Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball

WikiProject Baseball
Main project page + talk Special projects talk Resource Library talk Article Improvement Drive talk Requested articles and todo talk  → Articles needing attention talk  → Cleanup listing talk  → Nominations for deletion talk  → Article alerts talk Article assessment (Log) talk  → Featured articles (62) talk  → Featured lists (211) talk  → Good articles (557) talk Outreach talk  → Newsletter talk Portal talk Notability guidelines talk Style advice talk  → Naming conventions talk  → Player style advice talk  → Season article format talk Handling transactions talk Popular pages talk Active editors
Project organization Participants talk Large userbox talk Project userbox talk Project banner talk Project category talk
Major League Baseball Team specific Atlanta Braves talk Boston Red Sox talk Chicago Cubs talk Cincinnati Reds talk Los Angeles Angels talk Los Angeles Dodgers talk Minnesota Twins talk New York Mets talk New York Yankees talk Philadelphia Phillies talk San Diego Padres talk Seattle Mariners talk St. Louis Cardinals talk
General Subprojects Players talk College baseball talk Leagues and teams talk Little League talk Old-time Base Ball talk Negro league baseball talk Hall of Fame talk Umpires talk
Geographical Australia talk Japan talk Korea talk Taiwan talk
view · edit · changes

Good article reassessment for Forbes Field

Forbes Field has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Move request for Triple play

An editor has raised a move request for the article Triple play, which may be of interest to this community. The move discussion is located here. Dmoore5556 (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 2017 World Series

2017 World Series has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Team colors infographic bg is urgentlly broken, someone can help?

I had posted in the infobox talk page but since it is a VERY urgent matter (as it affects most non-mlb team pages) i feel the need to post it here and communicate to most people possible about this issue

From what i had discoveried, someone unknown few years ago had broken the team color bg sintax of teams infobox, making the config option invisible to the infobox options page and source code, thus making almost impossible to update

I had discoveried it only now beacuse i need to update the Hangwa Eagles to their new orange and black/navy color tones        , first i assumed that the color tab in infographic would auto config the rest, but after noticed it wasnt then i looked everywhere in the page and info box, top-to-down source, nothing had showed, all i had found was a unawnsered post about the issue in 2016 talk about it

Does someone that knows work with infoboxes can fix it ASP? Meganinja202 (talk) 21:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

baseballbiography.com

What is the opinion of the above website? It is linked to 1,023 baseball pages. It doesn't appear to add any unique info, it doesn't reference any of their info to anything, it doesn't appear to have any significance to any reputable organization, it appears to be nothing more than an extension of a blog. On digging a bit deeper, I find it may have originally been baseballlibrary.com, which has 2,215 dead links in articles. I am of the mind that both of these links should be removed en mass by a bot. What are some other opinions? Rgrds. --BX (talk) 01:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Given what I currently know, I support mass removal. If any editor can provide more insight/context and believes it should be retained... please add comment. Dmoore5556 (talk) 02:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@BX and Dmoore5556: From searching the archives, it looks like this has been discussed before. It's probably worth reviewing those discussions. Left guide (talk) 04:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

From what I just saw, prior discussions did not involve a lot of editors, but comments were negative about the site, except for one in 2010. Dmoore5556 (talk) 04:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)