Talk:Baltimore Blast (current)

Fair use rationale for Image:Blast.gif

Image:Blast.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BaltimoreSpirit95.gif

Image:BaltimoreSpirit95.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Blast.gif

Image:Blast.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blast were founded in 1978

Hold up, the Blast were founded in 1978 as the Houston Summit. In 1980 they moved to Baltimore and became the Baltimore Blast. The MISL disbanded before 1992. That same year Bill Stealey brought them back as the Spirit. Different name, same team. They never folded, the MISL did. It's illogical to call them two different teams only since the league disbanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.63.120 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. There was a Blast team that was founded in 1978 as the Houston Summit, but that team ceased operation in July 1992 when the original MISL folded. The current team was an expansion (meaning 'newly created') team for the NPSL. Just because the Spirit had many (but not all) of the same players and coaches as the Blast does not make them the same team. All the old NPSL media guides list the franchise as beginning in 1992. Also if you go to the Blast website and check out the team's all-time stats, the stats begin in 1992. The city of Baltimore has a great indoor soccer history, but it is split over two different teams. KitHutch (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but the Spirit were the same team owned by Bill Stealey. Ok, there was a short period of time after which the MISL disbanded that the Blast weren't going anywhere but Bill Stealey bought them out after a month or so and put them in the NPSL. That's why they were called an expansion team and Stealey renamed them the Spirit. Other than the short time they were "gone" and the fact they changed names, they were in fact the same team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.63.120 (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, when you leave a comment, please sign it. Just type "~" four times. Yes, Stealey owned the Spirit after the original Blast folded. But he was not involved in the ownership of the original Blast. The Spirit were a new business organization that was started when the MISL and the original Blast folded. The Spirit did sign some of the players and coaches from the Blast, who were technically free agents since the Blast had folded. If Stealey had owned the MISL team, then he would have had the rights to the name and logo. He did not. It was not until the old Blast owner Ed Hale bough the team in 1998 that they got the rights to use the name and logo but they are still different organizations. The Cleveland Crunch and Wichita Wings were both the same franchises that joined the NPSL when the MISL folded because they had the same ownership groups and continued to operate. The same thing happened to the San Diego Sockers and Dallas Sidekicks when they joined the CISL. You still haven't answered me about why the all-time stats on the Blast website only go to 1992 if the team was founded in 1978? KitHutch (talk) 01:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 13:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

– The current team gets noticeably more traffic than the past one (1178-400 last month), so let's privilege the current team, which is a more likely search term anyway. Articles like Montreal Impact suggest that current teams should have precedence. I would actually favor deleting the disambiguation page, since hatnotes on each article can do the same work, but this is fine too. Alternatively, Baltimore Blast (1992) would be an improvement, conforming to the other disambiguated team names in Category:National Indoor Soccer League teams. BDD (talk) 17:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.