User talk:Veronique

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I thought useful:


 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Brilliant prose
 * Featured pictures
 * Boilerplate text
 * Current polls
 * Mailing lists
 * IRC channel

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~.

Be Bold!

[[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 16:11, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

rosters
hey, i really love what you're doing, thanks.

As a Rockies fan, I think you're doing a terrific job. --Enkrates 00:25, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you! --Veronique 04:24, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

hey, i was just wonder, since you're putting the puerto rican flag next to players from puerto rico, are you planning on putting the state flags next to other americans? seems like it would be more interesting to look at...


 * Puerto Rico usually has their own "national" team in international competition separate from the US Teams while the 50 states don't. I don't think it would be consistent with the way they do it for soccer to show state flags instead of US flags. -- Veronique 04:48, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

expos/nationals debate
There is a major debate going on, and I wondered if you might want to chime in. The debate involves how to deal with franchise moves in baseball. The question is whether Montréal Expos should be its own article or if it should redirect to Washington Nationals. All other instances of franchise moves in MLB redirect the old team name to the new team name, and the history of the franchise is covered within the new team name (for MLB, NBA and NFL examples, see here. Some people are confused and think the Expos and the Nats are different teams. Some people don't want to upset Canadian readers.

Indeed, the Washington Nationals are not a new team - the Montreal Expos franchise has moved to Washington, and the old franchise name should redirect to the new franchise name, just like the 20+ instances of this occuring in Wikipedia. For example, Brooklyn Dodger history resides in the Los Angeles Dodgers article. New York Giants history, including the Shot Heard 'Round the World, resides in the San Francisco Giants article.

If you have the time, maybe you could chime in on the conversation there, Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos. Kingturtle 21:06, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mets history
Being a lifelong Cubs fan, I am obviously not a Mets fan, but I can appreciate their history of occasional ecstasy between long stretches of frustration. :) I added the stuff about other teams with horrific won-lost records. I think the "worst record in history" concept is a little nebulous, because there are other teams with worse percentages in the 19th century, and I'm thinking one of the Boston Braves teams might also have had a worse percentage than the Mets of 1962. The 20-134 record of the Cleveland team stands out because it is far and away the most losses of any team in one season, and the way it happened was shameful. The National League had allowed the Robison family to own both Cleveland and St. Louis, and they moved all the good players to St. Louis in 1899, thus stripping the team of true major leaguers. In a way, this is what happened to the Mets in 1962, since the other teams did not want to let the expansion teams have good players.  The difference is that the Mets had a future, whereas the 1899 Cleveland team had only a (reasonably good) past, and no future. Wahkeenah 14:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. You are correct about the 1935 Braves and more 19th century teams having worse records. I have made those corrections. As for the Spiders, I agree that it is an exceptionally dark episode that is notable, but I think elaborating on it in the Mets article is a bit of a digression. Hopefully readers interested in learning more about why the Spiders lost so many games in 1899 will follow the links to the Spiders article for that info. Cheers! --Veronique 15:59, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Is vs. Are
I have a "watch" on all the ballclubs, and so far I think that one character had only said "is" for the Mets and the Yankees. You fixed the Mets, and I fixed the Yankees. (Somebody should "fix" the Yankees, but that's another story). If he/she/it resurfaces, it's worth pointing out to them that teams are referred to as "are" even when they are singular words. The local National Hockey League team here is called the Minnesota Wild and their own broadcasters say "...the Wild are... (whatever)". Wahkeenah 02:22, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Air America Radio
Hi, I've noticed you making some good edit on the Air America Radio and I just wanted you to be warned about User:Keetoowah. This person is very obnoxious and is likely to make very sarcastic comments and the like. If you'd like to see some evidence of this, see Ward Churchill, which he has made into a kind of personal campaign. I just wanted you to know what to expect from him. In my opinion he does not edit in good faith at all. I'm not sure he'll have much interest in this article, but he might... Calicocat 00:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)


 * You were right! He's very frustrating to deal with. --Veronique 03:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell both Calicocat and Veronique have made it clear that they are willing to libel fellow Wikipedians because users like myself get in the way of Calicocat's and Veronique's blatant and obvious agenda-driven edits of articles.-Keetoowah 20:01, 17 August 2005 (UTC)


 * You are entitled to your opinion, sir. --Veronique 20:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

The AAR right-wing "whine festival" over fake news "funding controvery"
Here's a good analysis of the whine festival and smear campaign "Funding Controvery" Calicocat 03:54, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

ACLU reverts
I also have the ACLU page on my watchlist, and looking at the last couple vandals, I have to ask... we share a country with these people? I think the scariest edit recently has been "God exists and he should be worshipped the right way. The ACLU needs to accept this." Sdedeo 16:50, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Mets bios
Thanks for pointing out the manual of style on biographies after my improper edit on the Chris Woodward page. I'm glad such a thing exists, and I'd love to see it applied to baseball bios - a lot of which are in pretty bad shape right now. I am going to start working on cleaning up Mets player bios over the next few weeks, and my first baby step will be to get the first paragraph for each to conform with the manual of style. Gotta start somewhere! --Veronique 19:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, actually I thought there was something even more specific along the lines of do not put anything in there except date of birth - but that must have been relaxed a bit. Still, it looks nicer to leave place of birth elsewhere.  Glad to hear you're going through Mets player bios!  For some of the real newbies, check out http://www.thebaseballcube.com which has more thorough minor league stats than anywhere I've found.  I just wish I could find Spring Training stats too...  I've been plodding through expanding on the bios of the members of the '86 Mets.  I think I exhausted all the Fernandez, Darling, HoJo, Barry Lyons info I could find and hopefully Wikipedia is now the ultimate resource for info on those guys at least :)  Good luck and let me know if you need anything else.  Pictures would be nice - an admin went through marking a bunch of Mets' pictures as copyvio's (and was quite unfriendly and heavy-handed in the process) so be careful...  —Wknight94 (talk) 21:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

As inexperienced as I am with Wikipedia, I'll defer to you on cutting my Ed Kranepool trivia, but I did list it under trivia, and it is trivial. That's where I find, in other listings, other figures' impact on popular culture, restaurants named for them, Simpsons jokes about them. Anyhow, you've done a lot of good Mets history.--Edgy DC 17:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I do understand your point, but I think having a couple of websites named after someone isn't as significant as a Simpsons joke, for example. Mine is just one wikipedian's opinion, and it need not rule the day. --Veronique 22:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Mets as lovable losers
Hey there -- lifelong Mets fan, too (in Va.). In any event, you wrote: ''The Yankess actually stopped winning consistently shortly after the Mets started playing. They didn't start to dominate again until the late 1970s''. While that's true, the Mets did start in the middle of a five-consecutive-year streak of Yankees' World Series appearances (1960-1964), which was the culmination of 14 penants in 16 years. So, I do think that the contrast between the two teams is valid. (It was said, back then, that rooting for the Yankees was like rooting for US Steel). (Granted, the Yanks dropped like flies starting in 1965...) FWIW -- Sholom 02:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I see your point, but I think it's a limited one. There is a story arc to the 1960s, but I don't think you quite captured it. Here is how I see it. The Mets began as the Yankees' great post-WWII dynasty was falling apart. It was not a time of "seemingly continuous success" for the Yankees. There was serious doubt about their future. Attendance in the Bronx was off by almost a million fans per year from their peak in the late 1940s. The team's stars were aging, they got swept in the World Series for the first time ever in 1963, their manager quit, and in 1964, despite winning 99 games and another AL pennant, they were outdrawn at the box office by over 20% by the lowly Mets. After 1964, the team was sold and fell off a cliff both on the field and off. They didn't recover until 1976. I think the story of the 1960s is not one of the Yankees' success painfully magnifying the Mets' ineptitude. I think it is one of the Mets eclipsing the Yankees in local popularity. Veronique 05:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we're both right. Yes, it was the beginning of the falling off of the Yankees, but even in 1964 they weren't chopped liver.  Whitey Ford and Mickey Mantle had great years, as did Elston Howard; Mel Stottlemeyer was 9-3 as a rookie, Jim Bouton and Al Downing had good years, etc.  Not every team wins 99 games -- and they made it to the 7th game of the World Series.  There were three full seasons of this before they "fell of the cliff." So, I think it's a combination of the Yanks winning, and, perhaps some folks getting tired of it (thus, my comment of rooting for US Steel), in addition to seeing the aging and cracks in the dynasty.  (Is this making any sense?)  And, of course, many NL fans would never root for the Yankees in any event, and were delighted to have an NL team back in NYC -- Sholom 15:46, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

New York Mets and mention of Minor League teams in New York City
Hello. I think it is important to note that there are four professional baseball teams in New York, a situation which is rather unusual and remarkable. I have placed this on both the New York Mets and New York Yankees pages. It is not vandalism it is adding context! Wrath of Roth 18:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression I thought it was vandalism. It certainly isn't. I use "rv" as shorthand for "revert" and "rvv" for "revert - vandalism." I'll stop doing that because it obviously causes confusion. Anyway, my objection is simply that the first paragraph of the Mets article is not where that info belongs. The lead section should be pretty clean and concise, telling the reader just the basic facts about what the subject it is and why it is important. I think mentioning the Yankees is important in the lead of the Mets article because readers unfamiliar with the sport or the teams could confuse them with the Mets, but mentioning the minor league teams is kind of tangential, adding bulk and straying from the focus of that important first paragraph. I hope that's more clear. --19:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Seaver / HOF
Why'd you remove the graf about Seaver being the only player enshrined primarily as a Met? I agree the note was overlong and contained too much info about other players, but it's notable enough to be in there. Woodshed 20:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I originaly added the sentence about Seaver a few weeks ago and since then it grew into a big ugly mess. I looked around at some other team sites, and I liked the simple, concise way the Cardinals and Tigers pages presented the information, so I thought it would be worth trying that here. --Veronique 21:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Any objection to me adding it under the trivia section? Woodshed 00:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Works for me. But you don't have to ask my permission. Be bold! --Veronique 02:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Just didn't want to step on any toes. Woodshed 13:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Mets page out of sync
The page should be reverted back to last night at 19:58 (CaptainKirk1015). JoeyA change at 00:23 was actually a revert (look at the compare) and other recent changes were lost. Then the few changes since then can go back in. This answers your question of why things were getting reverted. I'm new to the page, so I didn't want to do this myself. Simon12 14:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nationals 133x100.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Nationals 133x100.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Veronique! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Jae Weong Seo -
 * 2) Heath Bell -
 * 3) Mike DeJean -

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)