User talk:Baseball Bugs/Archive003

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Reply

I understand why you did it. I left all the other reverts of the IP because it's pretty obviously a sock... there just ins't a reason for the strikethrough of text (there are discussions of this at the WP:BAN talkpage and WP:ANI so I removed those strikes.--Isotope23 14:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, any of his obvious unwashed socks can be reported for immediate blocking. If he continues to use a dynamic IP for socking, it might be a good idea to keep a list of the IPs on a usersubpage... Range blocking could be explored if he continues to sock.--Isotope23 14:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, which is why a WP:DENY of his edits is warrented. Any VZ IP edits to the articles he's shown a past interest in or related to his baseball interests can be reverted with a clear comment that this is likely the work of a block evading sock of Tecmobowl, regardless of the merit of said edit. From the point of his block forward he isn't allowed to edit here and his edits to articles are subject to be boldly undone.--Isotope23 15:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

THis looks like the 'don't undo strikeout reversions' section. I dropped your comment at the professional baseball page. I understand you wre trying to explain, but it came off as something between a 'gotcha!' sort of embarrassment post, and a trolling post to make tecmo react. The policy debates on AN/I are thoroughly outside the scope of that talk page anyways, so why use it to irritate Tecmo and cause more trouble? ThuranX 15:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Look familiar?

Special:Contributions/Ragefd look familiar? You've followed the drama more closely than I. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Tecmo did claim to have collected baseball cards since he was five years old and therefore was an expert. IrishGuy talk 23:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR and dispute

Well, I remember reading about the "I have abandoned Wikipedia" line, and, to tell you the truth, the unfair block I got almost got me pissed off enough to leave here also. First off, and this is relating to me, I got warned about 3RR. But I didn't violate it again after that. However, I got blocked anyway. HOW THE HELL CAN YOU DO THAT? IT'S SO FREAKING UNFAIR! I even talked to Ksy92003 via e-mail regarding the issue. I was that close to actually saying the hell with this place. You guys are so freakin lucky to still have me around here. Same with you, you make this place a whole lot better.

As for Ragefd, based on his contributions, what makes you think he is Tecmobowl? I'm not deriding you, it's just the evidence, other than being new here, doesn't suggest that he's Tecmo... yet. Soxrock 11:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] REJOICE MY FRIEND

PASCAK AND HIS BUDDY JOEIDAHO WERE INDEFINITELY BLOCKED! WE'RE SAVED... for now. Either way, rejoice my friend, rejoice! Soxrock 17:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

And have you seen my message sent from earlier today, right above this one. I'm really wondering about the suspected Tecmobowl sock, again. Thanks Soxrock 17:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I see. I only started following the Tecmo controversy, so I didn't see how it would be Tecmo. Eitherway, I see what you mean. I'll watch it too. Soxrock 17:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting to suspect Gmh224 and Jjj222 are the same user... Pascack. Two user names created today, after Pascack's 192.*.*.* IP was unblocked - taking on his anti-Yankees/pro-Mets agenda, starting with Joe Girardi this morning. Mghabmw 22:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yankee Doodle

Hi BB,

I added a parodic version of the Yankee Doodle song and you deleted it. I was wondering why. Thx, Weiande

Unsourced, uncited. Baseball Bugs 03:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Socks

Sorry, I removed the notice but will put back up if it is proven he is Tecmo. Soxrock 18:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keith Hernandez

I've noticed your contributions to a ton of baseball pages so I thought I'd ask your opinion before I made a change myself. Do you identify Keith Hernandez more with the Mets or the Cardinals? I noticed he had Cardinal colors on his page, but I tend to think of him more as a Met since he was the team captain on the dominant 1980's Mets, the Seinfeld episode, and he has been a Mets TV Analyst for years. He also ended his tenure with St. Louis on a pretty sour note. I'll defer to you, but thought I'd ask.

But who then makes the decisions on the colors of the retired non-Hall of Famers? Someone must make the decision, I am new to Wikipedia so not sure how this works.

No colors on retired players. HoF - go by cap if anything. Baseball Bugs 19:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

In theory, I'd agree with you, but on wikipedia, it appears that every retired player has colors in his box. Who is the user that makes those decisions and how is it changed? I just created my account today and don't want to make major changes before I am established. Gmh224 19:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Nice quote! Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Socks

Hey Bugs, can you direct me to this person? I don't know who you're talking about when it came to the "whose edit pattern and comments were definitely Tecmo...". Thanks Soxrock 01:26, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh jeez, is he that stupid? He's got to avoid Baseball articles. However, comparing the two, isn't the one Tecmo edited better? I mean, that version did have an infobox and more text. Soxrock 11:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I did think they they were an improvement. That's why I ask. Soxrock 15:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who's Who on third

just funnin'! LessHeard vanU 10:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I take it back. He's not chinless and spineless. The picture clearly shows he has a chin. Baseball Bugs 10:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IP complaints

"Personally, I ignore complaints made by IP addresses. But I'll let Mr. Epeefleche give you his own opinion on that. 0:) Baseball Bugs 16:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)"

Yes, I'm awfully sorry that I'm IP address scum. Please let me kill myself to make it up to you... :p Just kidding - Please don't bite and be nice. Even if someone is only a IP user, this makes him worth no more or no less that yourself - and who knows, he might even be "normal" contributer who did just not long in due to forgetfullness or an attempt for a wikibreak. 84.145.247.165 18:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seasonal articles

Jaranda (talk · contribs) has taken it upon himself to redirect the articles 2006 Kansas City Royals season and 1980 Tampa Bay Buccaneers season. I've saved them and put the underconstruction tag on them, but enough has been said, he's going with the non-notable card. Just an FYI that he is trying to redirect them. Soxrock 23:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

And I, once again, did remove the canvassing part. It doesn't look like canvassing now, so I cleaned it up like I should have Soxrock 11:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses on the project page. And I will be busy all day improving articles. Your help will be appreciated, I love the work you've done on the Yankee pages. Soxrock 13:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hilltop Park

Regarding your recent edit, I looked up the original article published in the Times the day after the game in question and it only mentions the team as the "Yankees" once in the article, in the quote included in the reference I had added. If this is indeed the same article, there would seem to be no reason to delete the original source, rather than a tertiary reference about the article in question. I'm also not sure that a single mention of "Yankees" in this article adequately demonstrates that the name had taken hold by that date. Nor would a single mention demonstrate that the article "is noteworthy in that the locals were referred to as the 'New York Yankees' or 'Yanks' throughout the article" when they were only mentioned one, single time as the Yankees and were not referenced as either the "New York Yankees" or "Yanks" at any point in the article. Alansohn 14:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

There were two articles on July 1, 1908. The game summary and its headline say "Yankees" several times, with no other nickname used. Baseball Bugs 14:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I searched and found the other article, which does seem to use "Yankees" and "Yanks" more generally. I did a search for June and July of 2008 and could find no reference to the use of "Highlanders" to refer to the team, and dozens of uses of "Yankees". I'd be curious to see a graph of uses of Yankees/Yanks vs. Highlanders over time, but I acknowledge that "Yankees" was prevalent at the time. Alansohn 14:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The source I'm using requires a subscription through my library. I wish it was publicly available. Alansohn 17:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Image:Halfstar.png The Half Barnstar
For being one of the few users in the WP:BASEBALL talk page that is civil and willing to talk about the copyright concerns other than attacking it or reverting. Jaranda wat's sup 14:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


Oh please. Now your being a kissup Jaranda. You just can't help us out overall. There are no copyvio problems with baseball-reference due to the fact that they do not own the stats Soxrock 14:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Half a barnstar is better than none. At this point, I'm half-overwhelmed. Baseball Bugs 14:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Funny. Either way, it's not really a good one, I wouldn't accept it because Jaranda is just kissing up to someone who isn't afraid to say its copyvio. Either way, it's not copyvio at all and he needs to back off Soxrock 15:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I should copy over the full ones I got on my former user page, both before and after it was permanently blocked. :) Baseball Bugs 15:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey that's not a bad idea. I like it. You've done great work here. I just wish my work (which isn't violating copyright) would be recognized in more than just 1 barnstar Soxrock 15:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Your work is recognized. It seems all you've done wrong was spread yourself too thin. The ones that do have content have very good and well-written content. The ones that don't have content are the problem. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not really into awards, although I did kind of like getting one posted on my old page some six weeks after it was blocked (at my own request, I should point out). Apparently I had been doing something right. :) Baseball Bugs 15:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
The important thing is to be content. :) Baseball Bugs 15:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I see. But remember, I will be building those articles. I just can't believe how this has blown up. Seriously, if you just work with me, we can get these up to great status. There is so much potential in those articles... I still just wish that I would be recognized barnstar-wise more than I am. I have worked so hard here since Mid-May (and I did edit before then, I've become more of a regular since February and have spent a lot of time here these past two months. Soxrock 15:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
As Wknight94 says, your work is good and is appreciated. Just do what I do, which is to write for myself and feel satisfaction when the article looks the way I want it to, while remaining open to improvements from others. Feeling good about an article is more rewarding than someone sticking a rusty-looking badge on your user page. :) Baseball Bugs 16:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, you know, I want Jaranda Fired. He is going overboard now Soxrock 16:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
He's got at least 2 complaints on separate issues logged against him. Admins are not easily dismissed, though. They are given a fair amount of latitude in order to do their jobs. I recommend that you focus on the content (OMG, I'm channeling Tecmo/Levi!!!) and try to forget about the distractions. Baseball Bugs 16:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I see. But it is still something I will heavily work on and don't want to have people making it harder. As for Tecmo, what's his newest alleged sock now? Soxrock 16:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
As far as I know, Tecmo has been silent since his brief appearance as an IP address sometime last week. Baseball Bugs 16:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you had me thinking another sock had emerged. Soxrock 16:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I was just being funny. "Channeling" is the notion of someone's spirit temporarily taking over your body and speaking through you. And Tecmo was always telling people to focus on the content, rather than on what a jerk he was. Baseball Bugs 17:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I see now. I don't get too many jokes, so I was a bit confused. And Tecmo was a jerk. I think that he just needed to do work instead of what he has done with the external links. He's good as long as he's calm Soxrock 17:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
That could be said for all of us. However, he was contentious from day one, clear back a year ago before any of us ever heard of him, so either he enjoyed fighting or didn't know any other way. Baseball Bugs 17:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Jeez. It was his style and he went way overboard. Soxrock 17:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of baseball team nicknames

No problem, glad to help, but I don't have to much time to really work on anything for too long. 209.244.42.107 21:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

You stated my detailed work on the Pittsburgh Pirates nickname origin sounded like it was copied, but don't worry, it was not. I am just a good writer.

[edit] Lame

Lamest ever
Lamest ever

I award you this lame award for coming up with a 'so bad it's good' anagram of my username. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 18:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windchills

You guessed wrong. (Why you're guessing where I have and haven't lived makes little sense, however; I'm interested in facts, not my or your personal background.) Did the Twins play on April 4, 2007? It doesn't appear they did based on mlb.com. Find me a date on which the Twins played AND the windchill was actually (not nearly) below zero F, and you can include that factoid if you want as being an extreme example of a potentiality. Assuming you source it properly. Moncrief 18:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

As noted on your page, the Twins played at the Dome on 4/4/07, and it was below 0 wind chill that day. Baseball Bugs 19:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
You've offered no real proof for the later assertion, other than a Farmer's Almanac Page that shows the high temperature was 42F. Moncrief 19:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
You've proven no such thing! You've given a day in April when the high temperature was 42F and offered a wind chill chart from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_chill that does not show the wind chill able to fall to below 0F at any point if the temperature is 42F. I suppose it is possible that the wind chill could be below zero in early April, or that it might have been at some point in Twin Cities history, but you haven't proven that it has been. Nice try at asking me to prove your assertions for you, though, and asking me to prove a negative (which I suppose would require me to look through every April Twins game date since the 60s to find out who's right). Whatever. Enjoy your hyperbole. Moncrief 21:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I simply gave you the first indication I found.
Right. One that didn't prove your point.
Look: you or someone put in an assertion. I should have just added a [citation needed] tag instead of taking it out outright, so that was my mistake. But adding [citation needed] tags is common practice in Wikipedia when one finds assertions that one thinks should be cited by evidence. It's not some kind of grand rudeness to ask that you provide evidence for an assertion before putting it in Wikipedia. So, yes, please find proof that the Twins play (even have played once) at the Metrodome on a day when the wind chill was below zero. I'll even let you fudge a bit on the temperature (we don't have to use the exact high-temp reading) and we can use the high end of the wind speed for the day. If you can't find this proof, you should rescind it. That's the way this website works. Moncrief 21:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Done. Fact tag added. And you're right about the other part too. So now if you want to change the fact tag, all you have to do is find evidence of a below-zero windchill day on a day that was during the Twins season of whatever year. Shouldn't be too tough. Moncrief 21:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mel Ott

Oh, I never would've known. First off, and it's beside the point, I think that the black and orange combos are better than even black and red combos. But, really, I thought that the Giants wore black-orange for their entire history. Either way, I'm not sure if the Giants adopted those colors or just had them for themselves.

And I've been wondering this for months now; Why do teams, no matter how much black they may where, always seem to use a different color for marketing or for TV (like the Giants always use orange on TV despite the fact that orange is hardly seen, and like the Pirates with yellow despite the fact that yellow is used the same way the Giants use orange). Thank you for the post. Soxrock 22:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Marc Okkonen must have a love with baseball unis. I mean, until recently, he had a detailed history of team uniforms online (it had to be pulled recently), but I'd love to see that book. Hopefully it is still circulating. Soxrock 23:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Awesome... thingy

I love your self-sockpuppet thing. I think I'll use it. Can I? Crowstarcaws 00:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI

Just letting you know. You're not involved specifically, but... Miss Mondegreen talk  14:28, July 30 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World Series

Hey, check this out ([1]). Even though it hasn't been updated since '03, it's very interesting and very entertaining. A few of the ones I liked

1) Reggie Jackson - 77 World Series 2) Ralph Terry - 62 World Series 3) November series - well, you already know 4) Jack Morris - 91 World Series 5) Jim Leyritz - 96 World Series

I'll tell you, even though I've seen it countless times, the 2001 World Series always gives me chills. That was an epic series. Soxrock 20:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, you're right! My choices were pure opinion, because I know Babe Ruth in 1932 would be near the bottom of your list :(. And the Randy Johnson/Pete Alexander comparison are similar, only that Alexander's Redbirds led 3-2, whereas Johnson needed luck. 2001 was high on my list because everytime I see that video, I get chills, even though I've seen it a thousand times. As for 2004, oh don't remind me, spare me because I HATE the Red Sox. Soxrock 23:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I root for your southside rivals. I also am a big Yankee fan, in fact, I'm more of a Yankee fan than White Sox fan, but Soxrock sounds better than, say, Yankeesrock or something. My userpage shows all my favorite teams in sports, just for assistance

Now, I understand that 50 years of managing is an impressive and will never be matched feat, but Connie Mack had a losing record during his career (Yeah yeah 3731 wins and what, 3800 losses? Oh 6 pennants, 4 World Series titles, but something like 10 or so last place finishes). Mack also decided to build that "spite fence" at Shibe Park in 1932. Whereas your Cubs could negotiate a deal regarding roof-top seats, Mack decided to screw the fans and screw Philly. In my mind, Mack was a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overrated manager who managed 20 years longer than he should've.

As for Babe Ruth, imagine if he played these days. Combining the livelier balls and the bandbox stadiums (he did have the Yankee Stadium porch, but he still played 77 games on the road...) and he still hit homeruns WITHOUT CHEATING in his late 30s. Greatest hitter, bar none. Soxrock 00:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Hitting Ruth quickly (no pun intended), the only sad thing if he played these days is that he himself would probably be suspected of doping, which is somewhat unfortunate (Oh I would've loved to see the Bambino play for the Yankees!). Don't forget that while Ruth was in Boston, 1914-1919 I think, the Sox won 3 World Series titles (1915 vs. Philly, 1916 vs. Brooklyn, and, sadly, 1918 vs. Chicago), so it wasn't like he emerged completely as a Yankee. And, yup, the Sox-Cubs rivalry was started in 1906 presumabely, when the Hitless Wonders upset the favored Cubs in 6 games. But, heck, the Sox didn't win again until 1917, whereas you won in 1907 and 1908 and in, well at least 99 years later.

I will tell you, you are one of the people I really enjoy talking to here. I don't mean to take away from anyone else, but, whereas for most people I talk about the encyclopedia, I can do both with you; talk about improvement and stuff like that, but I also talk out our nations pastime even if the NFL has passed it in popularity. You and Ksy92003 are the two people that keep me going here, otherwise I would've burned out weeks ago. Thank you for all of your kindness, you deserve a full barnstar for your ability to be nice and all. And you do a lot of research that really helps us out. Thanks for all your help

Anyway, getting back to baseball itself, I do remember the 104 homeruns book, and that just goes to show how good Ruth was. I noted Yankee Stadium earlier, well, in 1927, when he hit 60 official homeruns, 32 were on the road. All those detractors who say that Yankee Stadium was made for Ruth are total idiots (I don't mean to offend you if you are, but I'm just stating my own mind). Soxrock 00:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed your last note, but, it was '03 the spite thing was put up. But I must say the Cubs did handle it properly. But getting to the A's, they're the only team in MLB history to have 3 periods of dominance like they did not named the Yankees. I mean, 1910-1914, 1929-1931, 1972-1974 (after they'd left Philly). When did Benjamin Shibe's children die? The last one? I'm wondering that. Mack should've stepped down though. I mean, managing into your late 60's, managing 30 years. Hey, just about no one alive rememebers seeing Mack manage, 30 years would be just as much heralded these days. And I'll be unavaliable for about 20 minutes or so, so don't be surprised to see me not message back to you. Thanks Soxrock 00:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I'm back and I love friendly banter as well. I mean, a lot of the time talk pages can get downright negative (like mine last Sunday, not yesterday, but 8 days ago) and, like I said, it keeps me going, whereas if I'm having a down day I can just sit back in my chair and talk baseball of yesteryear with you. It's relaxing, and, you're right, it leads to improvement knowing there are friendly guys out there to talk to. Anyway, I do remember reading about Finley's proposed 296 ft right field fence, until the commish (Ford Frick I believe) forced him to push it back to 325. But I can see he was trying to make something like a smaller Yankee Stadium dimension wise, due to the "death-valley" left field-center field fence. Now, and it helps that you are older than I am so you know a lot more than I know, but the baseball chronicle that I showed you online has helped me pick up a taste of old-time baseball (1906: Ed Ruelbach of the Chicago Cubs goes 19-4...)

And good comparison on Gehrig, he is, unfortunately best remembered for falling victim of ALS. He hit 29 HRS and 114 RBI in 1938 while he was starting to get the disease. Remember, he was only what, 35 in 1939? He could've played into his 40s. And I know DiMaggio won 4 titles anyway, but imagine Gehrig in 1940, 1942, even 1944? He had it in him, until the disease took it from him. Such a sad story. 01:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I read about Johnson in a brief summary in the Oakland A's page. Yeah, how funny that Johnson traded for Ralph Terry in 1957, then traded him back in 1959 for a washed-up Hank Bauer. From 1955-1960, the A's were the Yanks glorified Triple-A team. And thanks for the Ben Shibe death year. I wanted to get that so that I could really see why Mack did not step down in the 1930's but rather 1950. It helps to get that info 01:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
You know, Old-Timers day is getting watered down. Scott Brosius? He is not a famous Yankee. He had his moments but he is not a legend, hell, he played four years there. Anyway, the Grand Old Man of baseball, I'd say keep it in the family (pun intended) and say Joe Torre. His calm demeanor just doesn't work anymore. The Yanks have little emotion when their not playing well, something they need Soxrock 01:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, good morning (I left at 10:00 last night, so I didn't respond then) and I must say that in my mind, and it relates to Paul O'Neill, the missing thing is the emotion. Since O'Neill retired, the Yanks have not had that emotional freak who punches water-coolers or anything. In 1952 and 1953, when the beat the Dodgers (with out DiMaggio), they had a physcological advantage over Brooklyn, and, for that matter, New York. I mean, the Yanks knew how to beat teams with Gil Hodges, Pee Wee Reese, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, and Roy Campanella. The only time Brooklyn beat New York in the 1950s, they were lucky Sandy Amoros made that great catch that robbed Yogi Berra of a sure double. If Amoros does not catch that, then it's almost certain the Yanks would've taken the lead and won the '55 World Series. It's just a matter of emotion the Yanks had in the late 1990s, and in the 1950s, when they played New York and Brooklyn, they just knew how to beat them, how to come through with the big hit and the right time (case and point: 1951, Game 4, 5th inning I believe, 2-1 Yanks, Yogi Berra, I believe, is on base, and DiMaggio fights all the way through the count then launches one into the left field stands at the Polo Grounds. Yanks win and then crush the Giants in the final two games).

Anyway, I do like Joe Torre, but it's time for a change in the Bronx. The Yanks need someone who will light a fire under your ass if you don't do something right. Soxrock 11:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, sorry I didn't see this earlier (you sent it while I was replying to your previous message...) but, first off, great job putting this together. Second, Ruth seems to go against the grain, whereas a lot of players prefer to stay back in the box to get extra time, whereas Ruth, as seen in the picture, is in the front. I read somewhere that he nearly stepped out of the box, but I don't remember whether it was in the Ruth article or in the 32 World Series article. As for Ruth's weight, you can say all you want, but, and you've hinted this, look at the 1917 image in his (Ruth's) article. He looks like a 185 pound guy. Ruth, sadly, bulked up by 1935, his final year in the majors. Either way, Ruth played well with the weight. He robbed Chick Hafey of a potential homerun in the 1933 All-Star game cross-town at Comiskey Park, and, in 1934, his final year with the Yanks, he still hit 22 HRS and drove in 84 RBI, production that would be considered ABOVE AVERAGE FOR 39 YEARS OLD BARRY BONDS! (sorry, just had to let that out). Anyway, one thing that kind of sucks for you is the fact that, if the Yanks and Cubs meet up in the Series this year or sometime in the future, you'll still be gunning for your first Series victory vs. New York. Can't be a pleasent thought. And, FYI, I saved the picture you gave me, so I'm not going to be losing it anytime soon. Soxrock 11:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, good idea for Ruth. Anyway I thought that Chicago had Florida in 2003. It was shocking the curse plagued them again, somehow. It's amazing that the Cubs keep falling victim to the curse. You know, how does the "Curse of the Billy Goat" apply for the Cubs curse? I mean, I know 62 years not being in the Series is a long time, but how is the 1909-1944 period explained in that curse? And, hell, I'm happy the Yanks beat the Twins, but that had to be an incrediably stupid decision. And you were at the Twins final home game in 04? How was the Metrodome? Did it suck or what?. Soxrock 12:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, hitting the Ruth image quickly, I enlarged it because it did not conform well to the article on the computer I'm on. It forced the next section to be crowded to the right. As for the 2004 ALDS and all that, that's a great image. From what I've heard, the Metrodome is ugly, the sound-system is broken, and it's a poorly built facility. However, you're right, Minnesota is a cold state, and the new Twins ballpark should have a retractable roof. However, I don't like any domed stadium, retractable-roofs are good enough in my mind Soxrock 12:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I actually went into the 03 series not thinking this would be too good. Now, Merkle's mistake can be forgiven because, if I remember correctly, the fans flooded the field after the base hit that appeared to give the Giants the victory and the pennant. That one is the most unknown... 1918, well, when Frazee needed to get out of debt he broke up the Red Sox dynasty and the Yanks were willling to take the talent. 1945, well, that is a lame excuse, because, again, they had not won since 1908 to begin with, so any possible curse had to occur sometime in 1909 most likely. 2003, amazing how you can have 5 freaking fans reaching for the ball and being in the stands, yet, because Bartman got it (remember, there was no guarentee Alou would catch that) and then Gonzalez can't field the groundball, Bartman becomes a pariah around the northside of Chicago (I wouldn't know about the White Sox fans if they liked that). Come on, Bartman has had his entire live ruined simply because he touched the ball. What a joke, you actually have to fell sorry for him today. And have a good day at work, I look forward to the next time we talk Soxrock 12:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, assuming that your done at work for today. I'd like to continue this conversation, but what do you want to talk about specifically? I ask you because I am a bad conversation starter. Soxrock 23:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lou Piniella

thanks for calling me charitable....that's a wikifirst for me. i am an inclusionist, so i rarely delete, but often use fact tags. that alone has gotten me some harsh feedback, but anytime i see a statement starting with "many believe" i add the fact tag. btw....the self-sockpuppet thing is HILARIOUS. LurkingInChicago 02:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:BabeRuth19321001.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:BabeRuth19321001.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Willie Mays

Well, it was a little late for me when I got the message (Computer off, watching The Bronx is Burning) but I would like to say that Willie Mays was determined, he would've found a way to catch that ball. But staying in the same general area and same platform, why is it that Mays' Game 1 catch is incredibly famous when there was the Game 7 catch by Brooklyn outfielder Sandy Amoros, who'd just came into left field replacing Jim Gilliam. I mean, that ball, if it gets down, doesn't win game 1 for the Yanks, it wins the series in all likelihood. Willie Mays had an unbelievable catch, one that likely saved Game 1 for the Giants, but Amoros saved Game 7 and the Brooklyn Dodgers only World Series title. I just think that, and a lot of people will probably agree, that the Amoros catch is among the most underrated World Series plays of all-time. Soxrock 11:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response (I am tired) but I only know about the Amoros catch because I was, once again, reading that chronicle and in December 2004 I did some research papers (1955 Yankees, '97 Indians) and found a picture of the Amoros catch. But, even if it was on the road, what about Sandy Koufax at Metropolitan Stadium in 1965? I was expecting that Amoros catch to be played on that World Series moments thing, but, then it could've been overkill seeing Mays/Amoros back-to-back. Eh, whatever, I myself, fanatic-wise, am better off not seeing it :) Soxrock 13:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, I agree with the Dodgers pitching. They gave up, what, 10 runs in the 1966 Series and got swept? As for the Bob Allison catch, I can't recall seeing that. I've seen Mays, Amoros, Swoboda, among others. I'll have to check out Bob Allison, who was a good hitter in those days. Soxrock 13:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, good point. Mays and Amoros won games from their catches, Chavez and Allison ultimately didn't, and, really, Allison ended the series with his strikeout. Soxrock 13:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow. I ask quickly if the "I believe" was from the actual quote or if it was just the way you thought it was said.

Anyway, changing subjects, I just want to mention that the baseball chronicle I frequently mention has helped my figure out history, but I like the fact that you upload so many pictures from the early 1900s. I've figured out that both of us have a deep passion for baseball history, which makes it easier to talk with each other. Soxrock 14:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Being there, that had to be gut-wrenching as a Cubs fan to score 16 runs and lose. I mean, 16 runs should equal a blow-out, but when the wind is blowing out at Wrigley, 16 runs could still lose you the game. Similar thing at the Cell on the southside, the Sox lost a game 20-14 last month. And, that makes me remember this; July 2nd, 2006; Sox/Cubs at Wrigley, and the Cubs win 15-11. I watched that game on WGN, I was pissed. Soxrock 16:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
And, let's not forget, Schmidt wouldn't have been booed as much as he was in Philly. And, another thing, Schmidt may have played longer if he played for the Cubs because he wouldn't have had to deal with that rock-hard astroturf at Veterans Stadium. From 1970-2003, Philly was a tough place to play at because of the damn astroturf. Soxrock 17:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Ha ha, that trend quote was quite funny. And your right about a historic stadium, but I don't know which. Do you mean historic Shibe Park, or the Phillies previous home, the Baker Bowl. I'll assume you mean Shibe Park, but I just want to make sure. Soxrock 17:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
That's funny. Jeez, Jamie Moyer's old enough he could've pitched in that game (ah, just joking). It's amazing how Philadelphia in all sports seems to be among the worst sports towns team wise in the nation. The Eagles sucked for a while, the Flyers have been so-so lately, the 76ers so-so, the Phillies (10,000 losses, enough said) and formerly the A's (granted 4 World Series and 6 Pennants, but many more losing seasons). Kind of sad to see really. Soxrock 17:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh jeez, I had to laugh at "It figures we got Vince, and not Joe or Dom. When brothers played in the majors, the Phillies usually wound up with the one who produced less. We had Harry Coveleski instead of Stan, Irish Meusel instead of Bob, Frank Torre instead of Joe, Ken Brett instead of George, Mike Maddux instead of Greg, Rick Surhoff instead of B.J. and Jeremy Giambi instead of Jason. If there had been a Zeppo Alou, the Phillies would have signed him." That's funny Soxrock 17:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, losing is definitely easy. Every night, you have to combine passion, willingness, and luck to win consistently. Losing just takes you not having passion and willingness. Bad luck can occur at anytime, you have to manage that. I think that Ozzie needs to step down, his style isn't working anymore. And this is really not a different team. The Sox are almost exactly the same team as they were in 05. Soxrock 17:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, it wouldn't make me their biggest fan, but perhaps they need to revert those uniforms from that era. But your right about the Cubs and the Sox. The Cubs from 1880-1885 and 1906-1910, the Red Sox from 1915-1918. Those were dominant teams Soxrock 17:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The Phils are starting to load on 2005 White Sox players. Really, I wouldn't of traded Rowand, and if they can, the ChiSox should try to sign Rowand this off-season. Hopefully Soxrock 17:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oh, so close...

Well, two topics are going to start, I guess, but when I heard that the Bombers won 16-3 last night over my equally beloved ChiSox (I was hoping the Yanks would win, the Sox have sold and are done for the year) and heard that they hit 8 HRS (that was my I addressed them as the Bombers), I immediately guessed what who their opponent was, and the score of the game. My guess, on the spot, was a 22-2 beating of the Philadelphia Athletics. Well, I checked the 1939 Philadelphia A's game log here, and it turns out that, on June 28th game 1 of a doubleheader at Shibe Park, the Yankees won 23-2. Damn, I can't believe I was that close. And, for the record, in the 2nd game of the doubleheader, they again shallacked the A's 10-0. Have you ever had any stories like that, where you saw some team tie a team record and tried to pull out information from when they previously set that record? Thanks for reading this story. Soxrock 13:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and you would know this very well, but, when the wind is blowing at Wrigley, the balls just fly. Those games would be entertaining for me, personally, because I'm an offensive person, I'm not much of a 1-0 pitchers duel type. Soxrock 13:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I forgot to mention blowing out. I'm sure you know what I meant though, right? As for Holtzman, wow; "(loud crack of the bat) Aaron swings, look out, that baby is hit... It is way back there... Billy Williams, back to the wall... back to the corner... HE GRABS IT!!!" (loud roar from the crowd)". That has to be the play your referring to. Soxrock 13:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tecmobowl/Long levi

Well, I am undertaking a project to cleanse out all his blanks of his talk page. By the end of the night, you might be able to see all of his talk page notes. For every 100 subjects, I will start a new archive. Thanks for your concern. NBAonNBC 22:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I have started the excavation. You can see me in progress at here. NBAonNBC 23:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll fix that. And I've gotten to the Epeflechee dispute. Now I keep getting blankings by that idiot NBAonNBC 00:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I suppose. Either way, I'm really on the hardest part now. And that epic discussion with Sarah Goldberg, oh gosh NBAonNBC 00:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Good lord, this is taking much longer than I wanted. NBAonNBC 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Just did her! Yes! NBAonNBC 00:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but I've got to keep it consistent with others. Anyway, I'm done! An hour's worth of wading can be found on the archive pages [2] and [3]. If they get deleted, I have a copy saved in my e-mail NBAonNBC 00:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NBAonNBC block

Any clue what happened with NBAonNBC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)? What did I miss? —Wknight94 (talk) 01:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)