User talk:Vidor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whatever.

Contents

[edit] I think...

it was the blanking of this (your) talkpage. I should've checked, and followed WP:TEMPLAR. Sorry. --Smokizzy (talk) 03:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

No one has been in contact with me about this article, (un)fortunately. --Smokizzy (talk) 03:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No-hitter

Hey, just wanted to say I think you've made some quality edits to no-hitter. It's looking like a pretty good encyclopedia article. — Demong talk 08:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] List of worst MLB season records

You've got some readers questioning the notability of this article. I don't question that. But I wonder if you have an equivalent article called something like List of best MLB season records? Also, some were mis-construing it to mean "worst teams". That's a value judgment. But "worst records" is easily definable. "lowest percentages" could be a better title, as it takes away any hint of point-of-view. Baseball Bugs 23:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

One issue is that the 1899 team is not listed in the outline, despite having played 154 games. But they are kind of a special case; a conflict-of-interest that would not be allowed today. (The Yankees got away with it with the K.C. Athletics, but as mediocre as the A's were they never came close to 1899's level). Baseball Bugs 04:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Never mind, I see that you fixed it. The 1884 Wilmington team was in the "Onion", whose classification as a "major" league remains a travesty, but that's not my decision to make. d:) Baseball Bugs 04:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of best MLB season records

2/3 as a percentage equates to about 108 games in the 162 game schedule or 102 in the 154 game schedule. Usually 100 wins is considered a fine season, but that might make the list too long to be meaningful. 2/3 might be good if it yields a comparable list to the worst seasons list. As with the "asterisk" for worst pre-1900 season, there could also be one for the percent the Cubs, i.e. White Stockings, racked up in 1880 or so. Baseball Bugs 06:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of obscure baseball records

I see this one has been nominated for deletion. I'm kind of on the fence about it, but it already passed inspection once. I just wondered if this subject was of interest to you. Baseball Bugs 15:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

One of Tecmobowl's obsessions is tagging articles for deletion. This is just one of many. Like you, I would not vote for deletion. I would vote for improvement or standardization or something like that. Baseball Bugs 16:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Streaks

The Matsui 518 vs. 519 is one of many vandalizations by User talk:Ron liebman, starting around January of this year. That user name and others were hijacked from SABR's member list, and he has also had a number of sockpuppets and IP addresses. He still pops up every 2 or 3 days, and several of us have his prime targets on our watch list. SABR itself properly recognizes 518 as the number. Baseball Bugs 06:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen that little war going on. Bizarre. Vidor 06:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
The mistake I made with that guy was taking the logical approach, i.e. the assumption that he was sincere but wrong. I've since concluded that he's just the typical vandal that finds something to latch onto, and doesn't care about the subject matter, just about the fight itself. In this case, it doesn't matter if it's 518 or 519, because it's over. It would only matter if he had played the next day. But he was out for months after that. Likewise with Tejada, who gets an extra day in his streak just because he took one at-bat. But it's over, so it's just a number. Yes, it's a stupid rule, but as you said, it is the rule. It reminds me of the rule that a batted ball striking a runner counts as a hit (assuming it still does, I haven't checked lately) instead of the obvious, which would be a fielder's choice. Years ago, someone said that rule will get changed once it breaks up a no-hitter artificially. But apparently that hasn't happened yet. Baseball Bugs 06:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Batted balls do indeed still count as base hits. Vidor 06:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Striking a runner, that is. Just one of those statistical oddities. The "figger filberts" (of which I am not one) sometimes forget that only two stats really matter: W's and L's. Baseball Bugs 06:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] For the love of God, keep this template

Template:MLB HoF

Congratulations on your future election to the Hall. d:) The interesting thing about the history of that template's arguments is the way it's evolved, which is the point I keep trying to make on that discussion page. The POV argument is bogus. The fair use argument is questionable. And if they simply don't like the picture, they should simply find a different one. The current attempt is called "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". And deleting the template from articles is not being done by consensus. Baseball Bugs 07:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Some of those folks are confused about what "neutral point of view" means. It doesn't mean pretending that Casey Wise or Dal Maxvill are on equal par with Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb. It means not claiming that by ourselves, but pointing to authoritative sources who say that... like the voters for the Baseball Hall of Fame. Baseball Bugs 07:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
It took tremendous self-control for me not to insult that woman. What an idiot. Stating that someone is a member of the HoF isn't point-of-view, it's a fact. Anyway, this looks like a long job but I just went through all the A's. Maybe I'll do the B's tomorrow. Vidor 07:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
And by the way, I like the photo. It looks like a cathedral, or a sanctuary. Maybe that's overkill (like the illustration you may have seen, of God handing a baseball to Adam) but these are the ultra-elite of the game's many thousands of players over the years. I might question the inclusion of guys like Morgan Bulkeley and Chick Hafey, but someone thought they belonged, and that's what counts. Baseball Bugs 07:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The real issue that should be discussed, which is one of the complaints in the deletion discussion, is where to place it. Instead of addressing that, they want to delete it. I would put it in the upper left, with the main picture and infobox in the upper right. That's subject to discussion, but it's worth a try. That speaks more to the hodge-podge approach of the baseball bio articles than anything. There needs to be some uniformity. That should be a subject of discussion, not bickering over the HoF template. Baseball Bugs 07:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

As I suspected, Tecmobowl is reverting all of your changes. Baseball Bugs 14:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Be prepared for an edit jihad with Tecmobowl... although he seems to be away from his desk this afternoon... as I soon will be. There are sometimes other things to do on a weekend. :) Baseball Bugs 19:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cap Anson

For better or worse, what Anson is best known for today is his influence in establishing the color line, which is a real shame, but of course it's his own fault. I fall short of "blaming" him for it, because if it was just him, it wouldn't have happened. There is no question he was a virulent racist, but it took a lot of other racists to establish the color line. His attitude combined with his leadership basically "modeled the way" for that shameful situation, by giving everyone the excuse to do it. Also, someone had reverted the "Pop" for some reason. Contemporary newspapers typically called him "Capt. Anson", and later on "Pop" as he became the old leader of the club, such as it was. Another thing worth mentioning somehow is how powerful a hitter he was, to get near 3,000 hits in the National League during a time when schedules were much shorter. He was an incredible ballplayer and a racist pig. That's the way things go sometime. Baseball Bugs 07:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It happens. Can't be avoided. Vidor 08:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking if Anson hadn't done it, maybe Cobb would have. Baseball Bugs 08:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
It might have been too late by then. Then again, maybe not. No way to tell. Vidor 08:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes. The flip side is that Anson could have been a force for good, if he had endorsed or at least said nothing negative about playing against Fleet Walker, implicitly if not explicitly endorsing integration. Maybe that could have helped undermine segregation, and maybe by Cobb's time it would have been a non-issue. But Anson's attitude was not so unusual in his day, nor was Cobb's. All water under the bridge. Baseball Bugs 08:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons

Hi, cool Mongolian food pictured you made. But... what will it take to convince you to upload your new images to the Wikipedia Commons right away? It's exactly the same procedure, only on a different site, so the amount of work will remain exactly the same (which compares favourably to the extra work involved when someone else has to transfer them there). --Latebird 23:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Because I've never done it before and when I followed that link to the Commons you gave me it confused the crap out of me. I am not particularly heavy on computer knowledge. Vidor 17:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Well then, go directly to Commons:, or follow any of the "Wikimedia Commons has media related to:" links in an article here to find an appropriate category there. Once there, just do the same thing as you did here up to now. There's a first time for everything, and I promise it won't hurt... ;) --Latebird 18:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Larsen

I added most of the deleted text, intact, into the 1956 World Series article. You're right, it doesn't really need so much info in both places. Baseball Bugs 23:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Super. DCGeist will probably pounce, though, as he did the last time I went through and cleaned up that article. Vidor 04:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
DCGeist (the ghost of Washington?) appears to be a perfect-game maven, and I'm sure a reasonable compromise can be achieved. :) Baseball Bugs 10:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anna Anderson

I notice that you keep removing the phrase "by most accounts" from the sentence about the killings of the Imperial family. There is no proof that Anastasia died on July 17, 1918 because two bodies are missing and there have been eye witness reports of her survival, as noted in the very next paragraph. She certainly COULD have died that night and the testimony to the contrary might be lies or wishful thinking, but there is no positive proof either way. The phrase "by most accounts" is the most accurate statement. "Anastasia was murdered" is not accurate because there isn't proof. I've switched that back and hope you won't change it. --Bookworm857158367 13:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anna Anderson

I have all the books too and I've read Yurovsky's statement. Yes, he said Anastasia died. There are also other statements to the effect that Anastasia survived. We don't know which is correct. Hence the phrase "by most accounts." --Bookworm857158367 14:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:TenSleepWYchurch.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:TenSleepWYchurch.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. 00:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cardinals

When I went to do some additional work on the 1899 Cleveland situation, I then realized what happened: The clubs basically traded places in the standings. But the Brooklyn club did somewhat the same thing with the Baltimore club, which put the Dodgers into first place and the Cardinals ended up where the Spiders had been the previous year, in fifth. So it was a "significant" improvement for the not-quite-Cardinals in wins and losses, and presumably in paid attendance, but presumably far short of where they had hoped to be (based on their supposed nickname that year, the "Perfectos") which is why I called it "moderate" improvement originally. In terms of pure numbers, it was more than "moderate" for sure. But if they had left Cleveland alone, maybe the Cardinals would have been contracted instead, and the Browns might still be in St. Louis as the only game in town. d:) Baseball Bugs 20:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your behavior on Talk:Shoeless Joe Jackson

If you have a problem with my editing that you would like to raise, either by contacting me, or at ANI or some other place, that's fine. If not, I expect the snide comments and accusations to stop. Not only are they attacks on my character, but they are, no matter what, completely inappropriate on article talk pages. Let me also remind you that you are in violation of WP:BAN "it is inappropriate to bait banned users or take advantage of their ban to mock them." I should also point out that in this case, you're mocking him for something he not only didn't do, but something he was completely and totally unconnected to. I made a suggestion, that was quickly shot down. Mocking me and accusing me of something that isn't true is not ok, and mocking Tecmo for my suggestion is beyong low. Miss Mondegreen talk  09:14, July 29 2007 (UTC)

Expect what you like, but I will say what I please. Your protest would carry more weight if you had not directly admitted to acting on behalf of a banned user, which is certainly a more explicit violation of rules than anything you have accused me of. Vidor 16:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI

Just notifying you. Miss Mondegreen talk  14:03, July 30 2007 (UTC)

Whatever. You are by yourself on that discussion page. You have explicitly admitted to acting on behalf of a banned user. Do what you like. Vidor 14:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Really, where? Miss Mondegreen talk  09:40, July 31 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rebecca Mark

Hi Vidor, I've just made some changes to the Rebecca Mark page. There's a lot of stuff about Azurix being listed on the NYSE but the sources I have say it was owned by one of Fastow's SPEs, Atlantic Water Trust. I just found something about it being listed but I don't know what the free float was. I think it likely the firm was controlled by Enron, everything else was... Chat back here I'll watch the page. Cheers --Dilaudid 00:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Checked this out the free float was only 33% - Enron owned 67% of the stock, half indirectly through Marlin (one of Fastow's SPEs). This is from 2000 so they obviously held control til the end. [1] --Dilaudid 01:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Violation of 3-revert rule:

You have violated the three-revert rule on Perfect game. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. Four reverts in under 19 hours: [2], [3], [4], [5].—DCGeist 20:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

As you seem entirely unrepentant about your violation of the rule, I've reported you to the appropriate administrators' noticeboard. I'll be happy to remove the report if you revert your violation.—DCGeist 21:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
You really are a terrible writer. Vidor 22:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I know! I've essentially written only six Featured Articles: B movie, Film Booking Offices of America, Kinetoscope, Mutual Broadcasting System, Leo Ornstein, and sound film. And I've done extensive writing and rewriting on only three others: heavy metal music, Panavision, and punk rock. I lie awake nights haunted by the thought of how much I could contribute if I was even a halfway decent writer.
3RR report withdrawn per your self-revert.—DCGeist 23:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Are they all as wordy as your perfect game article? Will you ever tell us how the coin flip in John Ward's game affected whether he was pitching in front of a home or away crowd? Will we ever find out what David Wells getting traded has to do with his perfect game? Inquiring minds want to know. And the "first-year player". That one's awesome. I wait for the day that Major League Baseball gives away separate awards for "Rookie of the Year" and "First-Year Player of the Year". Vidor 23:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
(1) Yup.
(2) To reiterate and explain still further: The coin flip meant that he pitched in the bottom rather than the top of each inning. There is a potential effect on strategy and thus performance. There is also a potential for misunderstanding by present-day readers. Someone scanning the boxscore could easily conclude that Ward was pitching away from home. The inclusion of the brief data point eliminates much of the possibility for confusion about the location and actual course of the game. As User:ww suggests, this sort of datum also educates the reader in one way the game and its basic rules have changed over the years.
(3) Ah...the article is not just about what given information "x" reveals about any given perfect game. It's also about what perfect games reveal about the rest of baseball. In this case, the fact that two of the three most recent perfect game pitchers were soon traded evidences that even such a remarkable achievement does nothing to secure a player's place with a team in contemporary MLB culture.—DCGeist 00:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone scanning the boxscore could easily conclude that Ward was pitching away from home. Except for the part in the table that says where the game was played. the article is not just about what given information "x" reveals about any given perfect game.--Precisely the problem that I have tried so very hard to fix. It's not an article about "contemporary MLB culture". It's an article about perfect games. Vidor 02:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Perfect game

That IP address is back, with typical inflammatory remarks, obvious trolling behavior seeking a reaction. I recommend that we make no further direct response to that user, as it only feeds into his game. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right, really, but it's way too much fun to antagonize him. I couldn't resist. Vidor 16:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
That's up to you. If I had said something to him, it would have been along the lines of what you said, as in, "If you have such disdain for wikipedia, why are you still here?" Well, obviously, he's still here because he's a troll. My take on this in general is that you and DCGeist are engaged in a content dispute, whereas that IP address is just trying to cause trouble. Have fun. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gorkhi-Terelj National Park

I made that edit removing "Many Westerners were introduced to Gorkhi-Terelj National Park when" because Westerners aren't the only people who watch "The Amazing Race" (e.g. foreigners in the U.S., people overseas watching it dubbed or with subtitles, etc., and it might subtly and wrongly imply that non-Western foreigners in fact had heard of the place. A formulation like, "one of the first times the park had been featured in a foreign television show" might work better, but is probably unverifiable, so I thought a simple statement of the fact that it had been featured in the TV show would be best, and the readers could draw their own conclusions based on those facts. Your thoughts? cab 00:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I guess. I suspect that the North American audience makes up the overwhelming majority of TAR viewers, but it's not important. Change it back if you like. Vidor 06:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Violation of policy on biographies of living persons

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Vidor, I have used a Level 3 warning because of the following 3 diffs (talk pages are explicitly included within the policy): [6], [7] (see [8]), and [9] (see [10]). John J. Bulten 01:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately, that's a lie, as the material I provided was referenced. Vidor 03:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible vulnerability

Hi, I sympathise your attempts to use the word "ger" in article Architecture of Mongolia although I don't insist on that, as I don't think it's vitally important which of the 2 words is used.
However, I am afraid that your examples relating to the Nazi period, may be hurting for members from certain coutnries. You used such an example once before, which could pass as occasional. But repeated occurance maybe thought as systematic. This worry would be settled down if you delete the last sentence in the parentheses in your last comment in the Talk page of that article. Thank you for understanding. Gantuya eng (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I think latebird once mentioned that he is not a German citizen, so he probably doesn't care. Yaan 16:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
The example in question was meant to demonstrate the absurdity of demanding common English words in every instance; nothing less and nothing more. I also cited "Tsar" as another foreign-language word with the English equivalent "king" (or, as was pointed out in the article, the closer equivalent "Caesar"). Vidor 16:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Problem was not with translating Mongolian words into English with native English words (ger = tent or house), but using loan word (Yurt) with the same sense just present in English.Bogomolov.PL 16:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Ger is neither tent nor house. The Mongolian for tent is maihan and for house is baishin. It's ui (үй) in Kazakh, which refers to ger-yurt, home and house. Yurt (ger) and tent are completely different things. Gantuya eng 16:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
It was an example of impossibility to define extraneous conception using native English words. So loan word is necessary, but English has this word yet - yurt. Is it reasonable add to the English vocabulary ui, ger etc. with the same sense as yurt? Bogomolov.PL 16:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Buuz

Buuz is known in Buryatia as poz (different spelling of the same word, these nations are relative), Manti is turkic name of buuz, and special article is present in WP. Also Mandu (dumpling) is present in Korean cuisine. So almost all Asia (from Tukey to Korea) knows buuz as manti-mandu. May bu you will fill a need add link to your buuz in the related manti-mandu articles. Bogomolov.PL 09:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

  • You could do that yourself if you like, as you know more about it than me. Vidor 16:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 St. Louis Cardinals season

Referring to this edit, I don't see anything wrong with a spring training schedule.   jj137 ♠ 00:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I do, and here it is: they're exhibitions. They don't count in the standings, they don't count in the statistics, they involve a great deal of players who will not appear for the regular St. Louis Cardinals in 2008, and they clutter up an article that already stands to be filled with a lot of stuff when you consider the regular season game log and all the regular season statistics. If you look at the talk page for the '08 season project, you will see that I am not alone in this opinion. If you look at other teams' season pages, you will see that they do not have spring training game logs. Vidor (talk) 20:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

These games may not count in the standings, but they do provide legitimate information, and there is no problem in showing these games, until at least the regular season starts. They don't mention any "players" (or ST standings) as your rant about them mentions. I (probably) would have no problem with its removal AFTER the regular season starts, if it truly upsets you that much to see those 32 games listed.

If you really have a problem with it (until Mar. 31), I have a simple solution for you: ignore the page until April 1. How does that sound? Katydidit (talk) 07:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

they do provide legitimate information. Not really. ignore the page until April 1. No. But, if it will pacify you, I will agree to leave the spring training log in the article until the regular season starts. Afterwards I will delete it. Vidor (talk) 07:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine with me. I was considering removing it myself after the regular season starts, anyway. I've noticed you have been warned at least twice on your reverts and violations of policy rules. Maybe you should take the hint you are on slippery ground with those repeated warnings on your attempts to disobey the rules. Better wise up, and fast or you might get blocked from further edits. Katydidit (talk) 07:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, now I won't be nice anymore. You are ignorant, and have no idea what you are talking about. I deleted your pointless, stupid addition of exhibition games to the page because it is pointless and stupid. Making edits is not "disobeying the rules". I am not required to ask your permission. I am on no slippery ground. I bet you didn't bother to check any of the other articles, did you? I bet you never looked at the format, did you? I bet you never noticed that the other 29 season articles don't have spring training logs, did you? I bet you never noticed that the 2006 and 2007 Cardinal season articles don't have spring training logs, did you?
I am, as I said above, willing to leave the spring training log in there until the actual season starts. It is pointless, and stupid, but I'll leave it. I will thank you in return not to insult or threaten me anymore. If you do, I'll just go ahead and delete the spring training log now, in accordance with the standard format for baseball season articles. Vidor (talk) 08:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
See WP:WAX. It is not the exact same thing but it is pretty much what you two are arguing about. You can't get rid of the spring training game log simply because the other 29 don't have it. It's called expanding the article. Plus, if you think they take up too much space, then just make them collapsible. It's not that hard.   jj137 ♠ 22:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Plus, I don't have a problem with it being removed when the regular season starts.   jj137 ♠ 22:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Plus, if you think they take up too much space, then just make them collapsible. It's not that hard.--Or, I could just delete them. I think I am on pretty solid ground, given that these season articles have been going for two or three years now and none of them have had a spring training log. If this "katydidit" person will stop making threats, then I will cooperate with her [him] by leaving the spring training log up until the regular season starts. I will not update it, because it's a waste of time, but I won't delete it. I would appreciate in turn not to be threatened and for the snide editing comments to cease. Vidor (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I won't insult your intelligence or threaten you, since the lack of the former is already apparent to everyone and the latter isn't appropriate. I'll just keep re-adding the ST games no matter how many times you delete them. BTW, you lied when you promised you would leave them up until Opening Day. ["...but I won't delete it."] Your credibility is now trash for all to see. Katydidit (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Boy, you must have thought real hard to come up with all that. Vidor (talk) 02:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Just commenting, the season articles have not been going for two or three years now, in fact, we didn't start creating many of them until less than a year ago.   jj137 ♠ 21:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Additionally, things don't always have to stay the same. There's always room for change.   jj137 ♠ 21:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
One more thing. If you want a consensus on this, just take it to to WT:MLB (but seriously, keep your initial post NPOV).   jj137 ♠ 21:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Game logs

There is a discussion at WT:MLB concerning how to treat the game logs for the 2008 season articles. Check it out, and comment as appropriate. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 22:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shortened Cardinals history

I wanted to specifically invite you to look over this User:Timpcrk87/sandbox/Cardinals before I posted it in the main article, since you have recently done a great deal of editing work on the Cardinals article. Discussion has been here. Timpcrk87 (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Running Man Barnstar
Your sports editing is top-notch. I also like the fact that your talk page is a great read, and you seem to be a sh*t disturber. (That's a compliment...) Keep up the good work! Roscoestl (talk) 03:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

for all the work on the Garfield assassination page. Your doing a great job!!!Remember (talk) 02:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Vidor (talk) 04:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Street-talk

"Finally, 33 years after being fired by the band, Best cashed in". Is this encyclopedic?--andreasegde (talk) 23:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Have a nice day. Vidor (talk) 00:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

No it's not. Have a nice day yourself, BTW.--andreasegde (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is, and just because you left this message, I'm going to go back and change it. Bye! Vidor (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)