Template talk:Washington Nationals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Baseball (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.


It seems inappropriate to have Montreal Expos and Washington Nationals at equal billing in this template. This clashes with all other current MLB navboxes. The fact that the move only occurred three years ago does not make this a special case. Either it needs to go the way of Texas Rangers, Minnesota Twins, Baltimore Orioles, Milwaukee Brewers et al., and just list its former incarnation in the table, or the navbox should be split in two: one for the current franchise, and another for the defunct Expos. --Xyzzyva (talk) 19:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I decided to be bold and begin a split of navboxes by creating Template:Montreal Expos. I have not yet tried to replace the Nationals box with it on the Expos-related pages. I wanted to get more consensus before that. Once that is complete, the Nationals box could be trimmed down to DC-only stuff, if we want. --Xyzzyva (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Skeezix1000 (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Does Alfonso Soriano really belong in the important figures list? He played for the Nats for just ONE season. Topgun530 (talk) 14:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe not, but you could argue that his one season with the Nats was better than Dunn's or Willingham's. The real problem is that the Nats (leaving aside the franchise's Montreal era) don't have enough history to make a decent list of important figures. My guess is that 30 years from now, Zimmerman is the only name that would still appear on the list. I don't really have an opinion on whether Soriano should be kept or deleted. The only name I can think of that perhaps should be added as a replacement is Riggleman. BRMo (talk) 01:08, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Number 42, retired number[edit]

I think that number 42, as in the retired number section, should be linked to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Nationals#Retired_numbers and not to the regular Jackie Robinson page. That page has nothing to do with the Nats, while the Washington Nationals section on the wiki is related to the Nats and gives more specific reasons why it is retired. --Il Maravilla (talk) 16:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)