User talk:Killervogel5/Archive 6

RE: World Series MVP
To be honest, I didn't even start on a format yet, though after finishing my next potential FL nom, I'll be sure to quickly start ahead with this one. I was just thinking of copying the NBA Finals Most Valuable Player Award format, but with more information in the lead. The key statistics column I think is a great idea, but I don't really like to pick things out. With school starting, it might be a struggle to finish the two articles I mentioned for FL, but I'll try to finish both by the end of September for sure. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]]  19:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring
I dunno if it is unconstructive. Someone needs to shut Yankees10 up. Please read what I just wrote on his talk page, and let me know if I am wrong in what I'm saying--Johnny Spasm (talk) 20:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks for the star, KV. Glad I could help. Coemgenus 15:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Ichiro Suzuki
Ichiro Suzuki is NPB single-season record Holder. NPB career record Holder is Isao Harimoto. The source is an official site of NPB.-- KANE  SUE  12:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Please cite me the exact WP rule in your saying it is appropriate to add other non-Triple Crown stats (H and SB in this case) to the Infobox in a non-league leading number, despite merely a one-year record (H), or franchise (Mariners) SB record. Contrary to your untrue assertion, I will abide by the independent arbiter ruling and have repeatedly said that, so please quit making up that line about me. Can you do that, at the least? Thanks! Katydidit (talk) 20:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Please reconsider
You are right. Thank you for bringing my mistake to my attention. The article has been fully-protected for ten days. I apologize for any inconvenience caused by my misunderstanding of the situation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or issues. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 15:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Math lesson
Okay Generation Y member, when you take 82 from 162 you get 80, NOT 81! I know you kids are stupid, you can't do basic Math, but when the Pirates lost their 82 game, which I had live on WGN, I updated it, but you're so stupid you can't even do basic Math to know that 162 minus 82 is 80! THIS is why wrongipedia is wrongipedia, it's because of stupid morons like YOU!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.11.154.4 (talk) 02:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Reported to WP:AIV for repeated attacks in violation of WP:NPA. Not even worth a response. -Dewelar (talk) 04:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

List of World Series champions
On the other hand, I'd think you'd know my work better than to presume that I only went in there only to do something unnecessary. My edit summary was "fix links", which is exactly what I did. Reverting a change (especially one made by an established editor) without checking for useful additions goes against WP:AGF. I may have been overzealous and "fixed" a few too many links, but at the very least, even without the Giants fix, the Athletics link that I fixed was pointing to the wrong team. Perhaps if I didn't have this headache, I wouldn't have engaged in that bit of tit-for-tat, but there it is. -Dewelar (talk) 02:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Once I am done fixing all the pages that link to New York Giants (baseball) (and there are only a handful remaining, but I got sidetracked last night), I will be redirecting it to New York Giants (disambiguation). This is necessary because there have been multiple MLB teams named the New York Giants (the other being the Players' League Giants), so "(baseball)" isn't enough of a disambiguator. The proper redirect would be New York Giants (NL), but that doesn't seem to exist yet. -Dewelar (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Even more confusing was that they were playing AT THE SAME TIME. Then again, the Players' League was pretty much a big ol' f-you to the two existing leagues. There were also two Athletics teams in Philadelphia that season (both of which folded by the end of the following season, clearing the way for Connie Mack's team). -Dewelar (talk) 19:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, now I have to ask: why did you change some of the links I just fixed? Is there a difference between using one redirect vs. a different redirect? -Dewelar (talk) 22:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, there doesn't seem to be anything in WP:NOTBROKEN to support that, but your point about not confusing the newbies may have some merit. It's not the way I'd do it, though. -Dewelar (talk) 00:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it's my understanding of MediaWiki that's lacking, and I'd like to learn, since I am using MediaWiki software on my own web site. What I'm trying to find out is if there's an actual advantage to doing it that way. In my opinion, I'd be more confused if the link went to a different place than it said it was going in the hover text. I guess it's just a matter of personal taste. And isn't a pipe a pipe? In this case, you're still piping the link, it's just that it's now piped to a redirect instead of being piped to the article itself. -Dewelar (talk) 01:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I guess. Personally, I find my way better "aesthetically", because it's cleaner (to me, doing it your way is making MW jump through an unnecessary extra hoop, which as an old programmer strikes me as just WRONG, dammit! :-D), but I respect that this is one area where we aren't going to convince each other, and that in the end both ways work. -Dewelar (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting. Digging a bit, it seems that at some point (at least as recently as 2006), the MoS said that direct links were preferred. I wonder when that changed, and why. -Dewelar (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It's quite frustrating. Every time I think I've learned something, I find something or someone else who does it differently and yells at me when I try to change it. Then again, I guess that kind of comes with the Wikipedia territory -- and it's why I've never applied to be an admin. -Dewelar (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Career Managerial Record of Charlie Manuel Cotinued
Wow read the first few lines of that talk page, and some really interesting stuff. Well, congratulations to you I guess on being successful in your crusade to limit information...in an encyclopedia. It seems you've been quite busy in removing the table from every manager's page. Great work on your part. Way to really cut down on that information, because, of course, you don't want too much information in an encyclopedia. It still does not, however, change the fact that many former managers have this table in their wiki pages. It also does not change the fact that now virtually all college coaches, and coaches in the three other major sports have this table on their pages as well. Therefore, I must also congratulate you on limiting the conhesiveness and unformity of wikipedia pages. More superior work on your part.

Also, your argument that, "Charlie Manuel was also a player, not just a manager. It's the same concept" makes no sense. So, because he was a player he shouldn't have a career managerial record box? And a manager that didn't play in the major leagues should? Additionally, the argument that this information can be accessed through external links could be applied to everything on this website...that's where all the information here comes from. With that argument, why have a wikipedia at all? why not just make pages that list external links?

At any rate, it's clear that your just going to continue to revert my edits, per your bizzare crusade to rid this site of information. So I have to tip my hat to you, you've succeeded in limiting the information and continuity of wikipedia. Congrats.

EATC (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Comments/suggestions for lists
Hi! I noticed that you're really active in commenting on featured list candidates. I just would like to ask for your comments on the following lists that I have made/edited in order of priority: My goal is for these articles to achieve featured list status. The subject content for the first two is related to international conservation of historic sites and cultural heritage, something that is under-represented among the featured lists. The same can be said for the third article; no pageant-related list has achieved featured list status so far. Thanks. Joey80 (talk) 04:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity
 * 2) 2008 World Monuments Watch List of Most Endangered Sites
 * 3) List of Miss Earth titleholders
 * Note that the 2008 World Monuments Watch List of Most Endangered Sites article is the seventh edition of such a list. Since all these editions have similar format articles, then any comment will probably be applicable to all. Thanks. Joey80 (talk) 04:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Rick Ankiel
I went back several edits to get past what looked like vandalism to me. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:09, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 9/6 appeared to be a good edit. The IP on the 7th took away the "starting pitcher" from the positions, which I took to be vandalism as he was once a starting pitcher. A redlink added some stupid comment which an IP tried to remove and messed up the infobox, and then that same IP zapped the entire infobox. Hence I assumed vandalism. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I see that I also got confused, about what you removed. I think we're good now. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:20, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Albert Pujols
I replied to your recent rant on me on my talk page in case you didn't see a message note. I'd appreciate it if you would not post on my talk page again. Katydidit (talk) 03:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

FLRC delegate election
As you volunteered at the talk page, I wanted to let you know about the delegate election you can run in.  iMatthew  talk  at 19:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If you do plan to run, you should add your nomination up sooner rather than later. They have to be up by Tuesday 0:00 (UTC).  iMatthew  talk  at 13:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Rookie of the Year
Left you a question on the talk page. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and nominated this list at FLC, appreciate any comments. Thanks! Staxringold talkcontribs 19:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Would you add the stats, as you suggested at the FLC? Staxringold talkcontribs 17:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)


 * AH! Sorry, I misworded that. I wasn't so much asking YOU to add the stats, I was asking if you think I should add them. What's this list that needs referencing? Staxringold talkcontribs 18:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note Hey hey hey! Stats have been added, I love for any advice you've got now! Staxringold talkcontribs 21:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Done done. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, now done for realz. :p Staxringold talkcontribs 19:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind words. My last question is this: Somewhere at home (not with me at school, but in the next couple weeks I'm sure I'll head home for something) I have a SABR book of esoteric baseball records. It MIGHT include various "rookie" records, would any of those be worth including (like I'm pretty sure Bob Grim is the only 20 game winner to win Rookie of the Year)? Staxringold talkcontribs 19:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Question on baseball team records list
List of Philadelphia Phillies team records, a list you brought to FL status, excludes active players from all-time records. This is the formula I used while working on List of New York Yankees team records, but it's causing problems now. Mariano Rivera holds the saves record, and Derek Jeter just broke the hits record last night. They have both been included in the list by other editors, leaving me to wonder whether to change them or not. I took Mariano out a couple of times in the past, but I'm inclined to leave them as is now. It's just very confusing for knowledgable readers to not see those two as record-holders, and I understand why IPs and newer users have made changes. What do you think?  Giants2008  ( 17–14 ) 17:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. Since the numbers in question were culmalative, I decided to leave them and update a couple of others. If a batting average or ERA record was "broken", I would have been more conservative about changing it, as you suggested.  Giants2008  ( 17–14 ) 01:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

So Taguchi edit
Hello - I reverted the edit you made to the So Taguchi article. You deleted the information regarding his addition to the Cubs roster as unreliably sourced, but the information was cited to a Chicago Tribune article/blog entry by Paul Sullivan, a cubs reporter for the Tribune. According to WP:V, newspaper blogs can be used as a reliable source as long as the writers are professional and the column is under editorial control. I would have left your revision if there was something contentious regarding the info added, however there's was nothing opinionated or critical in the new info that seemed to merit waiting until other sources release it. If you disagree strongly, please go ahead and revert me. Cheers, Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 20:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

World Series edits
My point is that in the actual World Series MVP Award talk page, there isn't much of a "set in stone", general opinion statement regarding the year-by-year World Series winning teams.

And look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Archive_13#Linking_to_team.27s_season_page_and_other_per-season_articles

For me, there would be, being a Phillies fan. Regardless, I'd say WP:NOTDIR is pretty clear: "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed". I'd say this is more appropriate as a category rather than a template. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me if I happened to put words in other people's mouths. But I'm seeing things from the perspective of trying to be as in-depth and concise (to serve as an educational tool of sorts) as possible. TMC1982 (talk) 6:30 p.m. 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Lets put it this way, take for instance the 1986 World Series between the New York Mets and Boston Red Sox. Did the New York Mets franchise dating back to 1962 win that particular World Series or did the New York Mets from that specific year win the World Series? To me, just narrowing things down to just the franchises' articles in general is severely overlooking the key subjects at hand. TMC1982 (talk) 6:38 p.m. 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Awards discussion
Heyo, just wanted to let you know that Isaac Lin made a decent proposal on this ongoing discussion. Staxringold talkcontribs 14:44, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Notice
Hi. I'm posting to let you know that your name has been mentioned on a list of Highly active users on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running for administratorship, or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 17:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, would you be interested in a nom? Totally deserve it IMO. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see you already said no on the page. Staxringold talkcontribs 21:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

FLC
Hello. I saw the comments you said on List of Kansas City Royals managers and I have a couple of questions about some of them. I've been inactice on Wikipedia until recently, so I don't quite understand what you're trying to say in the following:
 * The old managers list format didn't include sortability, but it's nearly always demanded at FLC these days. (What is sortability?)
 * There is a symbol for HoF in the key, but it's not used in the table (The orange signifies Hall of Famer)
 * No leading zeroes on winning percentage.

Thanks your comments. I hope to answer the rest of your comments soon.-- LAA Fan sign review 01:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for the clarification.-- LAA Fan sign review 16:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Civility
If civility is gone from the world, that means wikipedia must be "out of this world". It's odd to have CNN lecturing others on civility, considering how long Crossfire was on the air. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Crossfire's finest hour, so to speak, was when Jon Stewart came on the show and engaged in withering "the emperor has no clothes" kind of dialogue with the two idiot commentators, which led pretty much directly to getting the show cancelled. That kind of magic doesn't happen every day, I assure you. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Philadelphia Baseball Wall of Fame/archive1
Moving images to commons is quite easy. Use this tool. But make sure you are logged into commons before using it. Also save the full resolution image on your computer before using the tool. because it asks you to upload the image afterward. After you're done, you can request a speedy deletion to the duplicate images on wiki. Suede67 (talk) 01:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Complete description of use here. Suede67 (talk) 00:05, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: List of Project Runway contestants
Thanks for your help with improving the article. I was sorry to see that the FL nomination was closed, as I felt the issue could have been addressed within a short period of time. With the highlighting you added (to avoid apparent overemphasis), should I go ahead and try for FL status again? Hopefully all reviews would offer their support this time. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, no! So sorry, I should have waited before re-nominating, but I went ahead and did it thinking that it would be fine and we could continue the discussion. I have not had to re-nominate too many lists/articles in the past, so I was not sure what proper protocol was. I will keep your advice in mind for next time. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:05, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Sept. 22 attendance
The Marlins' website doesn't list it either. I figure they just opened the gates and hoped someone showed up. ;) --Coemgenus 13:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd be glad to, thanks. You're really the one who deserves most of the credit, though, since you've written the prose and what-not. I just fill in a game now and again.  Coemgenus 13:52, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

NO!
The project needs you dude, both Wiki in general and WP:MLB. Just ignore whiny users, don't let em get to you. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So fuck 'em, whoever they are. You produce better content then about 99% of editors and you know that. There may be stylistic disputes here and there, but ultimately the chips come down in the featured process. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I took that position a LONG time ago. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

FL red link criterion discussion
See here. Cheeers, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:47, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured list advice
I've been working on List of Major League Baseball players with 100 triples for a while, and was thinking of submitting it as a Featured List candidate. Do you think there is anything else I should do beforehand? Thanks, Coemgenus 14:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice! I'll probably start on it today, if real-life concerns don't intervene too much.  What's the deal with all the colors also requiring a symbol?  Is it for color-blind people or something?  I had wondered about that on some other lists I'd seen, since it seems redundant.  Even so, if that's the standard for FLs, I'll be glad to add it.  Coemgenus 17:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it's ready to roll now. I'll probably nominate it today, at some point, unless there's anything else you think it needs.  Thanks again for all the advice.  Coemgenus 14:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Cole & Heidi Hamels expecting child
Not sure why you removed my edit to Cole Hamels article, but he and Heidi ARE expecting a baby boy sometime within the next month or so, but I replaced the source with a better one just now

Cg41386 (talk) 07:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Userbox Request for Comment
KV: Thanks for your commetns about the baseball userbox issue. There is a request for commentary discussion here on the use of free images in MLB userboxes. Thought you may want to chime in. I'd personally like to upgrade a number of MLB different userboxes, but User:Tom Danson is opposed. BillTunell (talk) 19:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Phils logo
The tag on the logo is incorrect. The logo debuted in 1992, not before 1978.JaMikePA (talk) 19:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Similar, but not the same: http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com/sports/baseball/images/memorabilia/philliespennant1.JPG  JaMikePA (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

But it's still dishonest.JaMikePA (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you followed WP:Civility and WP:Good faith.JaMikePA (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"Don't tell me; I can't, don't, and won't do anything about it." This is an attack and you know it.JaMikePA (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay. :)JaMikePA (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Phillies clinched NL East
Honestly, the Phillies did. GoodDay (talk) 22:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Standings templates
There is an alternative to removing the information. You see, the templates are used together at two articles as standings, so it wouldn't necessarily be best to put the information in text for those. There is an alternative for the x-y-z approach that I've tried to implement, but I've been repeatedly reverted by an IP editor. -Rrius (talk) 23:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I'm referring to. If there is a more attractive way to do it, fine, but if it was ever meaningful to track the pennant races, then it certainly should be noted who won them. The x-y-z approach appears to appeal to neither of us, and is meaningless at the 2009 team season articles. Your assertion that the division and wild card winners should just be weaved in at each team's 2009 season article, the 2009 MLB season article, and the 2009 standings article is arbitrary. Why not the home records, or number of wins for each team? Any bit of information could occur in the articles, and in many cases already does, but that does not make it worthless for the template. -Rrius (talk) 23:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * First of all, don't twist my words. I said your position that this particular piece of information needs to be weaved in, as opposed to the others in the table, is arbitrary. Second, the table isn't an embedded list, and the unlinked text "won division" is so completely outside of what that policy is talking about that I'm having trouble understanding why you mention it. By your logic, it is each of the template pages, not the text "won division" that should be deleted. Finally, saying who won the division is meant to occur only from now through the end of the regular season. After the last game, it is clear that the top team won the division. Before then, it is not clear whether the race is over. If it was important to keep track during the race, it is important to say who won. -Rrius (talk) 23:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Howabout centralizing discussion at talk: 2009 Major League Baseball season. -- GoodDay (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Dabomb87 (talk) 23:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

2004 World Series FAC
Just letting you know, 2004 World Series, which you gave feedback on a while back, is currently a FAC. BUC (talk) 21:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

MLB standings
Should we use the y for divison and the w for the wildcard as in MLB.com does. There have been many people trying many things on the standings templates to identify the division and wildcard winners. What is the best way since now an editor is using yellow for the wildcard.  Osi  tadinma  00:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Then we create a key for the info?  Osi  tadinma  00:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, what you mean is that the season article should say that a repective team won their repsective divison or wildcard and not the template.  Osi  tadinma  00:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

About your recent edits to remove my notation of the AL Central Playoff Game: it may be a reg season game, but it should be shown after the AL standings, even if it is shown reflected in them, because it precipitates from the regular season standings just as the postseason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mapperson (talk • contribs) 13:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply + New idea
Heh, that source works (though is tenuous, IMO, it's just that one image description that says the guy is the last Athletic to get elected). How's this for a new project idea? The manager lists were the Improvement Drive subject at WP:MLB for a while, the list I proposed in that discussion seems reasonable, and we're already pretty close. Whaddya think? Also, we should get Muboshgu-can't-spell-his-name to FLC List of Major League Baseball awards as it's author, plus anyone else who did serious editing to it, once he can (given the current choke on FLCs to kill the backlog). We really are close on that topic. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I suppose that sourcing works. And as for FLCing the main awards page, that's fine. Like I said, the backlog will slow our process down a bit. It's a decent idea, but honestly a lot of that backlog is pretty much near clearing already anyways. What do you think about List of current Major League Baseball managers? I think it's justifiable, List of current National Basketball Association head coaches exists after-all. I think I'll give it a try tonight/tommorrow if you agree. Staxringold talkcontribs 17:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt FTC reviewers would expect that, particularly if you structure the topic as "Major League Baseball managers". The current featured topic on 30 Rock seasons just requires the seasons be FLs, not every episode (though someone did get a Good Topic with season 2). As for the text style list, I dunno if I agree. Some managers (Torre, Cox) are going to have far far far more to write on, and what you include will be a very personal choice. I think a simple list, like all our others, is the best bet. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That stuff really strikes me as lead material. Ultimately, as far as Wiki is concerned, Hinch is the same as Torre. All the project cares about is that you are notable enough for an article. Once that's true, no one notable figure is > Another. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd say so. That's always the argument made at Today's Featured Article when people whine about some random video game being featured while fundamental topics have lesser coverage. Anyways, I made a sample topic box over at my Sandbox. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take the 93 expansion, namely the Rockies and Marlins, to start. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Marlins probably can pass. Rockies, I agree (unless they had a very.. ROCKY HAHAHAHA I'M SO FUNNY... GM history that provides many entries). Staxringold talkcontribs 18:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Fine with me. I'll work up the Fishies first, just to get something going. Staxringold talkcontribs 18:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And I saw the CPOY update, thanks for that. I'll fill it in right now. I've got 30 Rock (season 3) at FLC right now, but that'll be the next one down the pike (and then maybe the Marlins list). Staxringold talkcontribs 19:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, question, think it's worth mentioning that Carpenter had previously won the 04 TSN Comeback award? Staxringold talkcontribs 19:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Kk. Obviously lots of guys have double-dipped, winning both in the same year for the same comeback, but he's the first to fulfill Bob Uecker's joke about winning the award multiple times. Staxringold talkcontribs 19:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Works for me, plus it justifies the lists being the FT, not the individual managers. Staxringold talkcontribs 23:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:CHAA.jpg
File:CHAA.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Commissioner's Historic Achievement Award.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)