Template talk:MLB HoF

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	MLB HoF 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
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
WikiProject Baseball To-do: edit  Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Baseball: The current Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/Article improvement drive article is New York Yankees. Requests: Keith Bucktrot, Rip Radcliff, Sandwich Pick, Trey Hillman Attention: 1873 New York Mutuals, 1947 Little League World Series, Bobby Cox, China national baseball team, National Association as a major league Expand: 2007 Major League Baseball season, Kansai Big Six Baseball League, Players League Stubs: 2005 Major League Baseball All-Star Game, Batboy, Catch (baseball), Check-swing, International Baseball Federation, Korean Baseball Organization, Korean Series Images: Appeal play, Charging the mound, Corked bat, Error, Wild pitch Quality watch: 8 FA-Class Baseball articles - 6 GA-Class Baseball articles.

This template was considered for deletion on 2006 February 14. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This template was considered for deletion on 2006 July 7. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Contents 1 Fair & Allowed Usage of HoF Logo 2 Wording and placement 3 Move icon into infobox 4 Copyright and trademark infringement 5 Design 6 Picture

[edit] Fair & Allowed Usage of HoF Logo

The logo is specifically allowed by the rightsholder, as it is their policy to allow editorial usage of the logo. This renders the "commercial use of wikipedia" argument moot. As an analogy, many newspapers that derive revenue both from direct sales and from advertising revenue routinely use the HoF logo when describing the year's inductions.

Moreover, many have cited Wikipedia's policies on fair use of images in templates, which is also moot, particularly given the "case-by-case" basis exception (#9) which is a litmus test not yet passed or failed, to say nothing of the fact that this is, in fact, a totally legal editorial use of the official logo of an organization, agency, or entity that is intrinsically public in nature.

Finally, many have cited that it is unnecessary baggage for a player to have this tag. For instance, CNN's Bernard Shaw would not have a CNN logo in his article. This is an entirely different case, for these reasons:

• HoF membership is a distinction given to a miniscule percentage of the overall historical number of players.
• HoF members are routinely discussed in the context of the exceptional achievement that earned them membership.
• HoF members, particularly from differing eras, are routinely compared against each other in common baseball discussion and parlance.
• For readers who are less baseball-literate, this template provides a quick, at-a-glance confirmation that they are reading an article related to a truly exceptional baseball player.
• Since too many of Wikipedia's baseball player articles are often, at best, woefully inadequate, this provides an easy way to see that there may be more easy-to-find information on a given member that would prove more useful than a straightforward, brief biography.

The ongoing debate over one teeny, totally legal template is indicative of the worst in Wikipedia coming out, and I'd like to express the wish that, if it's truly necessary to end this silly revert war, then, indeed, higher wikipedia powers should be consulted for a final decision. Democracy is getting us nowhere on this trifling, insignificant matter.

Ender78 03:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wording and placement

Just came across this template - I have two major problems with it:

• The wording sucks
• The current placement of it in articles sucks

Is there any way to improve it, or should it just be replaced with a category? Alphax ^τεχ 11:14, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

The placement is to compliment the infobox that would go down the right-hand side and the template would go on the left-hand side under the first main heading, see Sandy Koufax or Babe Ruth for a best example. If the article is lacking content, then it does look odd.

Regarding the wording, no offense, but if all you say is "it sucks", then no one is going to give you the time of day. Frankly, the content of your complaint "sucks". However, constructive criticism of how it should be worded is welcomed (as I just did this on a whim via the Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball players), or just be bold!.--CrazyTalk 15:45, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Move icon into infobox

The infobox for baseball players already notes HoF membership. It's possible that the icon used in this template could be incorporated there as appropriate, or that a an HoF-specific baseball player infobox could be created. Either of those two approaches would be preferable to having this be its own template. 66.167.253.49 20:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Copyright and trademark infringement

This template uses the proprietary logo of the Hall of Fame in a way which is not in accord with Wikipedia fair-use policies and (more importantly) the law. We may use the logo to illustrate the article on the Hall of Fame, but we should not be putting it on players' articles. To do so suggests that we are speaking for the Hall of Fame -- which we aren't, even if we're accurately reporting their opinion of players. It is also a copyright infringement; we're allowed to use logos under fair use when discussing the organization whose logo they are, but not generally to decorate other articles. --FOo 20:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I have sent an email to the Hall of Fame to see whether they will release the logo for Wikipedia's use in this manner. The text of my request is available on my userpage. Jpers36 19:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've temporarily replaced the image with one of the HOF. Please feel free to change it if you find a better image. - EurekaLott 06:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the best way to mark this, but I have received a response:

Dear Friend,
Thanks for your interest in the Hall of Fame. As we would classify this as an editorial use, you are permitted to use our logo on your site.
If you have any other questions, please contact Adam Jordan in our communications department at 607-547-0215.
Thank you again for your interest.
The Hall of Fame

So I'm going to reinsert the logo. Jpers36 03:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think that justifies it since we don't accept permission as a reason to keep an image. It would have to fall under fair use its image on the page--which I'm not convinced it does. So, this is not a legal problem for Wikipedia as they have stated... but if Wikipedia is reproduced for commercial enterprises it could create problems because it could go beyond editorial (as they call it) and it likely does go beyond fair use. I think we need to discuss this more. gren グレン 06:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It is irrelevant that specific permission was granted. Wikipedia's fair use policy specifically limits the used of images claimed under fair use to the article space with no exceptions. Pagrashtak 04:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Design

Since it was brought up in the TfD I'll restart this here. Three things about the design:

1. I changed the "thumbnail" format to a proper table format which we can adjust to fit into the pages. Size was a concern that was brought up.
2. The article title sometimes features (baseball player), now if you set the template to {{MLB HoF|George Davis}} it'll appear properly.
3. The picture: I proposed the Honus Wagner card picture which was deemed "better" but not good enough. Another alternative would be to use any picture from the Library of Congress collection (no copyright issues) and make it neutral enough that it stands in as an avatar for any ol' baseball player rather than a specific player.

Open for comments. ~ trialsanderrors 04:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• There is nothing more neutral than a picture of the Hall itself. Christy Mathewson's picture belongs on the Christy Mathewson page, not on the page of every Hall of Famer. Wahkeenah 04:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • It would be nice if we had a better picture of it, then. No offense to the photographer (my photos aren't that great either) but this image makes the template look bad on every page it's added too... it's just glaringly bad. --W.marsh 01:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

W. Marsh insterted a generic baseball I reverted it. I wonder if anyone else has any comments, the baseball seems useless to me as it doesn't represent the HOF in any way. Quadzilla99 23:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• Well, I think an image of a baseball represents the baseball hall of fame well enough. There were numerous comments that the HoF imaeg was pretty bad, and that's just from people who found the image talk page. It just seemed so bad to me that basically anything decent-looking was preferable. Composition aside, from the thumbnail it's not really clear what the image is, other than "some building". Even in highres you really have to squint to read what the building is... it's a pretty generic building. --W.marsh 00:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • A baseball represents a baseball. A photo of the Hall of Fame building is more to the point. The best would be the Hall of Fame logo, but the fair use queens won't allow it. Anyone who knows the Hall of Fame is likely to recognize the building. I wouldn't say it's at all generic. It's three sides of a square, and your average building doesn't look like that. However, I would agree that there could be a better picture. But I like this one. Wahkeenah 00:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

How about this? I found and uploaded this pic from flickr and made a sandbox to show what it would look like: Quadzilla99 00:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

MLB HoF is a member of the Baseball Hall of Fame

Now that's a nice one. They talk about someone being "enshrined", and this practically shouts "shrine". I just hope it's free use, or it will be smacked down in a hurry. Wahkeenah 00:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It definitely is, I'm pretty familiar with free use policies. I've uploaded and had approved almost 200 pics now. Quadzilla99 00:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I asked a couple of admins to look it over on Commons just to be sure, it would have to be reviewed before it could go in a template anyway. Quadzilla99 00:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Kudos. Let's also wait to see what Mr. Marsh has to say about it. Wahkeenah 00:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a much better picture... still hard to tell what it is in a thumbnail but at least few are going to be disapointed if they bother to click. Thanks for finding a better choice so quickly. But by the way, I follow the game and probably listen to 100 games a year and had no idea what the HoF building looked like... do they show it on TV a lot or something? It just struck me as some relatively normal museum type building. --W.marsh 01:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Thus you have never been to Cooperstown. You must go. It is a thoroughly delightful little town. You could spend all day there going to the different sights and never actually set foot in the Hall of Fame. That, of course, would be your last stop, all the next day: Baseball Mecca. d:) Wahkeenah 02:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok I inserted it let's see how everyone likes it. We could still perhaps do better. Quadzilla99 22:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)