Talk:Los Angeles Dodgers
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Los Angeles Dodgers is maintained by WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Baseball To-do:
Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Baseball:
|
|||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Southern California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Southern California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Breaking News Section
Given the news updates that happen during the offseason and regular season, perhaps a 'breaking news' section should be established were current events are cycled through. For example the section would currently contain: Schmidt, Juan Pierre, Wolf, Gonzo trades & Drew walking out on his contract. There's rumor of tampering: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/sports/baseball/08chass.html?ref=sports.
After a while this information would then be replaced by other 'breaking news' and, if deemed historically significant enough, would be integrated into a team history section.--Econmists 07:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Brooklyn separate
The Brooklyn history is sui generis. I demand that the Brooklyn history get a separate article. John wesley 20:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I understand what your saying, but they are the same team. They should be on the same page.
Someone has begun a page for the Brooklyn Dodgers. This article is becoming too long anyway. Perhaps moving the Brooklyn history to that page and referencing that article to this one (and vice versa) would be in order at this time. This is common practice on wikipedia when a subject takes up too much space on a page. As long as it is clear to the reader that both pages refer to the same franchise there should be no problem.--Exshpos 16:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's what should be done - a detailed History of the Brooklyn Dodgers entry, with a summary on this page. It is the same team, though, so it should not be separated. This is consistent with treatment of other clubs - Seattle Pilots re-routes to Milwaukee Brewers, and both California Angels and Anaheim Angels redirect to the main LA Angels of Anaheim page. -- Chancemichaels 17:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
[edit] Quick Note
There is an article for Hee Seop Choi on wikipedia, but it isn't linking to him because his name is listed as Hee-Seop Choi. I tried to change but I am relatively inexperienced with wikipedia, and couldn't figure out the way team rosters are stored. So somebody should probably change that.
[edit] Why list format?
What's with this bizarre bulleted list format? Wouldn't this article bebetter as simple paragraphs? — Adam Conover † 18:31, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Sausage man
Forgive my intrusion, but what about that guy who is always remindinng me to buy Farmer John sausages?
"Jeff Kent (2004 All-star)". i dunno. just made me laugh i guess. Chavez Latrine. yess sausage man, and chavez latrine residents being kicked out by the city for the land. Da 'Sco Mon 08:35, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bias
- i was originally kiddding, but after reading the the move to california, and 19??- to the present i find the level of bias toward the ballclub horrifying (i nearly got cancer of the lunch just reading them). btw, shouldnt the article include actual team history (ie World Series wins, etc) instead of just stuff on lasorda and scully? i was actually suprised not to find a section on 'pop culture references' which tells readers dodger players have been featured on The Simpsons. work is needed to remove bias and generally make better, but i dunno what the tag for that is. Da 'Sco Mon 08:51, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
There's not as much of a bias as your saying. I mean, the section on Vin Scully is only four lines, and he is a very influencial person in Dodger history. And as for Lasorda, he was the manager for twenty years, so you have to figure that he is going to get a fair amount of coverage. It lists World Seriess wins in the article, but if you want a specific section for it, then make one. Don't cry. If you think that we need a change, then make one.
[edit] Cleaning up 25-man roster
User:CFIF apparently didn't like something about my roster modification, but didn't describe what the problem was. I added abbreviations for the countries, for the benefit of those who don't recognize the flags and non-graphical browsers. Is that undesirable, or did something go wrong with the appearance of the information? (SEWilco 01:10, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC))
- It did not match the format of the other MLB rosters, and looked tacky with for example, "*flag* *3 letter abbreviation* *player*". Plus you added some player that was drafted by the Dodgers that wasn't even on the roster. I believe all the 25-man roster pages should have the same format as each other, not some tacky little reformatting job that just makes it all look worse and very unproffesional. If people don't know the country, they can just click on the flag. --CFIF 14:01, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I did not add any players.
- Not matching the other MLB rosters is irrelevant when all the rosters are changed. This was a test.
- Clicking on the flag brings up a page with a huge graphic of the flag, not the country's page. We can't link an image to a WP article.
- Apparently you don't like the appearance of the flag/abbrev/player.
- It is common to put the flag after a player's name; how about player/flag/abbrev?
- Would it be better to put the flag/abbrev in parentheses to indicate the country information is in addition to the player's name? (SEWilco 15:22, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC))
-
Okay, you want me to "explain my complaint", well, look, your adding the names looks tacky and looks different from the other 25-man rosters. What more is there to say? --CFIF 01:36, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Because the roster had names, I assume you refer to names or abbreviations of countries. See above. Your repetition of "different" also suggests you have not read my comments above. (SEWilco 04:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC))
[edit] Antonio Pérez
This link, which appears on the main article, does not lead to the baseball player bio. I can't find the correct article (Antonio Perez redirects to the same article). Can someone more familiar with Dodger-related articles link to the correct Perez article, or disambiguate the current one as appropriate. Mindmatrix 00:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Someone had already made Antonio Pérez (baseball player). I've added a disambiguation line to the one about the Spanish statesman. Gene Nygaard 01:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Major Rewrite
I just finished heavily rewriting the history section. The interface complained to me that, at 31 kilobytes, the article may be overlong. I'm not sure if this is true, especially considering the lists that take up the page's bottom third. I don't feel I dwelt overlong on any one topic, but I obviously do have affection for the subject. Editorial cuts may be called for, but I wouldn't mind some discussion. --Tisco 07:11, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
After looking at Wikipedia's guidelines on article size, the problems really arise if readable prose begins to exceed 30 kB. With all the lists and tables in this article, I think we're okay. But it shouldn't get much longer. Remember that economy of words is important. --Tisco 17:45, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm reverting a couple of recent edits. One of these concerns Vin Scully not mentioning the impending strike during games in 1981 (not 1980). It simply is not a significant enough event to be included in a one-paragraph summary of his career. If you want to discuss this on the Vin Scully page, feel free. The other item I'm reverting is the recent Bradley-Kent idiocy. It seems to me that Wikipedia's purpose is to give background, not to keep up on each piddly little news item. If anyone wants to un-revert, and/or discuss it here, then that's fine. --Tisco 05:04, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Picture vandalism?
Who removed all the pictures?
- Sign your comments, Freepablo --Tisco 19:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
- It was someone operating from the address 69.235.150.146, on 12/1. Please don't do that again. I am reverting. After he did that, a couple other people removed a bunch of linebreaks. I don't think this has any effect on the text as displayed in HTML, so I'm not bothering to disentangle these from the revert. --Tisco 19:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Terrible Signing
Dodgers made a terrible signing of Furcal. Vizquel dominates him in every aspect. Giants will be champions in 2006. Jendeyoung 21:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- This isn't a message board. Go take the discussion elsewhere. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 07:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Yea, nice predictions there, buddy. Furcal ended the season with a bating average of over .300, and the Dodgers finished way ahead of the Giants.
[edit] Editing the Roster
In addition to the Hee-Seop Choi entry on the roster area that needs to be linked, the manager section still says position currently vacant. Can someone put Grady Little in that slot? I'm pretty inexperienced as far as editing Wikipedia goes, tried for awhile but can't figure it out.
[edit] Nasty 1992
I noticed there's no mention of 1992, their worst W/L % in 80 years and their only last-place finish of the century. Article's too long as it is I guess? —Wknight94 (talk) 18:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC) DODGERS ARE BETTER THAN THE METS!!!!!!!!!!! A pissed off reader
[edit] Moving History
It seems like the new stuff in moving from Brooklyn is a bit too heavy on editorializing... Is there any way we can clean it up? I'm not advocating removal, there's some good points raised, but it almost seems like to balance it out we'd have to dig up the entire history of the sordid affairs in Chavez Ravine that helped the move as well... Coyote42 07:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Great Players:Awesome History Great players:Nomar Garciaparra,Jeff Kent,Adrian Beltre,Shawn Green,Jackie Robinson,Steve Finley,Mike Piazza. Rivals:San Francisco Giants (Dodgers have won 44 out of 84 games in the last half a decade.) Rivals Should be these teams in the following order (based on histories): San Franscisco Giants, New York Yankees, San Diego Padres, and Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. Colorado and Arizona ARE NOT RIVALS of the Dodgers-- just because they are in the same Divsion does not make them so. If you want to do that, add in the Cardinals, the Cubs, Phillies and Reds as well. the cardinals, cubs, phillies, and reds aren't in the NL West division. And the padres are not as much of a rival as the angels. Also, more great players inclued Eric Gagne, Sandy Koufax, Don Drysdale, Cesar Izturis, Paul lo Duca
[edit] Trolley dodgers nickname
The page is internally inconsistent. It gives dates of 1883 and 1895 for the initial use of the Trolley Dodgers nickname. The 1883 date doesn't make sense since nobody would know that getting to tpark would be a hazard before the team started playing. 66.95.123.6 13:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Logos section out of control
What's with the Logos section? Do we really need things like the 3D logo? In addition, the "B" is not correct. This section should be cleaned up, unless someone has a valid reason for the way it is now. -- Chancemichaels 17:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
- And now it's even worse, with logos repeated and wrongly identified. I'm going to remove the bulk of the section; if anyone would like to clean it up please feel free to put it back. (edit: wow, that was quick. I posted my comment, saw that I hadn't signed it, and by the time I clicked to edit we got into an edit conflict) --Chancemichaels 18:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
[edit] Brooklyn Geography: "Is O'Malley to Blame"
"the Dodgers' owner wanted to drop a cookie-cutter stadium in the middle of Flatbush...The site remains problematic: The proposed Atlantic Yards development in Flatbush has run into opposition..."
The Atlantic Yards are nowhere near what is now (and probably then) called Flatbush. It is on Flatbush avenue, however. So, someone who knows...where did o'malley want to put the stadium? Was it on the Atlantic Yards, and therefore just the "flatbush" reference is confused? Or did he indeed want to put it somewhere that was "in the middle of flatbush," and therefore the present text is wrong about the sites being the same?
I know enough to know it's an inaccuracy that must be fixed; just not enough to know how to fix it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.212.73.251 (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC).
I just fixed it, with a cite. Andrew Ross 22:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
