Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcuts:
WikiProject Baseball (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 


Archive

Player Archives


1 2 3

Columns in season game logs[edit]

In this series of edits to 1994 Montreal Expos season, an editor added tables for game logs. I removed the columns for stadium, game time, local TV, local cable TV, national TV, national cable TV, local radio, and national radio, as I believe this information is overly detailed, as well as being mostly repetitive, and so obscure the more important data in the table. Can we establish a consensus view on this? Thanks. isaacl (talk) 02:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Also note that the editor has re-added game log tables for the spring training season. Based on previous discussion, I had removed this addition. I've asked the editor to join in this discussion. isaacl (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Now the editor is filling in the game log table and re-inserting the additional columns. Can anyone weigh in on whether or not these columns should be present? Assuming there is a consensus to omit these columns, I'm at a bit of a loss at what to do, since short of semi-protection of every single team season article, I don't see a good way to stop these columns from being entered, and taking them out without removing the rest of the tabular data is tedious. isaacl (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
The TV stuff is ridiculous.. the local tv/radio info is already in the info box at the head of each article and doesnt change game to game. No reason to have it in these gamelogs. Spanneraol (talk) 18:10, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I've warned the IP. We can block the editors adding spring training game logs, but that's all I can think to do. We had a discussion about (probably) the same user adding local TV and local radio stations to regular-season game logs, and agreed that those parameters shouldn't be added to the table. Seattle (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Just a note: it's a different IP address now (see the edit history for 1994 Montreal Expos season). I'd forgotten about this discussion from 2012; not too much input, but the couple of people who commented did favour dropping the TV information. isaacl (talk) 18:27, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@Go Phightins!: Left the same warning. The next time it happens should lead to a block... Seattle (talk) 18:35, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I didn't find a discussion regarding an anonymous IP editor; if you happen to have an idea where the discussion is located, I'd appreciate a pointer. The spring training logs are easy to remove since there is consensus to drop the whole table, but extra columns in the game logs table are a pain to remove. (I suppose I could write a Lua module to assist.) isaacl (talk) 18:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I remember having one but I can't find it in the archives. I remember it was a recent discussion though. Seattle (talk) 20:06, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

The editor has re-inserted the stadium column and the spring training log. (The last few edits were from a different IP address.) isaacl (talk) 08:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Recording the voices of baseball players[edit]

Congratulations on your feature in The Signpost. I think you might be interested in a project I started, the 'Voice Intro Project' (#WikiVIP), which records the speaking voices of people who demonstrate what tho are the subject of a Wikipedia biography. The aim is to demonstrate what they sound like, and how they pronounce their own names. Subjects can record in English, and/ or in any other language in which they are comfortable. Please contribute, by recording any baseball personalities you know or meet; or encouraging them to supply their own recordings. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Miami Marlins' color for {{Baseball alternative primary color}}[edit]

{{{name}}}
Miami Marlins
Bats: {{{bats}}} Throws: {{{throws}}}

The color that is currently set for the Miami Marlins for {{Baseball alternative primary color}} is the team's blue. I disagree with this color choice - the color template is prominently used in several infoboxes, and the Marlins' blue is merely an accent color that barely shows up in their branding (about as often as yellow does). Outside of the logo/wordmark or the drop shadowing on the numbers for the orange jersey, the blue is not used anywhere on the team uniform. For example, Marlins players currently have an infobox that looks like the example to the right, which doesn't sit right with me. If anything, the blue color should be replaced with orange, as the team uses it about as much as the Baltimore Orioles or San Francisco Giants do. What does everyone think? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 12:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Just for reference, here are two alternatives that I think would better reflect the team's branding. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 17:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Giancarlo Stanton
Miami Marlins
Giancarlo Stanton
Miami Marlins
The blue does seem out of place. I like the second one better, but how about the player's name being white? NatureBoyMD (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
On a more general note, the legibility of the text on the colour backgrounds is poor; as was briefly discussed in the context of season articles, I think using colour borders instead of backgrounds would be a better way to incorporate the team colours without sacrificing readability. isaacl (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, here's white text version for your consideration. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 20:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Giancarlo Stanton
Miami Marlins
I also find the black on orange difficult to read. The Marlins uniforms outline the black with white, which improves legibility. In addition, larger lettering improves visibility, as evidenced by how this colour combination passes the W3C WCAG 2.0 AAA contrast standards for text above 18 point but fails it for text below this size. isaacl (talk) 21:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
OK then, how about all white text? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 13:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Giancarlo Stanton
Miami Marlins
All white looks the best to me and is the easiest to read. NatureBoyMD (talk) 16:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Outreach efforts: end-of-summer review[edit]

Back in March, some editors made various suggestions on improving WikiProject Baseball, which led to some discussion on welcoming new editors to the team. If anyone has welcomed new editors so far this season, could they post a brief message describing what they did and how successful it was? (For example, did you use {{WikiProject Baseball invitation}}, handcraft a greeting, or both? Did the editor subsequently increase their level of contribution to baseball-related articles?) Is there anything else you've done specifically related to outreach that everyone should know about? (The recently-created resource library could be considered as contributing to outreach, but I'm thinking of items with a bit more overt interaction with newcomers to baseball articles.) As the start of fall and the final push to the playoffs is upon us, bringing a larger audience, I'm thinking this is a good time to keep outreach in mind, and to learn from what has been done, good and bad.

If you are an editor who started editing baseball articles this season, perhaps you can share whether or not there was any specific actions by other editors that encouraged you to edit articles related to baseball, or Wikipedia in general? What has worked well, and what hasn't? What improvements can you suggest? isaacl (talk) 20:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The Inside Corner : September 1, 2014[edit]

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

Thanks to everyone for their contributions! If you'd like to submit something to the newsletter, please put the newsletter desk page on your watchlist, and sign up for a section, add some blurbs to the showcase queue, or start a discussion on the talk page about your proposed submission. Your assistance is appreciated. isaacl (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Request[edit]

Can somebody please change the size parameters of Template:Infobox baseball biography so that it matches Template:Infobox MLB player?--Yankees10 04:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Navbox questions[edit]

Looking for some input on the handling of some navbox issues below.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Minor league affiliate navboxes[edit]

Category:Minor league baseball affiliates navigational boxes has navboxes for each MLB team's minor league affiliates. However, a random sampling of MLB team navboxes at Category:Major League Baseball team navigational boxes shows that they too generally enumerate this information as well. Is there a need for such duplication? For an example see "Minors" at bottom of Template:Los Angeles Dodgers and Template:MLB Team Los Angeles Dodgers. I would propose that the affiliate navboxes can be deleted.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

As an editor that focuses on the minor leagues, I prefer the separate 'franchise' navbox. All but one team navbox has links to their farm clubs. The other 29 don't seem to follow any strict pattern of placement; some are at the bottom before season links, some are close to the bottom, some are spread around in the middle. The separate box of only MiLB teams is easier for me to find and use to navigate through a franchise. NatureBoyMD (talk) 01:03, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't tell if you prefer the separate navbox solely because the team navboxes are inconsistent. If so, the ideal solution is to standardize the team navboxes, not to duplicate the information in a different set navbox with duplicated info. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 02:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I think fixing the inconsistent placement of minor league info would help. Still, even with a consistent location in the team navbox, I think MiLB teams are easier to locate and navigate in the separate box. When I'm looking through an organization, I use the minor-league-only franchise box instead of the main team navbox. Maybe I'm alone in that. NatureBoyMD (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Team hall of fame members in navboxes[edit]

Are members of a team's hall of fame, such as those at Category:Major League Baseball museums and halls of fame, notable enough to be enumerated in a navbox? If so, should they be in a standalone navbox, or added to the general team navbox? For example, Template:San Diego Padres lists all their HOF members in the navbox. I recently created a dedicated article for the team's HOF, and added the article to the team navbox. I dont think the team navbox needs the clutter of listing each member, and would propose removing them. However, I'm leaning toward not creating a dedicated Padres HOF navbox, as it seems like we generally have too much navbox clutter in baseball.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

What should be in a season article?[edit]

Now that 2015's articles are already being created, I took a look through the 2014 articles, and most of them are to me very disappointing. Not necessarily for the lack of prose, but because it seems like it's table after table after table. For that matter, most of the articles have no sections to write about the season built in, so it's no wonder that users haven't been adding anything. Perhaps it's time now to brainstorm and get a good idea of what the 2015 shells should be like. If we get it on the right foot then we could have much better season articles. A few in 2014 are in good shape, but it's unfortunately the exception. Wizardman 23:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

We do have Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/MLB team season articles format, which has some basic ideas... The 2015 articles should not be started until 2014 is over... I agree that some people go over board on tables... I prefer mostly prose with a few basic tables, stats, roster, standings..... though I really hate the record vs. opponent tables that have popped up the last few years as I dont feel they give much useful info... certainly dont understand all the tables that are used on the Cardinals page. Spanneraol (talk) 23:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, I know I have been doing a lot of work on the Phillies' 2014 season article ... I am going to eventually need to do some pruning, especially on the preseason stuff, but I think it has a decent shell. Generally, I like the page Spanner linked above. Go Phightins! 23:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Man, that Cardinals article tries to be the entire media guide, doesn't it? Overall, I think a fair number of tables are unavoidable in a complete season article. These are really almanac pages and a considerable amount of a team's season is easily condensible into a table. From the perspective of a parallel project, here how I write in hockey: 2013–14 Calgary Flames season. In my view, there is seven key areas of interest: The season (prose), standings (table), player statistics (table), transactions, awards/milestones and draft (all three a mix of both, e.g. here), and minor league affiliates (prose - though this is one case where a table may be better for baseball). The draft may carry less weight from a baseball perspective than hockey, but otherwise, I would be looking for the same information. The Cardinals article loses me right off the bat with a bunch of minor hirings and firings that nobody cares about and doesn't get better by dedicating entire sections to events that don't require more than a couple sentences in this article. And completely agreed on the overbroad tables. There's TWO dedicated to head to head record (the matrix one is a horrible failure of WP:ACCESS with the colour-coded column headers, btw), percentage of runs due to HRs, Record when...? Oy. Can't blame you for wanting to get a set format down, Wizardman. Resolute 00:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Prose that discusses trends that occur during the season are what make an article encyclopedic. I don't like seeing a large amount of stats in prose that are handpicked from a stat site; that usually strikes me as WP:OR by an editor placing stats that they, not experts, are deciding is important. The other extreme is 162 game-by-game details, which are not a bad thing if they are eventually pared down when it is clearer what were the key points in the season.—Bagumba (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The Cardinals pages have been primarily the domain of User:Katydidit who always resented changes... he seems to have been blocked for sockpuppetry.. so that might not be an issue now... As to the style things, we should set up the season pages based on the style guide i linked to above. Spanneraol (talk) 02:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Signpost report on WikiProject Baseball featured on Wikimedia blog[edit]

Hi all,

As you may be aware, WikiProject Baseball was recently featured in the Signpost's WikiProject report series. As an ongoing effort to attract more attention, new readers and new editors, the Wikimedia Blog has published a post summarizing the Signpost's report here. Thanks to all involved!

CMonterrey (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

World Series name[edit]

I found a source which explains the origin of the name. I'd be interested if anyone here has any better sourcing. Thanks. Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 00:03, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

See the references here, including this Snopes article, for evidence against the "New York World" conjecture. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Also see this previous discussion on the World Series talk page. isaacl (talk) 00:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I just saw the snopes part so I self reverted. It would be nice to explain the origin in the name, if only to help the unenlightened :) Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 00:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Backwards k[edit]

Dear baseball experts: Backwards k redirects to [Strikeout#Jargon and slang]]. However, this section doesn't have any information about backwards k, whatever that may be. If this is an actual slang term, could someone who knows what it is please make an addition to the article? Or is this an inappropriate redirect? I have no idea, myself. —Anne Delong (talk) 08:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey Anne. Generally, a backwards k refers to a looking/called strikeout, whereas a "forward k" refers to a swinging strikeout. I will try to update that article as such, or perhaps a colleague here can. Thanks for bringing that to our attention. God bless. Go Phightins! 10:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I fixed it. The term is explained under the Rules section of the Strikeout page, so I just changed the redirect. InTheAM 15:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks to you both. —Anne Delong (talk) 01:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot help in converting infobox template[edit]

I have merged Template:Infobox Defunct Minor League Baseball into Template:Infobox Minor League Baseball. Does anyone know about how to get a bot (or some other tool?) to help with the conversion from one to the other on the 400+ pages that use the defunct infobox? It would require renaming the template, removing some fields, renaming some fields, and moving team data from one field to another. Thanks. NatureBoyMD (talk) 03:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Split notification for Minor League Baseball to Minor league baseball[edit]

There is a proposal to split off part of Minor League Baseball into a new article to cover the general concept of minor league baseball, to be titled Minor league baseball. Your input at Talk:Minor League Baseball#Split would be appreciated. - BilCat (talk) 14:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)