Talk:Adrian Gonzalez

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Adrián González title[edit]

Why Adrián González is redirecting to here. There is an Adrián González article that should use that title.--ClaudioMB 21:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Page protection[edit]

It was a good idea. The deadline for Gonzalez and the Red Sox to reach a deal is 2pm tomorrow.[1] If they don't reach a deal by then, the trade is off. --Muboshgu (talk) 23:29, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect. The deal will still go through if they don't reach an agreement. Gonzalez does not have a no trade clause and will go to Boston regardless of an extension being in place or not. ---THE TRUTH----

The deal is conditional on the Red Sox signing him to an extension. Gonzalez can't veto the deal, but the Red Sox can back out. --Muboshgu (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The sources are conflicting on this issue. Either way, we need to wait for an official announcement before changing the information.--TM 18:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Reportedly, the Sox and Gonzalez failed to come to terms on an extension, and the Sox are hesitant to go through with this trade if they're only guaranteed one year of Gonzalez, but there are no definitive reports that the deal is on or off at this time. --Muboshgu (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Reports: Gonzalez-to-Red Sox deal off for now THIS is why we wait for official confirmation on these deals. It may still happen, but at this moment it looks more likely that it won't. We may need to extend the page protection to deal with angry/disappointed fans. --Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I was just about to write that exact same first sentence.--TM 21:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
What about now? [2]--User:Dr.colin.rust —Preceding undated comment added 07:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC).

propose updating his picture to one from the Boston Press Conference. -Boston Burkenation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boston Burkenation (talkcontribs) 18:37, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

If you can find a version of it that isn't a copyright violation, go ahead. --Muboshgu (talk) 01:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

found one, but am unsure how to change the picture. if i link to it, someone else could change the pic. picture: --Boston Burkenation (talk) 18:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think thats a free image. Spanneraol (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

fair point. will continue search. thanks for the update. --Boston Burkenation (talk) 02:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


This is where I will make my case as to why I think "2011-Present" should be added to AG's info Box: 1) it's listed in his main article ("Boston Red Sox (2011-Present") 2) look at Cliff Lee's page. Clearly says "Philadelphia Phillies 2011-Present". 3) While it may be true that "future-present" is is virtually certain that he will play for the team in 2011; as such, adding "2011-Present" when he has a commitment to play for the team in 2011 is, in my view, acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boston Burkenation (talkcontribs) 03:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

(1) I don't know what that means; (2) WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a valid reason to do something, we've been reverting it there too; (3) "Virtually certain" violates WP:CRYSTAL. What if he suffers a career ending injury in spring training and never plays a game for them? Could happen.
That said, I'll put in place the compromise suggested on WT:BASEBALL and we'll see if that works. If IP's keep changing it to "2011-present", I'll take it off entirely. Again. And again. All the way until he makes an official appearance for the Red Sox. --Muboshgu (talk) 03:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:04, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Adrián GonzálezAdrian Gonzalez — Previous move was done without consensus/discussion, and under WP:BOLD. Significantly more Multiple sources (12.3 million) do not use the accent marks for the name, as compared to those that do (5.49 million), therefore the move should be reverted per WP:COMMONNAME. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Oppose for many of the reasons that are currently going on in the diacritics Rfc that is currently happening. -DJSasso (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I believe the RfC is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)/Diacritics RfCBagumba (talk) 23:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Sorry I meant to come back and link it and completely forgot. Thanks. -DJSasso (talk) 17:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
L.A. Times does not use the accents either, and it would be easy enough to do it it were the correct way to spell his name. I suggest reverting this name change without more discussion. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Let's not use the Google raw number of hits results one way or another as I have found them to be unreliable with regards to specific number of hits when > 1000 (see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Search engine issues for more info). Still more troubling is when I remove the "-wikipedia" option to theoretically not limit pages that include the phrase "wikipedia", the number of hits goes down (when removing limitations should cause the results to go up). With all due respect to WP:COMMONNAME, I will make an exception and use WP:COMMONSENSE in this unique case that is not pushing a totally foreign alphabet; only extra diacritics are being added, and redirects to the article without the marks already exist. I support its usage to reflect native spellings based on a person's cultural heritage. —Bagumba (talk) 23:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support as we don't need those 'accents' in the title. It's enough to have'em in the opening sentence. GoodDay (talk) 18:21, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. He is American and American sources tend to not use the diacritics. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. The sources seem to tend not to include an accent. For what it's worth, the subject himself leaves out the accent on his own websites: [3]; [4] Dohn joe (talk) 00:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral Curious case. As far as I am concerned, one authoritative source with diacritics is enough. If he was Mexican national, I would have unhesitatingly opposed this request. However, I'm puzzled at how he acquired his diacritics, as he was born north of the border. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
    As I noted below, the "authoritative source" - Baseball Reference - includes diacritics for this person, but not for his brother. Of course, there may well be a reason for that discrepancy, but it isn't explained on that site. Note: I should add that, notwithstanding my scare quotes, I do consider Baseball Reference to be quite authoritative on baseball in general - but no one's perfect.... Dohn joe (talk) 16:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Whenever I see his name referenced in news articles, it is often without the accents. I myself typed in his name without the accents and was shocked when this page did not instantly come up. I support changing it and think it will make it easier and more user friendly.--Mordecairule 19:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


Any additional comments:

I shall added notices to relevant talk pages regarding this discussion. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I moved the page here (with the accent marks) because that's how he's listed in B-Ref, which is usually accurate on those things. Many articles in the American media leave out accent marks that should be present. I'd love to see if anyone with greater knowledge than I can assert one way or the other. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
That is but one source out of millions. If one source out of millions said X was Y, that does not mean that it is fact, especially given that millions more say X is not Y.
Why was a discussion not started before making said move?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
To be fair, the naming is probably consistent with most MLB players' article names to use the extended Latin alphabet, so it might not have been seen as controversial; hence no move request. Perhaps there is a convention (or one needs to be created ) by WikiProject_Baseball? —Bagumba (talk) 21:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Bagumba is basically right. I didn't see this as controversial because it seemed consistent with other Latin players. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
There currently is a RfC going on wikipedia wide on their use or non-use and after about 3 weeks its currently split 50/50. Its something that most of the community can't seem to agree on and has been debated for years. -DJSasso (talk) 17:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
As far as Baseball Reference is concerned, they use the accent marks for Adrian, but not his brother: [5].
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Due to my WikiBreak I missed some edits. One of the edits I missed was the wikilink to his ethnicity, Mexican American, was removed. I understand per MOS ethnicity is not necessary in the introduction, it should be mentioned given that it is significant enough that the subject of this article has twice played for the Mexican team in the WBC. There should be somewhere within the article that this can be integrated smoothly. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 August 2012[edit]

Not done:

he might get traded

Gotcha12 (talk) 16:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC) helpfull

When its official, page will be updated. Spanneraol (talk) 16:18, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Even then, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 16:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Middle name[edit]

Someone had changed the bold name of the subject a couple days ago, without giving a reason; I have changed it back, with a supporting reference. However, when looking for additional references, I found this, which claims that the subject has no middle name. So what do we go with?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I'd go with the baseball reference source.. the sb nation article cant be verified. Spanneraol (talk) 19:37, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adrian Gonzalez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:02, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Gonzalez was NOT the first Mexican decent player to collect 2000 hits[edit]

Ted Williams (2654 hits) was certainly before Gonzalez. It says Gonzalez was first in the ESPN article cited, but it's wrong. Maybe he's the second. Tidewater 2014 (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

The ESPN source linked in the article says he was the first. I guess its how you decide if someone is of mexican descent or not. Spanneraol (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

It seems clear though that having a Mexican mother would qualify one as being “of Mexican decent.” The article doesn’t say “of entirely Mexican descent.” I’m going to edit this out of the sentence, but keep the source. If there are objections, let me know. Tidewater 2014 (talk) 15:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)