Jump to content

Talk:John Henry Lloyd

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

John Henry Lloyd's date of death

[edit]

According to the Connelsville (PA) Daily Courier, dated March 20, 1964 (page 6), John Henry Lloyd died the day before on March 19, 1964. The Baltimore (MD) Afro-American of March 24, 1964, gives the same information.

While Mr. Liebman may not be providing proper references, I have to agree with his findings in this case. John Henry Lloyd did indeed die in 1964, not 1965. Most if not all of the erroneous references to his death date go back to Robert Peterson's book, Only the Ball Was White, and the error has simply been perpetuated without any attempt at confirmation.

I will not make the change myself just yet, but I think that a truce should be called in this particular edit war.

-- Couillaud 20:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Social Security Death Index" doesn't give an exact date, but does say that he died in March, 1964. Davost (talk) 14:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that Liebman wouldn't provide citations, and that's why he's a banned user. However, others did, and the date is now sufficiently cited in this article. Thanks for checking. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Pop Lloyd?

[edit]

There is a redirect from Pop Lloyd to John Henry Lloyd. I'm wondering whether the redirect should go in the opposite direction per WP:COMMONNAME. Baseball-Reference.com and the Baseball Hall of Fame website both seem to list Pop Lloyd as the subject's common name. In some other places, he is listed as John Henry "Pop" Lloyd. I know this page has been in place for a long time, so I'm not sure if that is a consideration though. EricEnfermero (Talk) 11:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't known as "Pop" until very late in his playing career (when he was nearing his 40s) and into his managerial years. For the bulk of his career, for which he was famous, he was known by his given name. I am surprised this isn't mentioned at all in the article. Count this as an oppose. Rgrds. --64.85.214.88 (talk) 12:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Henry Lloyd. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Henry Lloyd. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Existence of Ted Harlow

[edit]

I was reading an article on Pop Lloyd in the Athletic today, when the author cited this article: "'[B]oth Babe Ruth and Ted Harlow, a noted sportswriter, reportedly believed Lloyd to be the greatest baseball player ever.'

So, yes, Harlow’s opinion about Lloyd is well known and has been shared with the world. There is just one small issue with Ted Harlow.

He never existed. . .

[Alvin Harlow] said that a longtime St. Louis sportswriter — no name was given — was a guest on a local radio show and was asked to name the greatest baseball player he’d ever seen. My best guess is that Harlow — who was from Missouri himself — just happened to be listening and probably didn’t even know who the sportswriter was or how to confirm it with him. And that’s where we get the familiar quote that people have wanted to attribute to the ubiquitous Ted Harlow."

Excerpted from https://theathletic.com/1644809/2020/03/02/the-baseball-100-no-25-pop-lloyd/ - requires a subscription.

What would be the best way to correct this without changing the underlying (and correct) point that Lloyd really was one of the best baseball players to that point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:199:1:6820:50D7:E47C:BF39:E3EC (talk) 13:00, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]