Talk:Hank Aaron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Peer review Hank Aaron has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This page has been selected for the release version of Wikipedia and rated B-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category Everydaylife.


Contents

[edit] Stats

Remember folks this is an ENCYCLOPEDIA... not a freaking baseball statistics book. you need to EXPLAIN this stuff as you would to a 6yr old who doesnt know the material. Also this needs some SERIOUS reformatting and wikifying. Alkivar 22:44, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the wonderful work on the league leader statistics. I always thought they looked ugly, but did not know what to do. I honestly think the page is in pretty good shape now. It needs a little more wikifying, but that is hardly grounds for a cleanup notice. The rest is clear and easy to follow now in my opinion. What do you think? Indrian 01:41, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
a cleanup notice simply means it needs to have data sorted into a more "pretty" view in my opinion. and to break things down into more sub-sections for ease of browsing. As it is there are WAAAAAY too many text only charts that should be turned into linked tables. see below for more of what i'm talking about Alkivar 02:06, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
1957 NL
GAMES               T6TH   151
AT BATS             5TH    615
RUNS                1ST    118
HITS                2ND    198
SINGLES             8TH    121
HOMERUNS            1ST     44
HR/100 OUTS         1ST    10.14
HR/100 PA           2ND     6.52
HR/100 AB           3RD     7.15
RBI                 1ST    132
AVERAGE             4TH    .322
SLG                 3RD    .600
OBA                 9TH    .378
OPS                 3RD     .978
RUNS CREATED        2ND    135
RCAA                T1ST    66
RCAP                2ND     64
OWP                 2ND    .772
RUNS CREATED/GAME   3RD     8.40
TOTAL BASES         1ST    369
EXTRA BASE HITS     3RD     77
ISOLATED POWER      4TH    .278
SECONDARY AVERAGE   6TH    .371
TOTAL AVERAGE       3RD     .988
BPA                 3RD    .612
INTENTIONAL WALKS   T2ND    15
PLATE APPEARANCES   T7TH   675
OUTS                T9TH   434
Yeah I've just put in a one-line text box now that doesn't take up much space. Lots of players do have a stats line somewhere in their articles. Mglovesfun 14:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

there are entirely too many charts like this that belong as HTML tables. plus there are many terms which a non baseball fan would not know. RBI,SLG,OBA,OPS,RCAA,RCAP,OWP,BPA (while obvious to you and me may not be obvious to someone only peripherally informed about baseball) and some of these statistics have their own entry pages on WIKI ... link to a few. And if you cant find em DEFINE em :) Alkivar 02:06, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Well, HTML tables are not my forte, so I will have to leave that to someone else probably. As for the stats, I will get on that. I am sorry I have been a bit difficult the last couple of days. I am not usually so stubborn when it comes to editing articles; I honestly do not know what came over me. Indrian 14:20, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

I think we ought to delete the tables of statistics on this page and let the external links point to pages with statistics. Gorrister 18:50, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • I do understand this sentiment, but I also see no harm in keeping the statistics since wikipedia has the space for it. The statistics provide a good measure of a player's worth at a glance and allow a lot of numerical information to be covered in a simple and straightforward manner that would take paragraphs of text to convey properly. Indrian 21:45, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Last negro league player to make major leagues

Aaron was in fact the last negro league player to make it to the major leagues. Aaron was drafted before Banks - 1952 vs. 1953, but Banks made it to the majors in 1953 vs. Aaron who made it in 1954. The [Negro league players association] website states that Aaron was the last. Gorrister 12:10, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inconsistencies

Why does the beginning of the article mention that he appeared in 25 All-star games, but twice later in the article say only 24 all-star appearences? Furthermore, how could he have made 24 all-star games if he played 23 seasons ('54-'76)?

Not sure about the inconsistancies, but for a couple of years there were two All-star games in the season.Gorrister 28 June 2005 21:45 (UTC)
He appeared in 25 All Star Games (Every season from 1955-1975). There were two games in the years 1959-1962. I will correct.Indrian June 28, 2005 23:11 (UTC)

[edit] Revert by Alkivar

Perhaps someone would care to explain why the fact that Mr. Aaron gave out the award named in his honor during the 2004 postseason is in any way important to his life, career, or legacy? This does not seem like something that belongs in an encyclopedia article. Indrian 00:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Its quite uncommon thats why. The awards have been given out for a long time (nearly 20 years?)... this is the FIRST and ONLY time he was there to personally hand it out. It certainly belongs more to the article than the fact that he voiced a character in Futurama, or runs a BMW Car Dealership, or has an Erdős number of 1. At least the fact he handed out the award named after him is BASEBALL related. ALKIVAR™ 03:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I'll buy that, but I think the article needs to make note of the special circumstances of the event, otherwise it does just appear to be a random and useless fact.Indrian 23:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Catholicism

I have read that Aaron converted to Catholicism after reading Thomas à Kempis's 'The Imitation of Christ'. Can anybody corroborate this? JackofOz 02:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] League Leader charts

I know this has come up before, but in my opinion the league leader charts make this page less readable and contain a lot on unnecessary information (do we really need to know that Aaron was second in the NL in GIDP in 1955?). Someone in the peer review mentioned that if these charts were moved to there own page they would be deleted, as wikipedia is not a baseball statistics guide. I agree. What is, however, a baseball statistics guide is Baseball-Reference.com. This page contains a link to Aaron's Baseball-Reference page, as do most player bios on Wikipedia. All of this info and more is contained on that page. As long as the link text makes clear that it is a page of statistics, people will know where to find them. Thoughts? --djrobgordon 17:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Can I take the silence to mean that everyone has come around to an identical point of view, or just that nobody wants to argue about this anymore? I still plan on drastically cutting down on the number of charts on this page, but I'm in a bit of a tift over at Babe Ruth and really don't have the time for multiple edit wars. Now's your chance to tell me what the league leader charts do that sentences can't. --djrobgordon 18:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abdul Jabbar reference

The article on Hank Aaron suggests that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar holds the distinction of having the last name which would come first alphabetically. Alaa Abdelnaby, however, would come first. Abdelnaby played in the early 90s. The misstatement about Abdul-Jabbar does not appear to be on the Abdul-Jabbar page, however.

[edit] Part of this article are copied from ESPN

Not that this isn't common on Wikipedia but a portion of this article read word-for-word with this article from ESPN. Perhaps if someone has time they can copyedit it. Anger22 13:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


Great... Ladydayelle 14:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] All star appearances

"24 All-Star appearances over 21 seasons"

How is this possible? I count that he played 23 seasons, so most likely that should be 21 appearances in 23? Can someone confirm this? Mglovesfun 15:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

  • From 1959 to 1962, two all star games were played every year. Indrian 15:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sadaharu Oh

The article currently notes that "Hank Aaron is second behind Japanese baseball player Sadaharu Oh (868) as the all time home run hitter in recorded baseball history." Since the Sadaharu Oh entry itself points out that Oh's record is not comparable to a MLB record due to smaller ballparks, different bats, etc. I'd like to change this article to read "Hank Aaron is second behind Japanese baseball player Sadaharu Oh (868) as the all time home run hitter in recorded baseball history; however, their records are not directly comparable due to differences between American and Japanese ballparks and equipment." Any objections/suggestions? Mrquizzical 04:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, Oh shouldn't even be mentioned, except maybe in the Trivia section. The records are, indeed, not comprable, and giving the comparison such a prominent place in this article doesn't provide a baseball novice with an accurate perspective of Aaron's place in the game's history. --djrobgordon 04:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. It would get a little wordy to try and explain in the flow of the article. The Trivia section would be a good place for it. Heck, let's let Hank have a few final months of glory before the Barry Bonds fans rip this article to shreds next season. :) -- dakern74 (talk) 04:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Change made. Thanks for the feedback. Mrquizzical 03:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean-Up Coming

This article is in some major work. I am trying my best to balance the idea of verifiable information with what I do not know. As such, I will try and add the [verification needed] code where applicable. It would probably help if someone could double check the sources. I don't want to expunge work that has been cited, but I am not sure the best research was done. Oh yeah, I moved the page as well... his name was Henry Aaron not Hank Aaron :-). Thoughts/ideas/comments ??? --Tecmobowl 12:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hank or Henry?

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) suggests to use the name that is most generally recognisable. I am certainly not an expert on baseball, but it is my impression that "Hank Aaron" is infinitely more recognisable than "Henry Aaron". (Google says: 10 times more)

As an example, our guideline on naming conventions gives Billy Joel rather than his full name William Martin Joel; the full name is mentioned in the article, but (currently) not even a redirection.

--Aleph4 14:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He is referred to as "Hank Aaron" far more times that he is by "Henry Aaron." To provide other examples similar to what is presented above, there are articles for "Ted Williams" (Birth name Theodore Samuel Williams), "Babe Ruth" (Birth name George Herman Ruth), Peggy Fleming (Birth name Margaret Gail Fleming) and former US president Bill Clinton (Birth name William Jefferson Clinton). The article should be called 'Hank Aaron."

Ladydayelle 15:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it was very bad form to move this page without discussing it first. As pointed out above, the more recognizable name is preferred by Wikipedia, and that is undoubtably Hank, not Henry. Unless further compelling reason can be given as to why this name change should stand, I will move it back in a few days. Indrian 21:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it is important to recognize that wikipedia does not "prefer" one over the other. That article is a suggestion. That being said, if there is an overwhelming consensus one way or the other then just change it back (it ain't that hard). I do not think that google search results should be considered at all when discussing this issue, if you remove the quotation marks, the results would weigh heavily in the direction of Henry over Hank. I am familiar with the Naming conventions. I do not think that people really believe Cher's name is only one word. Rather, she has been identified by that to the public. Similarly, I do not think people have confused Babe with George (as in Ruth). I do think that people have come to believe that Hank was his birth name. I even went so far as to look it up in a major encyclopedia that we have and under Hank Aaron it said: see Henry L. Aaron. In any event, have at it.Tecmobowl 01:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
First of all, it does not matter whether this was the right decision or not: moving any page on a significant topic with a large editing history to a new name simply should not be undertaken without first having a discussion to determine consensus. Making such a move without consultation really is just bad form. I know you were not being a vandal and were acting in good faith, so please do not take this as an attack. Second, your given reason for moving ("I do think that people have come to believe that Hank was his birth name.") makes no sense, because the article heading clearly gives his name as Henry Louis Aaron. Even if someone comes to a page called Hank Aaron thinking that is his real first name, once they start reading the article, it becomes immediately clear this is not so. Third, while I do not want to get into a technical debate on the definition of words in the English language, the phrase "The most used name to refer to a person is generally the one that Wikipedia will choose as page name" from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) indicates that the most recognized name is the one most often used on wikipedia, which by defintion makes it a preference even if that word is not used. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) also indicates a preference for the most commonly used name. While that page is not an official policy, just a guideline, it still enjoys a broad consensus, which means it still has great weight, and dismissing it out of hand as a "suggestion" is rather disingenuous. Fourth, I have no idea what "major" encyclopedia you used, but the Encyclopedia Britannica, Microsoft Encarta, Microsoft Complete Baseball, the Ballplayers, Baseball: The Biographical Encyclopedia, Total Baseball, the New Biographical History of Baseball, Baseballreference.com, baseballlibrary.com, and retrosheet.com all contain entries on Aaron under the name Hank Aaron, not Henry Aaron. If that is not a ringing endorsement for what the scholarly baseball community considers to be the proper name to use in an article about Aaron, I don't know what is. Indrian 15:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for sharing. It's wiki... why don't you try and fix the situation rather than just complain about it. You might even want to try and contribute to the article.Tecmobowl 22:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. You need to calm down and keep things civil here so as not to violate a policy or two. I do plan on moving the page back to its original location, but unlike you, I am waiting to give some time for discussion on the matter and am waiting a couple of days to make sure there is no serious objection. Also, I have contributed to this article, and many others on wikipedia, and there is no need to lash out at me in such a childish manner. If you want to continue civil and serious discussion on this matter, I am happy to join you; if you consider the subject closed, that is fine to, but if you respond to this message with another unproductive retort, I will just ignore it. I can see by looking at your talk page that you have had some trouble getting along with others in the past, and I would suggest modifying your attitude a little to have a more fulfilling wikipedia experience. Indrian 00:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Just move it back then and stop being so argumentative. Everyone else made constructive comments i moved it and put a comment on the talk page. User:Aleph4 and User:Ladydayelle both made reasonable points. Just move the page back and stop making threats. (forgot to sign this earlier) Tecmobowl 13:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I moved this back. I don't like how the redirect was immediately edited thereby obstructing the move - very fishy. Let's try to at least discuss this move first - it's clearly very controversial so should be brought to WP:RM. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I was actually trying to move the page back per my last statement (which i forgot to sign). I just screwed up that's all. Why is everyone on here a conspiracy theorist. Page is back and i have done enough editing for one person on this, I hope people continue the cleanup and go get some good sources for the material. Tecmobowl 13:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Everyone gets jumpy when sockpuppet allegations get thrown around but everything seems settled down now. Let's all relax and get back to improving the article per Tecmobowl's suggestion. If anyone is serious about moving this article, bring it to WP:RM. That's where controversial moves are requested and clearly this move would be controversial! :) —Wknight94 (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Primarysources tag

Re: the {{primarysources}} tag, is there any particular issue that needs to be addressed? When there are sources and references in an article, I usually prefer individual {{fact}} tags instead of the more general {{primarysources}} and {{unreferenced}} tags. Then people can focus on the actual problem areas instead of trying to reconcile the entire article. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I have just removed the tag. If the person thinks that there are not enough sources and wants to use a fact tag, I agree that this would be unhelpful, but he would be within his rights. It appears however, that every source the article does cite to is a secondary source, so the tag is just plain wrong. Indrian 21:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I think i just used the wrong tag, how about {{Not verified}} at the top? That aside, I used {{fact}} & {{verify source}} throughout the article. The two can easily be misinterpreted but both communicate the general idea that something is wrong with a particular statement. Thoughts, ideas, comments... :-)??? //Tecmobowl 23:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
      • I have no problem with that tag, and you are free to use it. Indrian 00:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More Photos

I believe we need more photos to enhance this article. Thoughts?Techmobowls 20:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the article is fine, a better questions is who are you and why do you only edit articles I edit???? Tecmobowl 20:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/a/n/Talk%7EHank_Aaron_2592.html"