Talk:2008 Cleveland Indians season: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:56, 31 March 2008

Ohio Unassessed

	Ohio portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Baseball Unassessed

	Baseball portal This article 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.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Comment

I personally think we should get rid of the "Notable Achievements". Yes, they are notable, but unnecessary, and aren't on any other baseball season articles. I'm not sure; what do others think? jj137 (Talk) 21:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you mean the "Noteable matchups" section. I think it is written like an advertisement(labor day, memorial day, etc.) but I like the concept of it so people can see the noteable games without looking through the game log <Baseballfan789 22:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Game Log Formatting

I don't want to start a revision war, but I feel like the formatting I used in this revision should be kept. I pointing out other articles isn't always significant, but I do believe it is in a matter of personal preference. The table formatting used in my revision is found in 27/29 MLB teams. Majorpayne27 (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is common sense to have March and April together because there is only one game in March. Also all of the official MLB schedules (except the ones that include spring training) list March and April together in years that games are played in March. Frank Anchor, (R-OH) (talk, contribs) 19:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to agree with Frank Anchor on this one. Just because most other teams have it like that doesnt make it right. It is stupid to have March listed separately for all teams (except Boston and Oakland, who played multiple games in March). NewYork483 (talk) 19:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 19:53, 31 March 2008 edit Frank Anchor (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 24,289 edits →Game Log Formatting ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:56, 31 March 2008 edit undo NewYork483 (talk \| contribs) 237 edits →Game Log Formatting Next edit →
Line 10:		Line 10:

	* It is common sense to have March and April together because there is only one game in March. Also all of the official MLB schedules (except the ones that include spring training) list March and April together in years that games are played in March. [[:User:Frank Anchor\|Frank Anchor]], <span style="color:red">(R-OH)</span> ([[:User talk:Frank Anchor\|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Frank Anchor\|contribs]]) 19:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)		* It is common sense to have March and April together because there is only one game in March. Also all of the official MLB schedules (except the ones that include spring training) list March and April together in years that games are played in March. [[:User:Frank Anchor\|Frank Anchor]], <span style="color:red">(R-OH)</span> ([[:User talk:Frank Anchor\|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Frank Anchor\|contribs]]) 19:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

			::I would have to agree with [[User:Frank Anchor\|Frank Anchor]] on this one. Just because most other teams have it like that doesnt make it right. It is stupid to have March listed separately for all teams (except Boston and Oakland, who played multiple games in March). [[User:NewYork483\|NewYork483]] ([[User talk:NewYork483\|talk]]) 19:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)