User talk:Tombstone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tombstone is currently inactive.
This is due to real life. Give me a few months and I'll be back.
Note: I jump from one project to another before I have finished the first project, so it may take me a few weeks to finish what I started or even to continue a conversation. I tried sticking with one project at a time, but that damn MTV ruined my attention span.
  • I usurped this username in March 2008 — I was Old Hoss from November 2006.
  • I decided to only maintain one userpage-slash-talkpage, so I redirected my userpage here..................
 
About me

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Tombstone, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 
Langara College 22:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Various questions

  1. What is the reason for, and differences of, class; specifically: class="toccolours" or class="infobox"?
  2. How do you control 2 infoboxes (or an infobox and an image) to either stack on top of each other on the right-hand side of the page, or appear side-by-side on the right-hand side of the page?
  3. How do you get a template to appear on the left-hand side of a specific page (as opposed to hard-coding the template to appear on the left-hand side on all pages)?

--Old Hoss 21:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Help:Tables#Style_classes—Infoboxes are just tables. The reason is to make it easy to style such boxes in a similar way, you just type in the style of the box and it's exact parameters are found in MediaWiki:Common.css. It also means it cold easily be changed in the future if wanted, for any reason, without needing to change thousands of infoboxes or hundreds of thousands of articles.

2. I think they would naturally stack. To make them appear side by side you could put them in a right-aligned table.

{| style="float:right;"
|{{Infobox one |parameter1=blue...}}
|{{Infobox two |parameter1=73...}}
|}

or with a picture

{| style="float:right;"
|[[Image:Example.png]]
|{{Infobox |parameter1=73...}}
|}

I would caution though, two infoboxes seems like a bad idea. The point of an infobox is to give over the most important details real fast. Wouldn't having two just confuse the issue? Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.

3. In the very first line of your infobox, you will have code like this:

{| class="infobox" style="font-size: 90%; text-align: left;"

The class="infobox" parameter automatically floats the infobox on the right of the screen. This can be overridden, however. Coding a float:left; parameter into the style would make the infobox float left:

{| class="infobox" style="font-size: 90%; text-align: left; float:left;"

If you only wanted this in certain boxes, you could put it inside a nifty {{#ifeq:}}:

{| class="infobox" style="font-size: 90%; text-align: left; {{#ifeq:{{{left|}}}|yes|float:left;}}"

This would mean that only when | left=yes was put into the infobox would it float left.

An alternate way of doing this is to put it inside a left-aligned table:

{| style="float:left;"
|{{Infobox name |parameter1=blue...}}
|}

Once again, though, I would caution. Is a left-aligned infobox really a good idea?

There are probably easier or better ways of doing these, I'm just an amateur. But, I hope I have answered your questions sufficiently :) --SeveroTC 23:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Infobox questions

Hi there, I answered your questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Various questions, however, having had a quick flick through your contributions, I'm not sure they are the answers you want. Specifically, {{Infobox US Constitution}} isn't an infobox. If your questions were based around the use of this template, then my answers don't particularly apply. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me. Regards, SeveroTC 00:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

  1. Completely shed light on the concept for me, thanks.
  2. Some pages, especially in the politics series, already have several navboxes and look cluttered; some of those pages would look better with side-by-sides, room permitting.
  3. Some small navboxes are placed in the "See also" section and look out of place on the right-hand side and a footer is not suitable.
Actually, you seemed to have answered my questions quite appropriately, although I have not utilized any of the techniques yet. Much obliged for your input. I could not find an all-encompassing help page with everything I was looking for regarding navboxes, so I might take you up on the offer if I have more questions. (Sorry for the delayed response, I am on-line only every now and again.)--Old Hoss 01:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem, happy to help. SeveroTC 11:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for Template:Missouri in the Civil War edit

Thanks for Missouri edit. It looks a lot better. With my knowledge of that toy, there's all sorts of mischief I can get into. Thanks again! Americasroof 22:18, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Belated cool.--Old Hoss 20:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voting Template

I greatly appreciate your efforts to rework the templates. However this is no longer applicable as the Voting and Electoral Systems templates no longer overlap. Rather than be merged, they were separated to cover their each individual aspects.

Though, maybe either of the templates could benefit from the style redesign. --Electiontechnology 02:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Even so, I think they would be better as footers, since the majority of pages are shorter than the template themselves, and some pages have both.--Old Hoss 02:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work

Good work on the United States Foreign Policy template! I think it's a much clearer and prettier template now. :-) Sijo Ripa 19:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool.--Old Hoss 20:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inchies

Unfortunately, I have to remove your speedy tag on this one, because the deletion last time was by expired prod; it needs to be an Afd deletion to get speedy next time. I suggest that you nominate it at WP:AFD so that we can get community views as to whether it should be deleted or not and if so, it can be speedily deleted next time it's recreated. Carlossuarez46 04:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I've done the above, no problem. But I am not clear on what you mean by "the deletion last time was by expired prod". I haven't been AfDing too long and I am not familiar with everything yet.--Old Hoss 04:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks and sorry

I reverted the 641KB article, and shrunk the ankh. ←BenB4 23:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like he broke the thing down one article per letter. It makes for nice short parts but I thought for sure he was hoping for people searching through it or something, but no problem. Thanks for your boldness. ←BenB4 03:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] US "Statements" or "Resolutions" template

Hey Hoss,

Please read my comments at Template talk:USstatements. This sort of thing is best covered by Categories. It is not possible to put all US documents, speeches, and songs in one template. See Category:United States historical documents, Category:Official documents of the United States, Category:State of the Union, etc. etc. There are too many. --JW1805 (Talk) 01:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey 05,
I'm sure you mean well, but you need to work on your methods. It could be misconstrued. I responded here.--Old Hoss 21:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Extinction events timeline

Hi,

I'll look into this when I get the opportunity!

Verisimilus T 11:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Howzat?

The navigation boxes centre text by default - I simply overruled that!

Verisimilus T 19:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for taking the time.--Old Hoss 19:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Navbox generic subgroup

I left a message for you at Template talk:Navbox generic subgroup. --David Göthberg 13:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Thank you for dealing with the disruptive AFD nominations by the fellow whom you reported on my talk page and later at AIV. I've been away from Wikipedia celebrating Shemini Atzeret and Simchat Torah, and I'm happy that other people like you have kept this place running while I focus on more important aspects of life. Keep up the good work! Shalom (Hello • Peace) 00:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem, that editor had been pushing POV previously and I give them the benefit of the doubt for awhile, but that was just immature. Regards.--Old Hoss 17:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notifying user after adding speedies

Thanks for the gentle reminder. Cheers, — BillC talk 21:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.--Old Hoss 21:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article

Sorry for not giving you a notice... :( It has to meet this guideline to be classified as patent nonsense. For hoaxes, you can PROD them or send the to AfD, which rather quickly garner consensus to delete. Cheers! Maxim(talk) (contributions) 21:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you.--Old Hoss 22:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Butting in

No, I don't mind. In general, editors are accorded more latitude on their userpages than in article namespace. I don't have any problem with that, but it seems to me that latitude is widely abused. My feelings on this topic are pretty much covered by WP:Userboxes#Content restrictions, WP:Userboxes#Potentially divisive words and WP:USER#What may I not have on my user page?. The problem is, editors routinely ignore these guidelines -- whose purpose, after all, is to foster a sense of community conducive to collaboration. --Rrburke(talk) 17:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I have not actively sought to enforce these provisions, nor was I aware they were posted so clearly, but I have always been disappointed with the obvious "sides" some editors take, based on agenda rather than context. I have only once been really taken aback (I hesitate to say "offended") by a userbox - a young Australian high school student wished to nuke America and kill its culture - and that editor ignored me on his talk page when I blanked that userbox, so I assumed he was just oblivious to his environment - which I assume 3/4 of like editors probably are. I wonder if some kind of awareness project would help. If done correctly, it may defuse disputes before they start, as some editors seek out users who disagree with them in order to pick a fight to make a point. If such a project was started, one would have to show extreme restraint and maturity before approaching a sensitive userbox, and the project would have to be careful not to turn into a strong-arm group. Interesting concept, though.--Old Hoss 18:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] spider nav

hey, thanks for creating the spider navigation box :) i'll see that i don't forget about it in the future, when more articles appear. check out the WikiProject Spiders btw :) cheers --Sarefo 12:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback!--Old Hoss 18:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

I'm actually surprised that the name was available. When I first created the account, I seem to remember thinking that that name was already taken. Sorry for the mistake, and thanks for your alerting me to the situation. :) John Carter 21:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome!--Old Hoss 21:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template

I am sure you don't realize it but I have no problem with you trying to tighten the template, the problem is how uneven you are making the bottom sections in relation to the top sections. I don't want the template to look stupid and uneven so if you can still tighten it and make the sections even then please do it.--Southern Texas 20:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Saying my good faith edits make things look stupid is not really that helpful, nor civil, SoTX. Please refrain from off-the-cuff remarks.
I believe you are mistaken, unless you are using a different browser or screen resolution. The way you have it, the group & subgroup sections take up nearly 40% of the template; the way I have it they take up only about 20% of the template - more in line with the common look of WP. What do you mean by "bottom section"? Do you mean the "below" parameter? Help me out here.
Please advise what browser you are using and at what resolution - that may be the problem. I am using Firefox @ 1024X728 resolution.
I am moving this to the template talk so others can join in. Regards.--Old Hoss 21:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New cats

LOL! You are right about insects going under animals. I'll change that right now. As for mammals and reptiles, I'm not sure we have enough animals templates to narrow it that finely. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:STLmedia

Template:STLmedia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Spencer1151 (talk) 20:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Animal templates

Hi Old Hoss. My knowledge of mammals is very basic; I'm mostly interested in carnivorous plants and cephalopods. :) As such, I can't comment on the taxonomy used in the templates, although the layout looks good. The only thing I can suggest is de-italicising families and subfamilies (only genus and species names are italicised). I'd suggest asking the folks over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals for their opinions. Mgiganteus1 (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, --Old Hoss (talk) 19:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Yes...ahem....erm, sorry about that. Must have been a rush of blood to the head - you see "The deleted page has a talk page (view | delete)", and before you know it, it's gone under G8. I've picked up a couple of your other housekeeping speedies this evening, so feel free to shout if I've done it more than this once! GBT/C 21:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't say as much, but I've restored it. GBT/C 21:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

...for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AWeather&diff=193195373&oldid=193181433
I guess I'm spoiled by it being built into the Navbox template. Sardanaphalus (talk) 05:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I hear ya. --Tombstone (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Global warming

Hi again; thanks for your message. Trying to follow it up has led to my discovery of other Navbox-based templates, in particular Template:Navigation with collapsible groups. I've begun experimenting with a more Navbox-compliant version of it, which I'm intending to create as Template:Navbox with collapsible sections. Anyway, I mention all this as I'm going to say that your alternate formatting for the above was neat -- showing me, for instance, something I guess I should've realized before: you can use Navbox subgroups for groupnames as well as lists -- but, for more space for links in the template (and less background color), how about a "Navigation with collapsible groups"-style format like this?:

If so, I'd create the "Navbox with collapsible sections" template and reformat the above for it. Sardanaphalus (talk) 05:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

PS Just saw your "I am/was/am/? Old Hoss" message. Hi!

Well, as you have probably learned, any change on WP is fought tooth and nail. I must admit I was involved as a minor party providing feedback during the Navbox subgroup development, so I should disclose my bias up front. The straight-across bars were a common option in the old "toccolors" navbox and seem to be viewed as old-school. Also, if you have too many different choices of navboxen, it contradicts the purpose of the development of navbox in the first place: standardization. However, I have been away from those discussions for about 3-4 months, so things probably have changed.
On the upside to straight-across bars, it does allow more room for links, and provides a visual break between sections instead of using alternating backgrounds. I utilized that function awhile back in {{Professional Baseball}} and it works quite well. On the downside, without a corresponding "group" parameter (like in the Temperature and Politics sections in your above example), it looks incomplete.
Regarding the collapsible section, {{United States foreign policy}} uses a jury-rigged technique, but I have always had reservations about that usage – a reader might not necessarily realize there are more links in that hidden section, the hide/show needs to be more obvious, IMO. A related method, as I am sure you know, is using {{Template group}}, which makes it obvious there are additional navigation links available. My personal preference is to have to click "show" only once and see everything available to me, rather than having to click "show" for each section, but that could change with a well formatted alternative.
You might be interested in following the conversation going on regarding the collapsible sections option in sidebar templates. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for all the above. First, I should add that I'm not enamored with the version above; I agree that, as you hinted, the straight-across bars seem to over-fragment the template. As with most things on Wikipedia and in life, I guess template design is all about a workable balance between sophistication and accessibility that gains consensus -- and right now, I guess I don't quite see how that might look. Having found the other Navbox variations, however, I'm beginning to think that the Navbox shell would probably benefit from becoming (even more) modular, i.e. just as {{Navbox subgroups}} allows groups within a group, something like {{Navbox columns}} (derived from {{Navbox with columns}}) would provide columns within a group; {{Navbox subsection}} would provide a straight-across bar area; and so on. I also reckon it would be a definite improvement if the {{nowrap begin}} item{{·w}} item{{·w}} ... {{nowrap end}} structure (that seems to be the best list formatting available) was encoded as the Navbox default. As regards sidebar templates, {{Infobox}} (which I'm wondering whether to try using regularly) doubles the number of issues to consider! Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reno Gang

Thanks tombstone for the help and review of my first article. This medium takes a bit to get used to, but I appreciate the help. I fully understand the changes you made. (talk)

[edit] Un-named editor

I have had to do a lot of tidy up work after user 87.204.58.50 who appears to have been editing for about 15 months. I was just about to do the same revert as you did on the White Rhino. The user changed the infobox image but not the caption. He has added a lot of images in key page positions replacing and deleting the others. He has found some good images, so I have tried to advise him. I told him about deleting images this morning. I have already advised him to read the wiki guidelines. Some of his image names have a name in them. Snowman (talk) 14:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Deleting link

Tombstone, why have you deleted the link to http://www.tijgeritorium.net ? It's a good site with good information. User: Big_smile_21 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Big smile 21 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

For the same reasons the other editors removed it, the link fails the following of Wikipedia's external link policies: it is a low quality site, it is a personal site, it adds nothing to the Wikiprdia article that isn't already presenting in better external links, and lastly you are a single purpose account adding nothing but linkspam while making no other contributions to the encyclopedia at all. It's nothing personal. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 11:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Antelopes template

Dear Tombstone: just for reference – only scientific names should go in italics, not the parentheses (brackets) that surround them. Thanks for the useful addition to the antelope species pages—GRM (talk) 13:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Damn! OK, thanks. It'll be easy to fix, but time consuming. I'll put it on my to-do-eventually list. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
You are welcome, and don't fret about it. You'd be amazed how many print-publishing houses get it wrong! Best wishes—GRM (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] warning vandals

Hello Tombstone.
I noticed that you revert quite a bit of vandalism. Thank you for helping keep Wikipedia the best encyclopedia in the world!
However, I have noticed that you do not always leave warnings on the vandals talk pages. You should always leave an appropriate warning after reverting vandalism. (The full list of talk page warnings may be found here, along with some suggestions and guidelines for using them.)
Be sure to leave the correct level of warning, and if the vandal has been warned four times in the last month, (Check the vandal's talk page history. Some vandals remove warnings from their talk pages.) report the vandal by going to this page and following the instructions.
Thank you again, and may the vandals fail...—Preceding unsigned comment added by J.delanoy (talk • contribs) 15:24, April 9, 2008 (UTC)

Hello, technically I'm not fighting the vandals any more. I used to, and then I got feed up with the return attacks, so I created a new account solely for fighting vandalism. I stopped fighting vandalism altogether because it got too personal. On this account, all I do is watch the mammal articles every now and again and WP:UNDO obvious vandalism, otherwise I am specific in the edit summary. I have found that WP:DENY works best for my purposes, and leaving an explicit edit summary also helps. I do alert the ones who mean well (specifically if they are adding their own website's external link), but the childish vandalism on these articles, I have found, stops if you ignore them. I do occasionally warn and report persistent vandals to WP:AIV, but warning most vandals on these articles is more trouble than it is worth. When I used to have an alternate account to fight vandals, I would be irritated sometimes when users would revert but not warn, but now I see why they did that. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 15:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Multicolumn reflist

Just following up on the multicolumn issue, would you be interested in logging the issue with Firefox's bugzilla? Wikipedia's bugzilla says the problem is not on their end. superlusertc 2008 April 11, 21:33 (UTC)

I'm not positive, but connection speed could also contribute to the problem, but either way it still always happens to me. If you provide a link to report it to Firefox's bugzilla (sorry to be anal, but I'm not too familiar with troubleshooting!), I'll go ahead and report it there, too. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Bugzilla is [1]. I have a strong suspicion that connection speed is part of your problem, but there's no excuse for the browser to behave like that, regardless of connection speed, and I can think of a half-dozen ways to correct the issue. If you don't mind, could you send me a link to the bug report when you make it? superlusertc 2008 April 12, 16:09 (UTC)

[edit] Lincoln Giants / Negro Southern League / 1927-28

Hello, Couillaud! The Complete Book of Baseball's Negro Leagues by John B. Holway lists the NY Lincoln Giants as a member of the ECL in 1927 going 21-22 in league play. Is this source wrong? Please respond here on your talk page. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 03:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The Lincoln Giants scheduled and played games against various teams still in the ECL (hence Holway's listing them in the league), but they dropped out of the league before the 1927 season. Writing from memory, as I'm not near my resources. IIRC, Robert Peterson's Only the Ball Was White shows league standings for the 1927 ECL sans the Lincoln Giants. I know that SABR's The Negro Leagues Book shows that. Holway may have given them credit for games played against ECL teams without concern for whether they were a member of the league proper. You might also notice that in Holway's yearly standings, the totals of wins and losses almost never balances, so his standings are suspect if only for that reason.
As for the Homestead Grays/Philadelphia Tigers question, the Negro Leagues Book shows Homestead and Hilldale, but I saw no mention of Philadelphia. SABR researcher Gary Ashwill ({http://agatetype.typepad.com/}) has researched the 1928 ECL, and would have the definitive answer on that.
--Couillaud (talk) 14:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed response. I figured that the standings didn't balance because of the shoddy record keeping, and I would be skeptic if they did add up properly, truthfully - what with all of the non-league games they played and randomly counted in the standings; so I wouldn't necessarily hold that against a source. Admittedly, I am committing an inexcusable "don't" by using one source and one source only (Holway). Since there was such poor reporting on the NLs, I wonder if WP should mention the contradictions rather than take one side or the other, sort of like was done on the Western League (original), unless of course a source is just plain wrong.
I was going to start a stub on the Negro Southern League, but the WP references state it existed for 1932 only, but Holway shows the league was around for 2 seasons, 1931-1932. Do you know which is which? Rgrds.--Tombstone (talk) 01:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

above was cut & pasted for continuity for my own reference from User talk:Couillaud#NY Lincoln Giants

I checked my references at home, which include Holway, SABR, Peterson, and Riley. For 1927, Holway is the only one that lists the Lincoln Giants as participating in the ECL; of the three that show yearly standings, Peterson and SABR show the same standings, down to the 1st half/2nd half breakdown (Holway doesn't show that split), and Holway's totals are different than the others.

It's a common experience among Negro League researchers to acknowledge Holway as a pioneer and a wonderful historical researcher, and then in almost the same breath to also acknowledge that he has certain eccentricities and that he is not a very good statistical researcher; most of his statistics must be taken with a cartload of salt. Based upon Riley, Peterson, and SABR, I would say the Lincoln Giants were NOT members of the ECL in '27.

As for 1928, the ECL broke up before mid-season, and Holway's is the only book that has published a guess at its standings; my caveate from above applies to this. Homestead was never a member of the league, but he lists them at 8-5. Peterson states that "Clubs were the Bacharach Giants, Baltimore Black Sox, Cuban Stars (East), Lincoln Giants, and Philadelphia Tigers". This is confirmed in Neil Lanctot's book, Fair Dealing and Clean Playing, about the Hilldale franchise. He confirms that there was a Philadelphia Tigers club (organized mainly from older and marginal players), that Hilldale did not join the league and tried to block the Tigers from obtaining a ballpark. The Tigers found a semi-pro field to use, and the league played a few weeks before disbanding without publishing any standings.

The best source for standings is Gary Ashwill's web site. I know the general Wikipedia philosophy about blogs, but SABR members regard Agate Type and the published findings found therein to be cutting edge research. Somewhere on that blog Gary has a list of games played by Negro teams, though I do not believe he differentiated between league and independent games. Currently, the standings of the 1928 ECL (unless Gary has figured them) are an unknown, and Holway's information is unreliable.

The Negro Southern League was actually in existence from about 1921 up till the 1940s, though it usually played at a lower level than the eastern and midwestern leagues, the only exception being 1932, when both the NNL and ANL had collapsed. Hall of Famer Turkey Stearnes played 1921 and 1922 in the NSL, but his rookie season is still thought to have been in 1923 when he moved to the Detroit Stars of the NNL.

To the best of my knowledge (checking the four main sources), the eastern Cuban Stars never called any city home until they morphed into the New York Cubans, and Holway is the only researcher to say they were ever stationed in Newark. It's possible he may have found one newspaper reference saying the Cubans were from Newark, or saw them play a number of games in a Newark ballpark (not a surprise; they played games in many cities, occasionally batting second as if they were the home team), and decided they called it home. The only time I know of any of the Cuban Stars teams being officially tied to a city was when the western team played home games in Cincinnati in 1921.

Hope this helps.

--Couillaud (talk) 05:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the detailed info, and mentioning the names of the other sources. I think I'll pick up some of the books you mentioned before I go any further. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 06:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, please note that when I mentioned that Agate Type has a "list of games played by Negro teams", I should have said "a list of games played by Negro teams in 1928", as that was the reason for mentioning it. --Couillaud (talk) 14:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)