User talk:Spanneraol/Archive10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dodgers

I am still reeling from a pair of unfortunate 7th innings. I sort of question the manager, but hind sight is 20/20. Anyways, I have posted 3 half decent pics of Scott Elbert at commons (in Commons:Category:2014-09-19 Cubs v. Dodgers baseball game at Wrigley Field) for you to choose from. Something is better than nothing. More images coming.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Also, confirm that this is File:20140919 AJ Ellis taking off his gear.JPG.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Your reeling? I was at one of those games! This series was so crushing.. I thought we were gonna win every game till one of the idiot Cardinals came up with a homer.... sigh.... Yea thats definitely AJ in that photo... I'll grab one of the Elbert shots, though after his performance in game 3 I'm tempted to nominate his page for deletion. <jk> Spanneraol (talk) 22:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Did you get any shots of Miguel Rojas, Yimi García or Carlos Frías? I think those are the only Dodgers without pictures right now. --Spanneraol (talk) 23:11, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I'll post a couple of Rojas eventually. I have every Dodger who played in this game. The only way that I have Garcia or Frias is if I can identify them in the post game handshakes.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
I have one of Rojas from the same inning (shooting conditions) as the pictures I recently posted of Van Slyke. I'll post that and maybe some others.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Let me state that as much as I respect Don Mattingly as a baseball player, I can not support his performance this last week. As good as Kershaw is, when a guy is gassed he is gassed. If he is pitching like a Cy Young pitcher through 6 innings it does not mean he can pitch the 7th. A manager has to recognize when his guy is done. After the first two hits in the 7th in game four, I was about to tweet get him out of there. I didn't since I don't have the Fox Sports Channel in my condo and could not see the game. I typed it and did not hit the tweet button. I knew he was gassed. When your guy has a one-hitter through 6 with 94 pitches, you have to watch him. If he is suddenly hittable and the series is on the line you have to yank him. Game 1 pretty bad too. Even though he only entered the 7th with 79 pitches, a pitcher who enters the 7th with a 2-hitter should be relieved before he lets the first four batters get hits. It was just poor managing. You are very kind to say it was idiot Cardinals, but Mattingly mismanaged the team into winter recess.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
    I think he was right to leave him in for the 7th in game 6 considering he had a one hit shutout at that point and no one could have thought he'd hang a curveball to Matt Adams.. that was a flukey thing... Remember in games 2 and 3 he took Greinke and Ryu out and the bullpen promptly gave up the leads... so its a no-win thing... I agree about game 1 though, i would have definitely taken him out before Carpenters at-bat, though JP Howell (who probably would have come in) did give up a homer to Carpenter in game 2, so who knows what would have happened there... He should have at least sent the pitching coach out to slow things down a bit like Matheney did whenever the Cards started getting into trouble.Spanneraol (talk) 12:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
    Game 1 was a situation where the last time he threw he had pitched a season high number of pitches. Personally, in game 162, I would have given Kershaw the start and pulled him after 5 innings for Grienke who would have also gotten a decent workout in. It would have given him a chance to chalk up some MVP points with a 22nd win, a chance at the pitching triple crown, and a chance to be closer to his pitching schedule than 8 days rest. When you have a two all-star rotation, you want to try to keep them in rhythm, IMO. Given Kershaw's last appearance had been the most pitches all season, I would have been on the lookout in game 1. If he was 90 pitches in and faltering, it would be time to do something. In game 4, after 100 pitches, you should not have been surprised to need to do something. I am just pissed I couldn't see the game. In fact, to add insult to injury, yesterday the condo cut a new deal without getting any new channels. They gave me a new box with HD and no new channels yesterday. I would have cut a deal for more channels rather than HD. How about HBO, Showtime and FoxSports Channel rather than HD. I hope some of the later rounds are on channels that I have.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:09, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
    You can watch FSP1 online through the Fox Sports streaming app.. Thats how i watched Game 4 cause i was at work at the time. There are also some um.... other free streams of sports games that are available online. Spanneraol (talk) 14:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
    It seems that I had FSC and did not know it. Now I have it with HD. Still would rather have had premium channel upgrade than HD upgrade.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:12, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Some Rojas images up.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictures of Joc Pederson as an LA Dodger instead of Rancho Cucamonga Quakes.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Nothing great, but at least we now have pictures of Jamey Wright as a Dodger.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:27, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I added images at Darwin Barney and moved them around so a Dodger picture is his main image.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:27, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if that one should stay as his main picture because the other image is a much better picture of him and thats more important than having one of his current club.Spanneraol (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Each thing I mention here is to get your opinion or involvement. I am basically asking you to take a look at the article. I am quite sure I like my own pictures better than a neutral observer. I was thinking it was better to have him in a Dodger uniform than a Cubs uniform (all else equal). Although you can see his whole face in the old main image, I am not sure it is better at showing us what he looks like. I trust your judgement, however.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

PLEASE EDIT Yasmani Grandal as Louisville is miss spelled -- Thank You -- S Peters

Nomination of Steve Cilladi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steve Cilladi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Cilladi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wizardman 21:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Tom Windle

Did you just ignore the sources?--Yankees10 19:59, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Mostly routine sources.. There is one decent one but this guy is at least a couple of years away from the majors... why do you keep writing questionable articles about minor leaguers that really should be on the minor league player page? Spanneraol (talk) 22:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Except none of those sources are actually routine...--Yankees10 23:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1972 Los Angeles Dodgers season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St. Peter's High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


Please comment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)#Bullpen_catchers Alex (talk) 21:57, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah Alex, why'd you have to go do that? We won the battle... you know how those guys are gonna vote...Spanneraol (talk) 22:12, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't have any 'motives.' It's not about winning or losing...clearly there's a divide in opinion so instead of having to dick around each time bullpen catchers come up, we might as well have a concrete consensus on the subject. Not coming to a consensus now just kicks the can further down the road for the next time there is a bullpen catcher squabble. Our 'victory' was tenuous and impermanent, we just got lucky that some people who aren't usually voters voted the way we wanted. Opinions could shift next time around. And if/when they do, it's best to have this consensus to refer to. Alex (talk) 05:33, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

The Inside Corner : November 3, 2014

What's in the latest edition of WikiProject Baseball's newsletter:

retired players

Hello, I am just wondering how you know that these players are retired such as Tug Hulett you have made these edits 22 days ago I just realized that you did not name a source in the article or in the edit summary please just let me know how you got the info that they retired thank you :)Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 00:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

The guy hasnt played in two years.. he's obviously retired. They often dont announce retirement unless they are big stars... the other guys tend to just not get a job and wander off into the ex-player realm. Spanneraol (talk) 00:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay that makes sense but for example an edit to Reid Gorecki who just played in the Atlantic League has played why is he under the retired list? So if any player who hasn't played in 2 years I can list as retired? Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 00:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

My usual method is that if they havent played in a full season and werent invited to spring training during that season then I list them as retired unless there is some evidence that they are still active, such as an injury they are rehabbing from or something like that. Spanneraol (talk) 01:34, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey I'm doing my edits off of a iPod so I'm still figuring all of this out was my edit on Joe Savery more complete?

yes, thank you. Spanneraol (talk) 03:25, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Griff Erickson

Just thought I'd remind you that you that you could G7 it if you wanted since you're the only one that has edited the article.--Yankees10 17:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Yea, i forgot about that... I'm working my way through the minor league free agent list that just came out today.Spanneraol (talk) 17:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbus High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:12, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your annual updating of minor league free agents and other work you do here. It is very much appreciated.--Yankees10 00:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josh Beckett

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Josh Beckett you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 01:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Support?

Hi. In this edit, I don't see you adding the RS support for your added text to the effect that the fellow is retired. Nor did your edit summary shed any light -- you didn't add one. Can you please fix that one way or another, such as by adding RS support or reverting (with an edit summary)? I assume you have a source, or I would simply revert. --Epeefleche (talk) 07:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josh Beckett

The article Josh Beckett you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Josh Beckett for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 04:40, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Josh Beckett

The article Josh Beckett you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Josh Beckett for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 05:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Oklahoma City Dodgers‎ source

Hi I noticed your edits and move of the Oklahoma City Redhawks to Oklahoma City Dodgers‎, however you failed to provided a source for the name change. I've done a search of the name and have found nothing pointing to it being the new name other then the fact that the new owners are set to announce a new name later today. I haven't reverted your edits yet however if a source can not be provided to back up the change I will revert the page back until the name change has been made official and sources back up the claims of the name change. If you have any questions fell free to leave them here or on my talk page.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 06:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

My source was a tweet from an LA Times reporter confirming the name change... was waiting till they wrote the story to add the source to the article... should be able to do that today. Dont revert it cause then we'll just have to move it back later today and thats a waste of energy. Spanneraol (talk) 13:02, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OKC Dodgers logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OKC Dodgers logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Chris Narveson

I edited his profile and you reverted it.

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fantasybaseball/update/24871693/marlins-sign-cole-gillespie-chris-narveson-to-minor-league-deals

I'd like it if you reverted it back to how I HAD PUT IT.

You need to include sources when you make edits.. I couldnt find evidence that he had signed with them, plus you left the Swallows in the info box which was very sloppy. Spanneraol (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

List of Major League Baseball full-career one-team players

I got your message questioning whether this page I started should be deleted, and after reading it I must ask...WHY?

I was inspired to start this article because with Derek Jeter's recent retirement after a full career with the New York Yankees (not that I'm a Yankees fan, in fact I'm a Red Sox fan), I got to thinking it would be interesting to find out just how many players have devoted a full career exclusively to one club.

So I went to work and put in a lot of research, mainly through Baseball Reference and with backup from Wikipedia articles on the individual players. And once the list was completed I wanted to share this information with any other parties that would find it of interest (surely there are millions of baseball followers out there), and I figured what better way to do that than to post it on Wikipedia!

Now I admit this is not a topic easily found on the web, or in print, or anywhere else, but think of it this way. This is a feat that not even one player in a hundred throughout all of MLB history has ever accomplished. Fewer players have spent an entire career exclusively with one club (at least long-term) than have, say, hit for the cycle or pitched a no-hitter. This is a feat that not only takes enormous talent and skill for the game, but also a tremendous amount of loyalty and dedication! If someone like Derek Jeter or Carl Yastrzemski was to tell you how proud they were to spend 20 years and more with their respective clubs, are you going to look them in the face and say to them, "That's not notable?" If a list of MLB mascots is considered notable, why not this?

As for the ten-year cutoff, I wanted to keep the list within reasonable length. Also, spending an entire career with a single team doesn't mean much if your career was only a few games, or one season, or even three seasons. You have to draw the line somewhere, but If you think ten years is too high a cutoff, or as you say, arbitrary, I'm flexible enough to discuss the matter. Five years might be OK.

As for the way I've titled the article, I figured it had to start with "List of Major League Baseball..." because that is how most of the MLB player lists are titled, so I figured it might be more easily found this way. But again, if anybody can figure out a better title that still conveys the subject matter clearly, I'm very willing to welcome any suggestions they may have.

I do hope you and everyone involved will reconsider. If you still decide to delete the page, I still have the original document I composed on my PC, and perhaps I'll send a copy of it along to Baseball Reference. I'm sure they would take an interest in this subject. Josephew (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

I dont decide to delete the page, its deleted through the AFD process. Post your reasoning there and maybe your arguments will win over the other people involved. Spanneraol (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

andrew heaney

The trade has been agreed upon and has been reported by numerous, viable sources. Please allow my edit to stand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.202.8.1 (talk) 00:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Not officially announced by either team yet.Spanneraol (talk) 00:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Rubby De La Rosa

I provided a link with the changes, therefore, it is valid and up to date. Why did you remove it?

Deal has not been finalized yet.. still just a rumor. Spanneraol (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Jon Lester

I appreciate the AGF with the auto-revert without first checking the source I added from the Cubs website. The story is on the front page of the Cub's site. Thanks. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Understood. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

football retired players

Hey you explained to me before about if baseball players haven't played for two years you list them as retired is that what you would do for football articles too or no? Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 04:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't edit football articles but the same policy should apply. Spanneraol (talk) 12:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Pat Neshek

The last I saw on the official wire (http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/transactions/) was that the deal has not been finalized beyond "insider talk". Do you mind referencing a source for the change, or reverting back to FA pending the official announcement from the Astros? Garchy (talk) 19:21, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I added the official source to the article. Spanneraol (talk) 19:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Just saw that, MLB wire must be a litle slow. thanks! Garchy (talk) 19:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Spanneraol. You have new messages at Muboshgu's talk page.
Message added 18:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– Muboshgu (talk) 18:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The Inside Corner : December 16, 2014

Chris Capuano

How come you reverted the edits on Chris Capuano? He resigned - Galatz (talk) 19:14, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Ryan Kalish

Thank you for the edit you made to Ryan Kalish I was actually in the middle of editing it as you finished haha Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 21:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Rollback

If you continue to misuse rollback, and you did here, it may be taken away from you, eh? WilyD 10:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pittsburgh Pirates all-time roster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McDonald. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Reversion of IP edits

Hi there. I noticed you reverted an IP editor for adding content to text of an article because it was already included in the infobox (for example, this edit). Note that infoboxes should be summaries of "key features of the page's subject", not alternate locations for content. Some mirrors, content aggregators, republishers, or other entities reusing Wikipedia content may discard the infoboxes, so any content they contain would no longer be associated with the article. I haven't reverted your changes because perhaps there were other reasons for the reversion, but if not, can you please undo your changes. Thanks. Mindmatrix 20:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

This particular content did not need to be duplicated. Perhaps you should look more closely at the edits before sending warning notes? Spanneraol (talk) 23:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

The Inside Corner : January 25, 2015

Disambiguation link notification for February 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brandon Beachy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ulnar collateral ligament. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to Jon Lester

Hello, and thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Jon Lester article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you!   Bfpage |leave a message  05:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I think you are confused as to what transpired. Spanneraol (talk) 13:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Portland Duffs players

Is there a reason you reverted my edit to Category:Portland Duffs players? Reverting that edit messes a few things up. It is a subcategory of Category:Portland Duffs, which I have linking to Category:Sports in Portland, Maine and Category:Defunct baseball teams in Maine. The TEAM category is what has to be directly categorized under the Baseball TEAMS in Maine, NOT the players category. The players category is meant to be a subcategory of the team. Tavix |  Talk  05:01, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry.. clicked on that one by accident on my watchlist. Spanneraol (talk) 05:24, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see... It's not a problem at all. I had a typo somewhere which made me think that Category:Portland Duffs was deleted. Because of that, I thought it was a bigger deal than it actually was and I kind of irrationally freaked out about it. But it's solved now. Tavix |  Talk  05:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

The Inside Corner : March 15, 2015

Rangers roster

Do players on the 60 day dl count towards the inactive number on the roster templates? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.178.86.254 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

No.. when they are on the 60 day DL they do not count towards the 40 man roster. Spanneraol (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
So would this be wrong. It's pertaining this. Counting the 60 guys as inactive on the template. 72.178.86.254 (talk) 22:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
The 60 man guys should never be counted.... those numbers should never go above 40. Spanneraol (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletions

Hi Span. I noticed that you have been deleting some filled-in "hits" parameter information from baseball player infoboxes. Is there something new, that mandates those deletions -- where other editors have thought it appropriate to fill in the parameter? --Epeefleche (talk) 20:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

The previous discussions on what to include in info boxes said that we should only include triple crown statistics (average, rbi, hrs) unless someone was especially known for something like someone who steals a lot of bases. Oh, also be careful using that dashes script as it often messes up the baseball reference minors links which often have -- in them. Spanneraol (talk) 21:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

McCarthy

Dude brandon McCarthy made his debut — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankees53 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

No.. he has not appeared in a game yet. Spanneraol (talk) 02:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

2015 Cubs article

I was checking out your 2015 Dodgers batting stats. Could I trouble you to change the Cubs Batting stats editing page so it mimics the Dodgers page. I think it will be easier for me to make the changes across rather than down. Thanks in advance. . Buster Seven Talk 20:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I did the first couple of lines... just put two || lines inbetween each entry. It is a lot easier to do across. Spanneraol (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Major League Baseball

Right now, you're in violation of WP:3RR. I invite you to undo your most recent reversion and address this on the talk page. Do understand that I am challenging the statement that this is the oldest of the professional leagues, and I am challenging the (frankly absurd) premise that "Major League Baseball" was founded in 1869. If you cannot -- or refuse to -- provide sources for those statements, WP:V requires that they be stricken. Since you seem to be online now, I'll give it an hour or two to allow you to undo your most recent edit before taking this to the 3RR noticeboard. Ravenswing 18:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey you are the one who made a BIG change without discussion or providing proof.. You are simply WRONG.. go back to editing your hockey articles where you know something about the sport. Spanneraol (talk) 18:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't have to "provide proof" -- you know full well that Wikipedia rules require editors who want to keep a statement to source it if the statement is challenged. My deadline for taking this to 3RR stands. Ravenswing 18:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
The rule when you make an edit and are then reverted is to take it to the talk page.. you are the one who made the change and when challenged kept re-adding your incorrect information. There is no evidence that any new organization was created in 2000. I changed the date to 1903 as I can source that right now. Spanneraol (talk) 18:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey Josh Hamilton has been traded and go to belcher report online site or there app click on mlb and then click on Texas rangers ok and its says rangers and angels agree on hamiltons trade ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmunoz95 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Steve Cilladi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steve Cilladi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Cilladi (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 15:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Alex Guerrero

In the future, would you please let people finish editing, and maybe take a moment to read their sources, before you insist on contradicting? --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 23:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Matt West (baseball), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bellaire High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

"proper grammar to put the comma"?

In this edit of yours you undid my edits to take out commas not normally used in baseball players' names. You might be right that it should not be a question of what they use or prefer. But Grammar Girl tells me that it is also not a question of proper grammar: [1]. Can you reconsider? I'm a newbie, and I don't see a section in the manual of style about this. Timmeredgar (talk) 22:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

It's actually an issue of wp:commonname, I would think. See this timely discussion here. --Epeefleche (talk) 23:16, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
After doing some research it seems like the rules are changing.. it used to be mandatory to use the comma, now it seems optional... but I see no reason to be changing the pages as the page name should match the name you are changing... Where are you getting the "they dont usually use the comma" stuff anyway? Jerry Hairston, Jr. uses the comma on his twitter page [2]. Spanneraol (talk) 23:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Neither one of us changed Hairston -- he was already consistently without comma except for the title, and you left it that way. I will fix and move. I agree that his preference is not the key issue, as Grammar Girl says in her section "Why Publications Follow Styles Instead of Doing What People Want." And I did some googling and found that there is a MOS page that talks about this: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies which says "Do not place a comma before Jr...", but also says it is disputed. What to do? Timmeredgar (talk) 02:17, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Since its obviously disputed, why the desire to change things? It just looks wrong without the comma. Spanneraol (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, the desire to change things came before, so unrelated. What is the disputed thing about? I tried following the talk link, but there is nothing there. Timmeredgar (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I missed the comment by Epeefleche above. Now I see the relevant discussion. Why isn't that linked from the MOS page? Timmeredgar (talk) 04:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
For baseball players, the comma seems to be unusual, in news, books, and such. So does wp:commonname say we should just omit it? That would agree with what the manual of style says. So it sounds like I am on an OK path here? There seem to be a lot of different ways of looking at this question. Maybe the manual will be changed? Timmeredgar (talk) 04:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Why are you going out of your way to change all these articles though? Whats the point other than annoying people? The discussions seemed to be saying not to change articles. Spanneraol (talk) 12:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Has somebody said they are annoyed? I'm not going out of my way, just looking around and working on things that don't seem right (like that Hairston article where his name did not have comma but other names did). Is that not what wikipedia editors do? I'm not sure, being a newbie, but I did get good encouragement and help at the help desk. You are the only one who has undone any of my work. Have I annoyed you? Please let me know. Timmeredgar (talk) 14:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
And what about the Railway articles that I edited and moved? Do you see any issue or annoyance there? What about the caps fixing that I suggested on the wikiproject trains page and have got no answer on yet? Would it annoy anyone if I go ahead and fix those to be more consistent? Timmeredgar (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Well when you go and move articles around without discussion it can be annoying... especially when you listed them as "uncontroversial" move requests when they are at least somewhat controversial. I don't have any opinion on the other articles you've done cause i only work on baseball articles. It's always better to discuss first rather than making unilateral moves of longstanding articles. Spanneraol (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
As a note to those who are not aware, the above editor is a sockpuppet of Dicklyon, and has now been blocked. RGloucester — ☎ 16:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

University of Hawaii at Manoa Level I and Level II NCAA Sanctions

May 16, 2015:

Noteworthy information about University of Hawaii at Manoa athletics "doesnt [sic] belong on" the University of Hawaii at Manoa Wikipedia page under the athletics section?

That sounds like classic Orwellian doublespeak to me!


--BengalCatHawaii (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

That page just gives an overview, it doesnt touch on specifics.. the athletics page is more appropriate. Spanneraol (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

University of Hawaii at Manoa Level I and Level II NCAA Violations: Round II

Spanneraol stated: "That page just gives an overview, it doesnt touch on specifics.. the athletics page is more appropriate."

BengalCatHawaii's Rebuttal:

The University of Hawaii at Manoa Wikipedia article and the University of Hawaii at Manoa Athletics Wikipedia article are not mutually exclusive articles. In fact, the two articles overlap. Therefore, they are, by definition, mutually inclusive.

Critiquing your editing of the University of Hawaii at Manoa article, I would have to assess it as over zealous, controlling, biased, defensive, and reminiscent of the Ministry of Truth. Proof: If positive public relations news, such as a NCAA championship from a specific year, were included in the University of Hawaii at Manoa article, then it would remain and not be reverted. This is, in fact, the case, as specifics are indeed discussed under the Athletics section of the University of Hawaii at Manoa article. To the contrary, and in stark contrast to your heavy and uncompromising editing style, if negative public relations news, such as NCAA sanctions from a specific year, were included in the University of Hawaii at Manoa article, then it would be reverted, censored, and summarily suppressed. Case in point: It took you less than 24 hours to censor the negative news regarding the NCAA events. Therefore, in all fairness and balanced editing, you must either include the bad with the good, or not include either.

In conclusion, I sense some intellectual dishonesty on your part, namely, using your flawed reasoning explained above, to provide a pretext, or false reason, for suppressing the relevant and significant news.

--BengalCatHawaii (talk) 01:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment here... the section of that article simply provides an overview of the athletics program, describing the conferences they play in and the titles won... adding a long segment about the recent sanctions without any context is UNDUE WEIGHT and you also need to be aware of WP:RECENTISM. I dont know what you are getting at with the time frame.. I have the page on my watch list so when i saw the edit I reverted it for those reasons. The news is relevant to the athletics department so it should go on that page.. It isnt relevant to the school as a whole. Spanneraol (talk) 04:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

University of Hawaii at Manoa Level I and Level II NCAA Violations: Round III

Spanneraol stated: "I disagree with your assessment here... the section of that article simply provides an overview of the athletics program, describing the conferences they play in and the titles won... adding a long segment about the recent sanctions without any context is UNDUE WEIGHT and you also need to be aware of WP:RECENTISM. I dont know what you are getting at with the time frame.. I have the page on my watch list so when i saw the edit I reverted it for those reasons. The news is relevant to the athletics department so it should go on that page.. It isnt relevant to the school as a whole."


BengalCatHawaii's Rebuttal:

First, Wikipedia's policy on recentism has been implemented to lessen the overburdening of articles with news as it occurs, inter alia. The operative word is overburdening. The addition of three sentences does not constitute overburdening. Therefore, your argument is frivolous at best.

Second, the addition of three sentences does not violate Wikipedia's guidelines on "proportion, balance, and due weight." The addition of a paragraph or more may contravene those standards--the addition of three sentences does not. Therefore, your argument that three sentences constitutes "adding a long segment" that adds "UNDUE WEIGHT [sic]" to the article does not ring true and suggests unreasonable censorship.

(Incidentally, the "context" that you refer to is provided by the section of the article: "Athletics.")

Third, you stated that one of the rationales for reverting my edits was the "adding a long segment." By any reasonable interpretation of the phrase "long segment" three additional sentences would most probably not constitute a long segment as you misleadingly argue. Therefore, your proffered rationale is probably false.

Fourth, you stated that my edit "isnt [sic] relevant" to the school as a whole." To the contrary, the information I provided for the article is closely connected to the article, in general, and the athletics section specifically. Therefore, it is relevant, and to call it irrelevant is skewed analysis.

Fifth, and finally, you refer to "the school as a whole." This is factually an incorrect statement and speaks volumes about your misunderstanding. The school as a whole is the University of Hawaii System. The specific campus to which my edit related is the University of Hawaii at Manoa. I did not attempt to edit the University of Hawaii System Wikipedia article because there is not an athletics section and my edit would not be particularly relevant and would add undue weight to the school as a whole as you argue. However, I did attempt to edit the University of Hawaii at Manoa Wikipedia article because there is an athletics section and my edit is relevant to that specific campus. Therefore, your lack of knowledge on the fundamental infrastructure of the entity in question resulted in your erroneous reversion edit.

--BengalCatHawaii (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You dont need to add a new title each time.. and you can stop being insulting and rude in your comments. You have added the same section to several different articles. That is not necessary. If you consider what else is in that segment, three sentences about the basketball program would definitely be considered a long segment. There is no "censorship" involved. The point is to keep the article consistent and not place recent news above the historical context of the article. Also, the University of Hawaii system is a group of schools, not one school. Spanneraol (talk) 13:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

University of Hawaii at Manoa Level I and Level II NCAA Violations: Conclusion

Spanneraol stated: "You dont need to add a new title each time.. and you can stop being insulting and rude in your comments. You have added the same section to several different articles. That is not necessary. If you consider what else is in that segment, three sentences about the basketball program would definitely be considered a long segment. There is no "censorship" involved. The point is to keep the article consistent and not place recent news above the historical context of the article. Also, the University of Hawaii system is a group of schools, not one school."


BengalCatHawaii's Rebuttal:

You might be doing a disservice to Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is a beautiful thing when one editor makes a good-faith edit and supports it with a credible source, and the next editor does the same thing, and the next, and the next, and so on; and at the end of the day a nice body of information is created by this sort of citizen journalism-editing and collaboration.

With heavy-handed, overly controlling, and Procrustean-like gatekeepers, Wikipedia bureaucracy gets a bad name and turns off good editors.

It was not my intent to be "insulting and rude." I simply call it like I see it. As a self-castigating remark, I am prone to being too honest for my own good. The perceived insulting rudeness was merely forthrightness.

I must take issue with your above statement that it was "not necessary" to add the same section to different articles. Many articles overlap, so a fact or facts may pertain to multiple articles. By comparison, a baseball statistic may fit nicely into several separate Wikipedia articles.

Finally, the University of Hawaii system is the school, that is, what is known as the University of Hawaii. The University of Hawaii at Manoa is one campus of several under the umbrella of the University of Hawaii.

I thank you for your spirited debate. It was invigorating like jumping into an icy pool. Let's do it again sometime. Your friend, BengalCatHawaii.

--BengalCatHawaii (talk) 00:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No, the University of Hawaii system is not a "school" any more than all the University of California campuses are the same school.. each campus is a separate school that belongs to the same system.. all state schools under the state control but each campus is a separate school. Spanneraol (talk) 00:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


I understand what you are saying, and in a loose sense you are correct. However, to be strictly correct, the University of Hawaii is one university. Proof: There is only one president. The individual campuses are governed by chancellors. By analogy, one can look at the issue as the United States where there is also only one United States with only one president but with 50 semi-sovereign states each with their own governors falling under the umbrella of the United States as one country. E pluribus unum (of many, one) sums up nicely this sort of ambiguous concept. Best, BengalCatHawaii.


BengalCatHawaii (talk) 04:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Dan Jennings (baseball executive)

Now that Jennings has been named the Marlins manager (Facepalm Facepalm), do you think the article should be renamed? Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Possibly. Not sure though... probably a discussion worth having on his talk page. Spanneraol (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Jon Garcia (baseball) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jon Garcia (baseball) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Garcia (baseball) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wizardman 02:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Jake Lemmerman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jake Lemmerman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake Lemmerman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wizardman 02:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Interested in being nominated to become an admin?

Hey. So first of all, I have to say that I really admire you as a Wikipedia editor. You are an amazing contributor to WikiProject Baseball, especially as evidenced by the numerous baseball-related articles that you have helped promote to good article status. You do a great job of keeping player articles up to date and reverting incorrect/unsourced info on them. You also contribute a lot to AfD discussions. Most of all, though, you've been on Wikipedia for nearly ten years, and in that time, you've accumulated almost 80,000 edits (actually over 80,000 counting your deleted edits) and you've also never been blocked. All of this considered, I can't think of anyone else I know on Wikipedia who is more deserving of becoming an administrator. Therefore, I would like to nominate you. However, before I do, I wanted to first see if it's something you actually want. Please let me know. Thank you, and keep it up with the great contributions. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 00:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks but i don't really want to be an administrator. I've seen too many editors that I admired on here that became admins and then quickly burned out from all the administrative tasks and either quit the project all together or drastically scale back the work they were doing. I like working on articles, but I'm not interested in the political stuff. Thanks again for the kind words though. Spanneraol (talk) 02:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay. If you ever change your mind, though, I'd be honored to nominate you. And you're welcome. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 18:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Freedom Pro Baseball League, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I think you confused me with someone else. What unconstructive edit are you referring to? Did you even look at what the edits were or read the edit summaries? Spanneraol (talk) 01:30, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Revert warring is unconstructive. While you haven't broken WP:3RR yet, WP:DISPUTE requires you to stop the reverting and discuss the issues to come to a consensus. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Discussion only works if both parties are willing to talk. You have a single purpose account with no other edits involved here. Spanneraol (talk) 03:39, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Spanneraol/Archive10&oldid=1139085805"