User talk:Dewelar/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Request

When you use the lifetime template can you put it on the top so that these categories are the first.--Yankees10 23:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm following the instructions in the template documentation, which reads "Since Categories are preferred to be listed in most-common order, the Lifetime template should generally be placed after the last Category tag..." -Dewelar (talk) 00:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh Ok, by the way I dont know if you know but the Montreal Expos have there own article, so please dont direct it to the Nationals like you did for Tim McCarver.--Yankees10 17:37, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Noted. -Dewelar (talk) 17:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Message from "Gregory T. Glading" moved from page top

Atleast I know who you are. Let' put this article to bed. I am sick of fighting over it. I will defend my article until one of you can get me blocked. your move.

I believe it has to do with : [1] and with the editor having an issue with people not using real names for their loggin accounts [2] -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Retired template

I won't use it, but can you explain what you mean.-DANO- (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand now. But can we change the ones with the retired term to not have it? Also, I know about the template for MLBprimarycolor, but how do I actually view the info IN THAT TEMPLATE?-DANO- (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Jackal4

Please note that Jackal4, whom you have warned in the past, continues to engage in edit warring, putting up innappropriate material on dozens of articles (which he then refused to delete), profanity, and deleting communications between others on their pages. Perhaps you can communicate with him? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much. I'm listing some examples on my talk page.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

71.246.*.* edits - Doping

I don't know the backstory on the Doping category edits, but on face value it looks legitimate. I realize he had caused some problems and might be sock-puppeting, but I'm not sure the objection is right in this instance. Let me know if there's something I don't know about the situation, but I think the doping category is proper otherwise. Shadowjams (talk) 09:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Risking being too direct, the second sentence of the blocking policy says Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, not to punish users. It is not much of a punishment, and that is the point. This particular edit seems to be constructive, which is the point. Tell me if I'm missing the big picture with this user. If, for example, the category he's using has been disreputed, that would be relevant. But a player with a doping category seems ok. Shadowjams (talk) 09:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, and I completely understand your exasperation. It's a bit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and I understand the temptation completely. Excuse my flippancy too. I'd seen these doping tags all night and I thought this might be removed by a big fan. Let me know if I can help with this user's disruptions in the future. Shadowjams (talk) 09:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Rob and Robert Ellis

I saw that you created Rob Ellis (outfielder). The only Ellis' in MLB are Rob and Robert Ellis (baseball). Since you used outfielder with Rob instead of baseball, I am assuming that their names are close enough to being the same that Robert Ellis (baseball) should be moved to Robert Ellis (pitcher). Yes? Jackal4 (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Double commas

Thanks thats interesting I will watch that. Let me know if you see anything else.--Kumioko (talk) 21:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Twins Territory

I noticed that you are a Twins fan. I'm something of a Twins fan, myself. I live in Fort Myers, which is where the Twins have Spring training, and where their A ball team, the Fort Myers Miracle, play. In fact, when President Obama was in town last week, I gave him a Miracle jersey as a gift. I go to Miracle games regularly and have autographs of just about everyone who's ever played for the Miracle in the last 6 years (including Joe Mauer and Francisco Liriano). If you ever decide to look at the Wikipedia entries on some of the Twins' farmhands, chances are I created it or at least edited it at one point.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I actually enjoy minor league baseball over Spring training with the major leaguers, but both are cool. I drive past Hammond stadium every day on my way to work. Florida is a great place to live if you like baseball.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 21:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Jackal4

Jackal4 has run amok on a number of baseball pages. Pls take a look at my comments on his discussion page -- perhaps you can talk sense into him. Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI, Jackal4 has been blocked for the second time this month -- this time for a 30-day period. See [3].--Epeefleche (talk) 08:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Bill Hopper

The page you just made, Bill Hopper, was a redirect made by YUL89YYZ in 2006, so technically, he made the page, in case you didn't see that. Thanks, Adam Penale (talk) 20:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Saw it. It was a redirect to an entirely different person (now a hat note of my page), so that doesn't count :) . -Dewelar (talk) 20:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Chico Hernandez

Thank You very much for making the corrections to James Chico Hernandez; the sambo fighter and Chico Hernandez the baseball player! Thanks for getting back to me! Chico 9 (talk) 09:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

A.J. Burnett

I moved it because I saw the note at the top of the page. I don't see anything wrong with naming the article "Allen James Burnett" and having the short name redirect to that. –BuickCenturyDriver 07:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, I noticed that there are two redirects to the player's article. One of them, A. J. Burnett was tagged for deletion. –BuickCenturyDriver 07:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that one. Would you like A.J. Burnett to be a redirect as it is and A. J. Burnett (with the extra space) to be the player's article? –BuickCenturyDriver 07:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm in favor of the full name title. But if you prefer the short name (A.J. Burnett), then how about deleting it and merging both articles, and having just A.J. (without the space) redirect to the full name title? –BuickCenturyDriver 07:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

John Franklin West

Hey. Made him his own page, with his actual name now. Frank West can keep the one that bears [his] name, no harm no foul. Frank West, the game character, has millions more fans and more general relevance than an old pitcher, so I suggest you not fight this further. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.133.4.35 (talk) 12:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Spencer Steedley

I found your post about SPencer " balling up on me" very funny, but please believe me, he is my cousin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lkeever2 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC) Yes and this site is normally wrong.--Lkeever2 (talk) 10:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

dodgers seasons

Hey.. I don't mind you combining the starters and relievers on the season rosters, but can you leave the "CL" closer designation on the closers? I'd like to identify the closer on the roster. Spanneraol (talk) 01:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a smile....

Papercutbiology♫ (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Papercutbiology♫ (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

P90X

Hi. You marked the article I created P90X as advertising. Can you please explain why you think it's advertising? If this is advertising, then is the article on Microsoft Windows advertising as well? I can add references from news organizations that mention the system if need be. Thanks. Wikipedia brown (talk) 04:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

"Notable alumni" of minor league teams

Hi. Another editor, NatureBoyMD, has come up with what I think is a good and thoughtful template and conditions for a "notable alumni" list for a minor league team that interests him. See [4]. I thought that before he finalizes it, it/he might benefit from you taking a glance at it, and giving him any comments that you may have, since I could see it being used for other minor league teams (its better than anything I've seen), and you are a baseball editor whose views I respect. Feel free to leave your comments on it for him on my home talk page at the above url, as that is where he and I have been discussing it. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:46, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

uniform numbers

Hey, welcome back. Do you know of a good source that has the uniform numbers of the managers and coaches? I've mostly been using Baseball Almanac for the rosters but it only lists the players... only have been able to find uniform number sources for a few of the teams (Yanks, cubs) that have the manages and coaches.. any ideas? Spanneraol (talk) 14:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

Since you seem to enjoy writing MLB player articles, I would like to draw your attention to Earle Brucker, Jr.. He recently died:[5] so it may be good to get the info while his obits are still out there. Kinston eagle (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Here's another one for you: Ed Blake [6]. Kinston eagle (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

1962 Colt .45s

I was wondering what you mean by you were about to nuke all the changes I made, and why did you delete the tie games in the 1962 NL Standings? http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1962/B04250HOU1962.htm http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1962/B09090HOU1962.htm are the box scores for the two games called due to curfew. Punx.django (talk) 02:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explination. I was trying to model the page after the 2008 Philadelphia Phillies season page which got a featured article status. I'm pretty sure that major league baseball recognizes the tie games, but I'm not too concerned about pushing the issue. I'd like to work together on this to make all the historic pages better. Are you sure that 5 tables are really better than 2? Punx.django (talk) 02:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

No problems... I did some digging and reading the actual rules of major league baseball so if the tie issue comes up again you can point to rule 4.12 Suspended games. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/start_end_4.jsp As for the formatting, I'll fix it since I broke it. I'm new to the wiki-baseball project so I was just using the wrong templete. =) Anyway, if you need anything, just let me know. Punx.django (talk) 02:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I like it, much better frame to the article, easier to attach meat to it. Thanks. Punx.django (talk) 11:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Had a quick question for you, I'm using the 62 colt season page as a templete after you fixed it, but is there a particular order that the players should be listed in the stats columns? For starting pitchers I've been using IP and for relievers I've been using Saves but for other batters I've no idea what the s.o.p. is? Thanks in advance Punx.django (talk) 16:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

NA seasons

Hey, You continue to do a great job with the season articles.. I've gotten a bit busier at work so my production has slumped off a bit lately.. seems like a lot of the more recent seasons have rosters already though... I'll slowly get to adding the ones that don't. I wanted to mention that some of the National Association teams from 1871-1875 have season pages also that I think you have missed... I intend eventually to make pages for the teams that don't have them but you might want to skim over those as well.. not sure all the changes you are making. Spanneraol (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

1882 St. Louis Brown Stockings season

I have reverted your changes to this page, as they returned empty, incomplete, and approximated columns to the stat tables, as well as undid some of the the work that was done to standardize their layout. -Dewelar (talk) 17:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand how separating the stats into starters and non-starters which cannot be verified and which is unconventional in baseball statistics is "standardizing" the layout. Historically the only categories are baseball statistics in hitting, pitching, and fielding. Timpcrk87 (talk) 17:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

First, I was primarily referring to your insinuation of a starting position player lineup, which remains unverifiable. If this was discussed somewhere let me know, because I've been looking for when/where a decision was made for this format. But as far as I can tell, it has been just you adding empty headings with no content to every single season article and then breaking out that statistics as you see fit where they've already been entered. There are serious problems with this format besides its unconventional nature. For instance, why is Seward listed as the starting outfielder over McCaffery? They played in the same number of games, but McCaffery actually had more atbats, its unverifiable and amounts to original research on your part. Timpcrk87 (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

DRV for Category:Knuckleball pitchers

The close of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 17#Category:Knuckleball pitchers, in which you participated, is now under discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009 April 28#Category:Knuckleball pitchers. Alansohn (talk) 04:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

East End Park (Cincinnati) vs. Pendleton Park

Consensus seems to be toward focusing the article to East End Park. I think you are one of about only 4 or so that have weighed in. Could we maybe get your "final" opinion on the matter before we take action? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Much of what he says has the ring of truth, but I agree that for specific facts not available elsewhere we need to see some citations, such as "according the Cincinnati [name of newspaper] on [such-and-such date]..." Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Kelly

Please elaborate. Also note that this is an outgrowth of the East End Park (Cincinnati) article, which has been kind of an interesting little project this week. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Not "A.K.A." just "A.A." as in "American Association", to distinguish this short-lived team from the established National League Reds club. The overall dilemma we run into with these things is that team nicknames, especially prior the 1900s, were not formal brands, they were just media inventions. There has been an attempt by modern writers to retrofit unofficial nicknames as if they were chosen by the teams as they are nowadays. The one editor has uncovered evidence that the team called itself (or tried to call itself) the Reds. As I noted in the article, that meant they were dealing with a Reds team across town (just as the Players' League New York team also called itself the "Giants") and another Reds team in their own league, in Boston. The local media had a field day with this collection of drunken misfits, and because Kelly's presence was so strong, most of them were "Kelly's - something". Lee Allen, a Cincinnati native and lifelong fan of the Reds, as well as a newspaper writer and eventual Hall of Fame historian, devoted a chapter to this team in which he said they were "called" Kelly's Killers. He didn't say that was their "official" name. He also didn't say anything about Reds, Porkers, or Kelly's-anything-else. I don't think he was overly concerned about that. It was the colorful nature of this team that caught his attention. I also think later historians took it on faith that Kelly's Killers was actually the name of the team. See how interesting this all gets? Are you still awake. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we should move the Kelly's Killers article itself until we have more concrete information. A lot of sources still say Kelly's Killers. This reminds me of the Boston Red Sox / Pilgrims situation, which was published in SABR and which goes into depth debunking the Pilgrims thing which is why Pilgrims is only a footnote in wikipedia. If someone were to do likewise with this 1891 club, then you'd have a citable source. What we have right now is mainly newspaper references, which is fine except it needs to be more definitive, and even at that, the article needs to make it clear that Kelly's Killers is widely used today in reference to that team. As for the Kelly article, I was trying to make things clearer in the infobox. But maybe I didn't. And I'm not married to it. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Probably just as well not to confuse things too much. We do have to rely on published sources, and when we know they don't quite have it right, we can introduce alternate evidence. But we don't want to get carried away just yet. I do like the East End Park article, though. It's an obscurity, but what makes it nifty is that it still exists, in a somewhat altered form. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 03:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Aladdin (film) Good Article Reassessment

As a major contributor to Aladdin (film), I thought you'd want to know that that article is currently under going a Good Article Reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps. The article currently fails the good article criteria, as detailed at Talk:Aladdin (film)/GA1. Its reassessment is on hold for seven days to allow time for the issues to be addressed. Thanks. -- -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Designated Hitters

Since my page got so bogged down in that silly argument over Billingsly's article.. I figured I'd respond here about the DH... Some guys were almost exclusively DHs don't you think we should reflect that as their primary position? Also.. Herb Washington as officially listed as a designated runner during the 1974 & 1975 seasons for Oakland so that is what I listed him as. He never batted so he couldn't really be listed anywhere else. Spanneraol (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh, yes, and I'll respond here as well. My problem with this is that designated hitter isn't really a "position". For instance, on the current Twins, Jason Kubel has played 35 games as a DH, and 14 in the outfield thus far. Do we really list him as a DH, just because he's played the most games there? Or do we list him as an outfielder? Personally, I'd prefer to see him lsted as an outfielder, becasue that's what he is, but BA would list him as a DH. He's a DH only by circumstance, as are most players, like Earl Williams on the '77 A's.

I agree, however, that someone like Washington is a special case (along with Allan Lewis, Larry Lintz, and others who filled the same role for the A's during the mid-70s). Perhaps the last category should be changed to "Other players"? -Dewelar (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

You are right that many DHs also play other positions but their are some, like Edgar Martinez who were pretty much exclusively listed as a DH on rosters for most of his career... Still I suppose I can live with the generic "other batters" if that's the decision. Spanneraol (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

If nothing else, it saves us from having multiple sections for DHs, PHs and PRs, which is a positive IMO. -Dewelar (talk) 23:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Pete Milne

On June 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pete Milne, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

could i get you opinion

Just wondering if I could get you opinion on something Talk:Manchester mayoral election, 2009 (New Hampshire) is where the discussion is. So there is an disagreement between me and another editor on what the page should be I believe it should be the one posted above and he thinks it should be Manchester, New Hampshire mayoral election, 2009 just wondering if you could contribute thanks Gang14 (talk) 05:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Baseball Reference links

Hi there. Forgive my ignorance but I am not sure what you mean regarding the old formatting for my links to pages on the Baseball Reference site. Can you please provide me with an example? Thank you for advising me that the site is now using an additional directory level for player pages.

• Thank you for the examples. Now I understand. Hope you enjoyed the 4th of July. Maple Leaf (talk) 17:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• Good idea! A bot change would be the most ideal way to approach it. Maple Leaf (talk) 21:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

navbars on the rosters

Hey there... I've started pulling the navbar-header off of the rosters... I saw someone take them off a few of the early Yankees seasons and I realized they really don't belong... these aren't navboxes... however, I didn't start doing that till the 1982 rosters... so since you are still a few years behind that, so you think you could you add removing those to your "clean up" routine? (see 1986 Boston Red Sox season for an example of what I mean.) Spanneraol (talk) 21:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Your edits

Hi, and thanks for your contributions. I noticed that you linked some dates recently. This practice is now deprecated. Please see WP:LINKING and WP:MOSNUM. Furthermore, there is an Arbcom restriction on mass linking/delinking of chronological elements, although this is no suggestion from me that you are in breach whatsoever. I'm happy to respond to any inquiries you may have about the matter. Thank you for your attention. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Worcester

I don't believe the move to be so "abrupt"; the page had been at Worcester Worcesters for some time, as far as I was aware. I hate the double-name construction too, but that's a different discussion. Regardless of what Retrosheet says, the convention of the times was to use the city name, not a team name. As the source states, the "Ruby Legs" was used only one time in the media that was found by the researcher, and the headline said "Ruby Legs defeat Worcester". To me, that's pretty sound evidence that they are not one and the same. Retrosheet still says that the Phillies were the Blue Jays during WWII, but available evidence says otherwise. Page 149 seems to be the nail in the coffin. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see and understand. User:Neonblak is certainly the resident guru on Old Time Base Ball around here, but as far as I remembered, the last time I had seen that page, it was the "Worcesters", and the assertion which I sourced was part of the article, though at the time was unsourced. The reason it came to my attention is that there have been a sudden rash of people changing pipelinks to Worcester on the Phillies pages. I thought it was a recent move, which is why I moved it back (essentially what I thought to be a revert). I'm going to open a discussion on the team's talk page about whether we should go to 1880 Worcesters season and the like. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Note

I figured you might be interested in this ANI post - [7].
Warm regards, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Notes in minor league pages

Hi, Dewelar, and thanks for your note. I have used the convention you mentioned (notes below the template chart) to accommodate a number of items I originally entered when I contributed the farm system data to these pages. (I have originated the Farm System section, where it exists, for all teams except the Dodgers. I am currently working on finishing the A's franchise and yet to come hope to enter data for the Pirates, Rangers, Astros, Brewers, and all teams that have netered MLB since 1977.) These "notes" included league championships, joint affiliations, midseason franchise shifts or foldings, or midseason league foldings. The "notes below the box" convention manages to keep this original information intact, without taking away from the effectiveness of the chart, which is a far better way to present the farm systems than the list I had originally entered. I have noted your contributions to this section and am sorry for typing over any of your work; I only did so when I was correcting the north-south spacing for the rows in the chart. I have noticed that to have the correct spacing for all the rows, they must be numbered from the bottom. The current last is level 20. I think Spanneraol is revising the template on and off, and he currently has 20 levels to it. So I have also been trying to clean that up.

Anyway, I am open to further discussion about how we can standardize this section. Thanks. McGill1974 (talk) 17:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Moving it there seems like a good idea. Thanks.McGill1974 (talk) 17:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

CfD of interest

I think you'd be interested in this proposal, in light of our recent conversation about a speedy change. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. I have commented there and will keep an eye on it. -Dewelar (talk) 23:03, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Birth/death dates in bio articles

Odd. Whoever's doing that is clearly wrong, seeing as how every biography on the site has those. Wizardman 20:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

List of World Series champions

I didn't "indiscriminately" undo anything; I made a reversion in line with MOS. I think you'd know my work better than that by now. It might have been nice to make some kind of note in the edit summary why you were doing that so it didn't get reverted. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I've seen many editors do the exact same thing with a "fixing links" edit summary with no intent of actually making changes beyond that, so pardon me if I was skeptical. No offense intended. Just out of curiosity, what changes did you make to the New York Giants (baseball) link? It still seems to redirect to SF Giants. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 11:41, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I never even knew there was another New York Giants. Well done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Because, at least in my opinion, it's better to be linking to the correct team name rather than pipelinking. That way, novice code readers aren't confused. Maybe my interpretation of WP:NOTBROKEN is broken. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I just believe that if it's going to redirect, we should use the capabilities that MediaWiki software gives us to redirect through a page, rather than piping. In my writing, I try to reserve piping for terms like, for a baseball example, season years or baseball jargon. Or, of course, avoiding dab pages. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the advantage is aesthetic, nothing more. It's just what I prefer to see. Since we have the capability to redirect, I don't see any reason to deliberately go around them. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I found something on this topic that you might find interesting. I just happened across it while fixing some stuff earlier today. I honestly didn't even know this (see bullet 4) existed until today, but what do you know? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I really wish I knew. There are even parts of the MOS that say "Wikipedia is not consistent", but if those are both part of the MOS, it seems like a gross misjudgment on somebody's part. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree... If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Lasorda's Kingman rant

I noticed something interesting about the Tommy Lasorda Kingman rant, and brought it up for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball. I think you might want in on this discussion.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 20:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Hope you get unbonked soon. Saw the wikibreak template earlier and got a lil worried :) Wizardman 04:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Mainly I was just finding myself getting worked up over little stuff and needed a self-enforced break. Now it's a matter of easing my way back in. It'll probably be a while before I come anywhere near prior volume of work, but I'm not going away entirely :) . -Dewelar (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Are you gonna finish the work you were doing on the rest of the season articles? I think you left off around 1980... I'm about finished with the rosters.. working on the 2009 ones now which is a bit tougher cause baseball almanac hasn't done em yet.. Spanneraol (talk) 03:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I intend to, yes, but I can't give you a time frame. -Dewelar (talk) 02:51, 22 October 2009 (UTC)