Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Archive 2

Line score template
I thought I would bring this up here, I created last year and his been implented on several pages, 2005 World Series being the most notable. The reason I brought it up is that someone on the NLDS was determined to keep reverting it when I put it in. The benifits of using the template are many. One, it ensures that all the linescores look the same. Two, it is a lot easier to fill out for someone uncomfortable filling out the syntax and takes up a lot less room in the edit screen. Third, it is much easier to adjust to extra innings. Compare these two examples. which produces:

and even pushing out to 14 innings: produces:

Here is an example of the previous syntax: which produces: and now pushing to extra innings: which produces: With the previous syntax, notice how the width percentages need to be adjusted to take into account for the extra columns, which is not needed in the template. Comments are appreciated. --Holderca1 03:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks great. So what's the problem?  Why was it being reverted?  —Wknight94 (talk) 03:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * They claimed that the other way "looked better" and was the way that is done everywhere else on Wikipedia. The first one is something that can be accounted for in the template, the second is hardly a valid reason.  --Holderca1 03:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I put it back. I agree that it looks better and a template is easier to use by definition. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, it would be good to put some of this documentation above in the template itself - or at least in its talk page. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Will do, I will work on it today. --Holderca1 12:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course now that your template is in play, you get to go back and fix all of the existing articles too! ;)  —Wknight94 (talk) 00:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I updated the template, the HRH field is no longer needed. --Holderca1 13:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

"Year founded"
Someone has been adding a to a whole bunch of pages I watch. Other than seeming to be kinda large (for a few teams, the template is bigger than the article), I'm more concerned about an item that says "year founded". As we know, minor league franchises move and change mascots/team names, well, a lot. What is the consensus regarding such an item? Is it (a) the year the current city and name both went into effect; (b) the year the team moved to the current city, even if it's changed "mascots" since then; or (c) the year someone decided to establish a franchise, even if it was in another city with a totally different team name? Those can be hard to track. And, yes, I think this discussion has been held before. -- dakern74 (talk) 03:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Dates in baseball
All the articles in Category:Dates in baseball are being considered for deletion at Articles for deletion/June 2 in baseball (second nomination). Thryduulf 09:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Postseason Infoboxes
I believe these championship infoboxes should be removed on sight as they're out of scope for the wiki and they're repeated data from the team infoboxes. The conclusion that they show a history of a championship is not the intent of a single team's page. The NLDS, NLCS, ALDS, ALCS, NL Pennants, AL Pennants and WS wikis should depict the history and winners of the prior series. An example of this can be found here. Thankfully, most teams do not use the championship infoboxes because of their long history (e.g., the NYY, Dodgers, Boston, Chicago, Cardinals) as it doesn't make sense to have a bloated infobox along with the bloated team records. Retropunk 07:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What's a postseason infobox/championship infobox? —Wknight94 (talk) 10:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think Retropunk is talking about a table like the one he removed here. Rolando (talk) 13:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Article names with slashes in the title
I have came across quite a few artices that have a slash in the title, for example: Detroit Tigers/Team records. I think these were created thinking that they were subpages, but the subpage feature is disabled in the main article space and you end up just getting an article with a slash in the title. I have changed a few to titles without the slash, but it seems that that slash has infested quite a few articles. Also see Subpages and item 3 is what applies here. --Holderca1 18:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

What a great project!
Hello all! I am new here but would love to contribute to this project. I have created a couple of pages for a pair of defunct teams of the Southeastern League of Professional Baseball:


 * Selma Cloverleafs
 * Americus Arrows

Do I manually add the tag to this project on the discussion page or request it? I love researching defunct teams and am glad to finally have an outlet for it! -- Patriarca12.
 * You can add any tag to any page your heart desires! :)  Very nice job on those two articles BTW.  Can your references be found on the Internet anywhere?  Just curious...  Keep up the good work!  —Wknight94 (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello People
So i have added myself to the members list (if that's not okay, please let me know). I am a huge baseball fan and love the sport and colleting memorabilia from the sport (specifically baseball cards). I have noticed some major problems with almost all of the bios. Is it possible to develop a template that would standardize the format for a page as a whole? That might not be the best idea, but i'm trying to figure out how to fix all this POV stuff and other erros. Information is repeated many times throughout the article, statements of opinion are found all over the place, and many info boxes are simply used to list information that is not easily understood by people not familiar with the sport of baseball. Wiki is for the everyperson, I don't think that people in ethiopia are likely to understand what OPS is. --Tecmobowl 09:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Anyone can add themselves to the list - in fact, it may be the only way you can get on! :)  While I agree that Ethiopians are not going to understand what OPS is, 1.) I don't think they'll care, 2.) I definitely don't think that's a reason to remove it like you did here, and 3.) one of the chief benefits here is that you can link to the OPS page which will guide them somewhere to learn.  I'm not going to understand any of the statistics in a cricket player's bio but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be any stats shown.  If I want to understand them - which I currently don't - I'll click on those stats and start reading.  As far as POV, I noticed some warnings on your talk page (which you've removed) which seem to stem from you making huge changes to long-established articles.  The Willie Mays article has been around since the early days and has had POV issues since edit #1 in July 2002.  In articles that old, it's best to tread somewhat lightly - at least until people get to know and trust you a little - and probably discuss large changes on the talk page first.  I've been here over a year now and have never removed as much stuff from an article as you have in any of your edits to that page.  Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with your intention - and in a quick scan I do agree with some of your changes - hopefully you can understand how doing them all at once without a single attempt at discussion or a single edit on Talk:Willie Mays would freak some people out.  —Wknight94 (talk) 12:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, some of my history is due to me learning my way around here. However, most of the accusations I think were made by people who themselves didn't understand the issue OR by people who have been harassing me for no aparent reason (i'll leave out links b/c it's just not a big deal).  I have read through the POV section many times and will continue to look at it carefully.  People throw the term vandalism far too often.  I will continue to add discussions for the appropriate changes, as I have done on this talk page.  Perhaps my example of ethiopians was a bit extreme, however, my main point is that player templates should not be used to list an "excesive" amount of information.  Obviously, this is a very subjective thing.  I feel that the templates are used in order to summarize information ... not regurgitate it.  Please feel free to engage me in a discussion anytime you are concerned with my edits.  Thank you for responding as well. --Tecmobowl 18:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Linked dates in section headers
I'm strongly considering going through the various series articles and removing the linked dates from the section headers. WP:MOSHEAD is very clear that nothing should be linked in headings. For dates in particular, the appearance - and therefore the section link - can appear different depending on the reader's date preferences. Using 1986 World Series to link to Game 6 of the 1986 World Series works for me but, if I prefer to see dates as 25 October, that link would not work. In addition, the date doesn't seem necessary for section headers anyway. Why not just use "Game 6" as the section heading instead of the less wieldy "Game 6, October 25". Any opinions before I fire up WP:AWB? —Wknight94 (talk) 02:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I would definitely agree about the linked dates. Personally, I would remove the date from the title as well, but someone else might feel otherwise, so that part is up to you. --Tecmobowl 02:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not sure I follow. Which article titles have dates? —Wknight94 (talk) 03:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I meant title as in "section header" --Tecmobowl 04:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Quiz
I have started a page at WikiProject_Baseball/Quiz. Eventually, it will look like WikiProject_Cricket/Quiz or WikiProject_AFL/Quiz. Look at those pages to get a feel for the idea. Feel free to join in! ςפקι Д Иτς ☺ ☻ 20:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Subproject for MLB postseason
What do you all think about a subproject for the MLB postseason. There is definitely enough pages to support a project, at least 200. There are quite a few that need a lot of work and I think getting some dedicated participants to work on them would help out. If there is enough interest I can take up the lead on getting it all set up. --Holderca1 15:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want to do it, feel free I say. Just H 05:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems like this main project hasn't had much going on lately. What do you need help with?  I've got a lot of record books and historical stuff that might come in useful.  -- dakern74 (talk) 20:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Just a lot of cleanup, standardization, expansion etc... Some of the articles have nearly half of their content in a trivia section, most of which should be integrated into the body of the article.  --Holderca1 15:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure an entire separate project is totally necessary but I'm all for trying to clean them up as part of this project. One thing I notice (and may even be guilty of) is adding too much unsourced drama and speculation (WP:OR) to the postseason articles in particular.  Anyway, let me know how you want to organize it all and I'm in.  I've also got a nice World Series book which goes into detail about World Series games and would probably count as a WP:RS. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to create an article for each WS with the box scores, see 2005 World Series box scores. It takes quite a bit of work, but I think it adds quite a bit of detail to the WS pages. --Holderca1 18:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't personally mind that but you may meet some opposition along the lines of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Good luck.  —Wknight94 (talk) 18:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the '05 page has existed for a year now without opposition. If there is an article for every episode of the Simpsons, then what would be wrong with a few box scores.  --Holderca1 18:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I don't mind it but there may have been no complaints because almost nothing links to it, i.e. few have seen it. I think you would get resistance if you tried to create boxscore-only articles for other postseason series.  But I could be wrong - it's been known to happen!  :)  —Wknight94 (talk) 19:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, to answer your direct question, the Simpsons episode articles include write-ups and information beyond the box score so-to-speak. There's really nothing else that could be written about a set of box scores.  Now that I think about it, the box scores should probably replace the line scores in the 2005 World Series article itself.  It's not like that article is too long or anything.  —Wknight94 (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That may not be a bad idea, although the 7 game WS will be pretty long with all the box scores included. I guess this wouldn't need to be a project on its own, would a subpage of the main project be appropriate? --Holderca1 19:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is what a game would look like if merged... --Holderca1 19:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible to fix the linescore box such that it's comestically pleasing (i.e., the removal of the empty rows)? Additionally, it may be nice to have a template for the team cards. Retropunk 22:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What empty rows? I also don't know what you mean when you say team cards. --Holderca1 22:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The empty homerun row. When I said team cards, I meant the team lineup cards or extended boxscore cards if you wish to call it that. Retropunk 22:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you point to a page with the empty homerun row? The template doesn't show the homerun row when no homeruns are hit.  --Holderca1 18:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears this happens with Firefox. IE shows a thicker bottom line and Firefox shows a small (height-wise) row. Retropunk 04:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I corrected that, but it changes the appearance when there are homeruns hit, I will look at it later to see if it is possible to fix that. --Holderca1 11:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Game 1
October 22: U.S. Cellular Field, Chicago, Illinois

Playing in their first World Series home game since 1959, the White Sox took an early lead with a home run from Jermaine Dye in the first inning. The Sox scored two more in the bottom half when Juan Uribe doubled in A.J. Pierzynski after Carl Everett had already scored on a groudout earlier in the inning. The Astros responded again in the next inning when Lance Berkman hit a double, driving in Adam Everett and Craig Biggio. In the White Sox half of the fourth, Joe Crede hit what turned out to be the game winning home run. In the bottom of the eighth, Scott Podsednik hit a triple with Pierzynski on second. Roger Clemens recorded his shortest World Series start, leaving after the second inning with 53 pitches including 35 for strikes, due to a sore hamstring that he had previously injured (and caused him to miss his last regular season start) as the loss went to Wandy Rodríguez. José Contreras pitched seven innings, allowing three runs on six hits for the win, and Bobby Jenks earned the save to give the White Sox a 1-0 lead in the series. When Neal Cotts entered the game in the top of the 8th it marked the first time in 5 games that the White Sox had gone to their bullpen.


 * Very nice. I might copy the weather part for other sports. Just H 05:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar?
I was thinking about a barnstar for this Wikiproject. Unfornately, I don't know how to make one, so I would appreciate it with someone with that knowledge created one and listed it at Barnstar and award proposals. ¿ςפקι Д Иτς! ☺ ☻ 01:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Just copy and paste a baseball onto a barnstar. Photoshop or even something simpler would do it. Just H 05:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

New cite template

 * As a shortcut for whoever wants to use it, I created Template:JamesAbstract for use in citing Bill James' abstract. Right now its written for the newest edition, so if anyone wants to use it for an older edition, feel free to modify it with various #ifs or whatever.  Wickethewok 05:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Splitting List of baseball jargon
The page is Wikipedia's fifth largest as of the 11th. Splitting into two or three sections may be beneficial. TTV (MyTV|PolygonZ|Green Valley) 03:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There's been a debate on that article's talk page about trimming it down, and/or whether it should be kept at all since it borders on a glossary. Props to User:Mack2 who has done a lot of work on it lately.  But I agree more help may still be needed.  -- dakern74 (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like User:SamK1992 just went ahead and split it, a decision with which I don't agree. The look on the remaining parent article is ugly, and it'll be much harder for people to flip between different "sections" of the forked bits. He didn't note that they were split off from a parent, either. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 13:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * While that user was wrong to split the article without further discussion, the page was over 200kb long and way over recommended length. That situation could not persist. Indrian 14:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure it could. I haven't noticed smoke coming out of my computer as a result of that page, and it's been in a similar state for a long time now... -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 17:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Template
I have created a new template (Template:Baseball Year) to more easily link to Years in Baseball. Before, you had to put 1962 to get 1962, but now you only have to put 1962 to get the same 1962. ¿ςפקι Д Иτς! ☺ ☻ 16:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Pretty nice. I guess we could use the template for future baseball articles and it could help the link substitution process. Thanks. =)  Nish kid 64  19:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is good but it's still too long. How about a wicked short shortcut like by and/or BY?  —Wknight94 (talk) 02:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah I thought it was too long as well, but I didn't want to give SFgiants the wrong impression. I'll try fixing it up.  Nish kid 64  21:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Just making those two redirects would suffice. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, let me test this out. 1999. Okay, it's all fine and dandy now.  Nish kid 64  21:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! ¿ςפקι Д Иτς! ☺ ☻ 00:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox MLB player
For the template, there is a section entitled "formerteams". I just wanted to address to fellow project members that you do not add the current team to that list. It specifically says former teams, and one can logically assume (except if the person left baseball for a few years, but that's pretty rare) that the player has been playing with the current team since leaving the latest former team.  Nish kid 64  02:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia
Beginning cross-post.
 * See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★ MESSED  ROCKER ★  02:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

''End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.''

All-Star categories per CFD consensus
Recently, there was a massive CFD that converged all yearly All-Star categories into two categories entitled Category:National League All-Stars and Category:American League All-Stars. As a result, there are many duplicates of these categories on baseball pages, so I'm looking for help from fellow project members in helping remove duplicate categories on individual baseball player articles. I suggest using AWB for this, as it detects multiple categories and fixes up those changes, as well as other formatting and grammar changes. Thanks guys,  Nish kid 64  18:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have gotten through at least 200 so far. I'm still going through 500+ more from Category:American League All-Stars using AWB.  Nish kid 64  21:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

semi-spam extlinks in a few player biographies
Could someone from the baseball project look over these links please. They were all inserted by on the same day. They seem to point at a baseball-related charity selling memorabilia and the charity's connection with the players in whose biographies the link got inserted (not all that many) is not clear. The person did make a significant edit to Al Downing. I think the links don't meet WP:EL extlink guidelines and should probably go, but I'll defer to you folks. 67.117.130.181 07:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed two of the three (leaving only on Jenkins' own page where it's at least relevant). In future, you don't need anyone's permission to remove spam - be bold!  If you're nervous because you don't have a user ID then get a user ID.  :)  —Wknight94 (talk) 12:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've been removing a lot of spam but this particular one I thought I would leave up to the judgement of the baseball editors. Thanks. 67.117.130.181 18:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

"Major League" or "major league"?
Dumb question: is it customary to say that someone "broke a Major League record" or "broke a major league record", i.e. upper case or lower case? —Wknight94 (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Check MLB.COM and see how they do it. I would guess lower case. major league baseball is a category, Major League Baseball is an organization. Wahkeenah 04:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

1800-2006 who are you related to that is a baseball player?
I am related to ossie shreckingost he played for the phillys in the early 1900's as a catcher i would like any of you people to add to this comment and put anyone you are related to. Tridentdc24 20:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC)tridentdc24Tridentdc24 20:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC)]]

Notability of Baseball Players?
I CSD'd Fred Applegate since I saw no assertion of notability. He only played three games in the Majors, and outside of that and an entry in baseball statistical almanacs, is not otherwise notable.

Another user removed the CSD tag under the rationale "notable for being a major league player". I don't think wiki should be duplicating statistical almanacs in replicating every player who played a day in the Major leagues, and I don't think Mr. Applegate rises to the level of notability. Thoughts? --Mmx1 15:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't you think playing major league play is notable enough? The article is still a stub. There are reasons for articles being tagged stubs, there is more information available for these players, they just haven't been expanded yet.--Borgarde 15:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Is there? I tried and couldn't come up with any references to him outside of almanac entries. Is wiki a baseball almanac? --Mmx1 15:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In general, anyone that has played in the majors is considered notable. Note the line in WP:BIO that begins, "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league..."  We even have a few minor league players - although I would agree that's pushing it in most cases.  —Wknight94 (talk) 16:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Considering how statistically "unlikely" it is for a baseball player (who started in little league/high school/college, etc) to make it to the major leagues, there is certainly notability attached to that accomplishment. Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. Agne 19:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Anybody who made it to the majors is notable just for that. Even if they only had one at bat. Just H 05:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

New baseball field image
I created an SVG image to replace the PNG version of the baseball field.


 * [[Image:Baseball diamond.svg|400px]]

I am soliciting input at Talk:Baseball. Cburnett 01:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * i'll save you the trip. It looks good. Very instructional. Just H 05:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to read. Perhaps the font could be larger?? How about lighter colors??  Oscar 22:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Userbox
I'll make a userbox in a bit. Just H 05:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:BLP and baseball bio articles
Looking for some help with an important project. I've come across a number of articles about people in baseball where the subject is still living but the article was not tagged appropriately with Category:Living people. I ended up removing most of the content in Brian Sabean because it was unsourced. If folks involved with this wikiproject could help out by going through the articles on baseball executives/scouts/etc. and tagging them appropriately (adding that category to the article, then adding to the article's talk page), it would be a huge help. Along the way, if you find an article on a living person with a lot of unsourced material, especially if it's negative or controversial, please remove that content to help us comply with WP:BLP. Thanks for your help! | Mr. Darcy talk 23:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

MLB Team Season Articles
Hello. I have just joined this WikiProject. I am also a hard-working member of WikiProject Ice Hockey. From my hockey editing, I have also been a hard-working member of the team-seasons articles, which are the following: 2006-07 Los Angeles Kings season 2006-07 Anaheim Ducks season 2006-07 Dallas Stars season 2006-07 Phoenix Coyotes season

I would like to suggest that this idea can also be used for the MLB season coming up in '07. If anybody is for or against this idea, please get back to me on my user talk page here as soon as possible. Thank you. Ksy92003 01:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion about splitting YYYY in baseball articles...
...is going on at Talk:List of MLB seasons. —Wknight94 (talk) 05:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball 1876
The WikiProject Baseball 1876, an inactive WikiProject about the early days of Baseball is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball 1876. Members of this WikiProject are invited to comment. Thryduulf 14:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixed FA Assessment
Just thought I should let the project know that I fixed the link in the assessment to the featured articles category, which is why it suddenly jumped from no FA to 6.

So 6 baseball articles are featured, lets get some more ;) --Borgarde 11:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know a couple folks are working hard on Lee Smith (baseball). If anyone has pictures of him, that would be great!  —Wknight94 (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Created project template
I created a project template. It's pretty basic right now, feel free to edit it Template:WPBB, add more information, colours, etc. I just copied it straight from another WikiProject and made it relevent to ours.

I think it will be easier to navigate through the project once it's on each project page, also, I put peer review on it because I intend to get this section started in the near future --Borgarde 12:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Peer Reviews
I modified the Baseball-WikiProject template to allow for Peer Reviews, check out the peer review page for more info --Borgarde 13:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguators for teams
I have recently been making some edits to baseball articles, particularly related to 19th century baseball. The names of two old teams, the Buffalo Bisons and the Toledo Mud Hens, are presently being used by modern minor league teams that are not tied to the old teams except through geography. I would like to create articles on these two older teams but am not sure how to disambiguate the articles. Buffalo Bison (19th century)? Toledo Mud Hens (1896 - 1900)? Neither is particularly exciting. Can anyone furnish some advice?? Oscar 22:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Take a look at this, San Diego Padres, San Diego Padres (PCL). The main name refers to the one in the higher league, i.e. Major League Baseball, and the other one was a team in the Pacific Coast League and is named with the abbreviation PCL. Just a suggestion, there is no guideline to naming right now, but it's just one I found. --Borgarde 14:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, disambiguating by league would probably be preferable to disambiguating by year(s). That's my opinion anyway.  —Wknight94 (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Great idea. Thanks, Oscar 22:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

List of pitchers by pitches
Long story short, I had the idea of creating a List of Major League pitchers by pitches thrown. Not being a baseball expert, I didn't spend much time fleshing out the list, as I wanted to hear from you people. Thoughts? Suggestions? The totally wrong idea? Please leave a message on Talk:List of Major League pitchers by pitches thrown. Much thanks. -Seinfreak37 14:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * (also posted on the list's talk) Sounds like an unbelievably difficult task, and while it would be on the encyclopedic side, I can only comment that most pitchers throw what could be called a slider, or a curveball, or a changeup, but really, only the fastball is consistently thrown between pitchers, and heck, there's even a 2-seam, 4-seam, split-finger fastball (different from the forkball), a cut fastball (similar to a 2-seam fastball but thrown with a traditional slider grip)... etc. There's just a billion different variants on each type of pitch.  I find it very unlikely that the information would be complete enough to be of any real use.  Also, that would require one heck of a lot of citations. -- KirinX 17:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

A subproject about pre-1900 baseball
As some of you already know, I created a WikiProject, and it was deleted - twice. Some other users suggested I merge it with the Baseball WikiProject. If you think this could work, just let me know. Thanks!

Bookworm1 23:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There could be a taskforce created? Like Pre-1900 Taskforce. The banner we use on tagging pages can easily be amended to add taskforces, I was messing around with it the other day and figured out how, so if you wanted to start something like that, it could work. In my opinion, all the other wikiprojects relating to baseball should be taskforces of this main one, lot easier to keep things organised --Borgarde 02:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, so how would I create a Taskforce, or whatever ya call it? Would I just create a page entitled "Wikipedia:Pre-1900 Taskforce" or "Wikipedia:Old-time Base Ball Taskforce"?


 * Bookworm1 16:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd say keep it under this main WikiProject, like WikiProject Baseball/Pre-1900 Taskforce or whatever the name is decided.. The template you'd use would be the same main Baseball-WikiProject, and there'd be an extra field added to it for the taskforce, which isn't hard to add. We should discuss what the name should be called though if this is going to be made --Borgarde 10:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * If no one has any objections, I'm going to go ahead and create the page for the Old-time Base Ball Taskforce. If anyone doesn't like the name, you can change it, I don't mind. I'll wait about half an hour to see if anyone has any objections (I've learned not to go ahead and create something without checking with someone first).
 * Bookworm1 01:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Assessment/Quality
I'm on this task, if anyone would be so kind as to double-check me once in a blue moon to see if you agree with the importance and quality factors of each article I will be doing. Thanks to anyone as crazy as me. ;) -- KirinX 19:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Joining the WikiProject
I was thinking that, since I started the Old-time Base Ball Taskforce, I should be an "official" member of the WikiProject. Can I go ahead and add my name to the list? Bookworm1 13:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You don't need to ask permission, just put your name down ;) --Borgarde 23:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)