User talk:BRMo/Archive 2

Good work

Nice work adding sources to the Sandy Koufax article. Not to pressure you but I hope you keep it up, I'd hate to see it delisted. Quadzilla99 16:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For singlehandedly taking Sandy Koufax from a disgrace to featured articles to a well-sourced, comprehensive bio. Regardless of how the FAR turns out, it's an infinitely better article thanks to your work. Djrobgordon 18:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Mormon Pioneers References

I moved the references that I was able to attach to citations in the article so that they were in-text - like they should be. I'm curious as to why you reverted my edit. Nhansen 05:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

cool. Thanks for the response. I just figured it was redundant and I stand corrected. Now if we can just figure out who wrote the vanguard section - and get them to apply in-text references - we should be on our way :) Best - Nhansen 20:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Connie marrero 53topps-013.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Connie marrero 53topps-013.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Koufax

You're welcome; glad to see the article maintain FA status. — Deckiller 00:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

I'm thrilled to receive my first editing-related barnstar (nice as the humor one was, I don't really count it). Happy editing. --Djrobgordon 21:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Original research

On the Baseball statistics article, you removed the Good statistics section because you said it was original research. I have read and studied the Wikipedia:No original research article and I have to say that I am confused. I do not disagree with your point ... I am trying to understand it. Could you please help me. To use an analogy, if I have a world map and I count the continents shown on the map, it would be original research and against the Wikipedia rules for me to include the following statement in an article: There are seven continents. I would have to find an independent source in which someone else counted the continents and cite the source. Is that correct? So, in the case of this article, using the MLB.COM statistics (which is a valid source in its own right) and recognizing where the top 50 all-time fall is original research and not allowed. I have to find another source that says, for example, a batting average over .300 is considered good. Is this the way ity is supposed to work? Thanks for your time. Truthanado 04:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to your comments, I added summary statistics to the Good statistics section of the article. Your comments would be appreciated, especially with respect to WP:NOR. Truthanado 01:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Mind helping?

I have talked with you before regarding the Minor League baseball players category and how it can be improved. I was hoping that you could help with an imminent article move that I am going to do. The discussion is here. Any input would be advised as a number of articles suffer from the same problem. If we can come up with a good "system", we could systematically fix the problem. //Tecmobowl 03:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your thoughts. I have added a response. //Tecmobowl 09:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, so first, thanks for contributing to the discussion on Paige. It will definitely help! I spent some time reviewing that Category:Baseball records and notice that the problem with the names is vast. That discussion page doesn't seem to get a lot of action, so what do you think we should do. By the way, I have renamed the article "List of Major League Baseball leaders in career wins." which was a minor adjustment from your suggested format. //Tecmobowl 05:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

• Good deal. Since it is vast, I will open the discussion on the "more popular" articles and just be bold on the rest and go ahead. That's a great suggestion on Paige, we'll talk more there. Have a good trip hehe! //Tecmobowl 06:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

• Tecmo Banned Indefinitely. FYI--Tecmo has been banned indefinitely for repeated violations of Wiki policy.--Epeefleche 01:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Jose Mendez and Santa Clara

BRMo:

My single source for listing Jose Mendez as managing Santa Clara is a newspaper article (I cannot lay my hands it at this moment, and don't have time to look just now) from the Chicago Defender in late '23/ early '24 which headlines a story that Charleston had been benched by Mendez for indifferent play (he had made six errors in as many innings). The article made it clear that Mendez was the field manager, and made all game decisions. I'll look for the article to give you a specific citation, though I may only have it in hard copy. If I find a PDF of it, I'll upload it.

In 1923 (I researched that season, and am the author of the "1923 NNL Yearbook" published by "Replay Baseball" that occasionally gets cited in some articles (see Milwaukee Bears), Tinti Molina was the "manager" of the Cuban Stars (West), but that amounted to being business manager (probably equivalent of today's position of GM), while Rafael Figarola was actually the field manager; I tend to think the same situation applied with Santa Clara --- Couillaud 15:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The confusion between business and field manager actually goes back to the earliest days of pro baseball when both jobs were held by the same man. The titles evolved slowly, in the minors, Majors, and Negro Leauges. Molina is particularly hard to pin down, as he was a player, field manager, field and business manager, and solely business manager at different times during his career. It's a matter of luck to make the distinction at times, such as finding an occasional headline or a line in a story that mentions the field captain.

In reality, Molina really was the manager of Santa Clara in 1923-24, because he performed duties that fell within the scope of what was called "management". José Méendez was also the manager of Santa Clara, because he performed duties that fell within that same scope. It's still a mystery sometimes. In the Cuban League, the actual title of "manager" belonged to Molina, though Méndez was the manager under the modern definition. It depends on which definition one wishes to adhere to, and I usually use the modern definition, as I like to minimize confusion for modern readers.

I frequently read the posts in BTF HOM, but I rarely feel competent to comment. I'm far from "expert" at this, but I have some expertise in a very narrow area. BTF draws a lot of well-informed people. -- Couillaud 20:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Paige

The 1966 Baseball Guide has a photo of Paige and Sullivan walking off the mound together "to the cheers of the crowd" or whatever. There's no story, just the photo and the caption, but it certainly seems likely it was staged that way. It was late September, the A's were way out of the race, so it was safe for a stunt. Oddly enough, this was against the Red Sox, and Sullivan signed with the Red Sox in the off-season. Maybe he was "trying out" for the BoSox that night. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:1983 Chicago White Sox

Template:1983 Chicago White Sox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. I am notifying you because I see you have in the past edited the template. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

josh gibson

replied on talk page. 64.131.205.111 00:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

What to do with an obstinate editor?

I received a RFC from User 64.131.205.111 (whose previous ID , YoSoyGuapo, was banned) about Josh Gibson's lifetime HR totals; I know you've already responded to him a couple of times. I gave him my opinion, that the numbers need to reflect what is known from best and most recent research; he is of the opinion that the "nearly 800" that has been claimed from anecdotal evidence for 50 years is the most accurate. He's spent some time attacking me personally (suggesting that I have a deliberate agenda to "downplay" Negro League numbers (such as not giving Gibson "full" credit for games played against semi-pro competition), and I'm getting very tired of it.

It seems his pattern to try to confuse the issue, insist that any source that disagrees with his is "not a valid source", and then start personal attacks. Do you know of a Wikipedian procedure to stop him, or slow him down? Or should we just ignore his comments and revert his edits when he makes changes?

---Couillaud 18:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Josh Gibson seasonal stats

Baseball Reference Bullpen would like to use the stats you've compiled and formatted, but would not do so without your permission, so I'd like to ask if you'd mind letting the information on your testpage be copied to that site. Meanwhile I am working on a proposal for rewriting the page here in view of the recent dispute.

-- Couillaud 18:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Josh Gibson

Good work on trying to undo the damage caused by that YoSoy character. The one thing I wonder about, though, is whether there is any worthwhile or reliable source that actually breaks down his exhibition homers. You see various articles that say he hit so-and-so number of homers in all games in such-and-such a year. So it seems like someone has that info, or thinks they do. I wonder if it has been published anywhere? If so, it would fill in the gaps and explain where all the numbers come from. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

As I suspected, no detailed source. Which is just fine by YoSoy, because he thinks we should "just trust them" to provide smidgens of their holy scriptures. That last comment is sarcastic but assumes YoSoy is sincere, when in fact he's a troll. The best you can do is cite sources that give summaries and kind of say "that's all there is, folks." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Negro league baseball

FYI, you were correct in making the recent revert to Negro league baseball. While there were a few white players who played in the Negro Leagues, there were never all-white teams in the Negro Leagues. It was not just a possible hoax, just a plain and simple all-out hoax.

A few Cuban players (like Pedro Dibut and Dolf Luque) played in both the Negro Leagues and white Organized Ball, while some white American ballplayers played on integrated Negro League teams in the 1950s as the league was fading, and many Negro League teams played exhibition games against the House of David, but there were never any all-white teams with league status.

I think we mentioned in the Discussion of the Jackie Robinson article that the article should get semi-protection because of all the anonymous vandalism done it; perhaps this one should be a candidate as well. --Couillaud (talk) 14:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)