Talk:The Baseball Network

Baseball Mid‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Postseason Television Schedule

1995 Tue 10/10 10/11 10/12 10/13 10/14 10/15 10/16 10/17 10/18

                                 -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----

ALCS ** Sea v Cle 2-3-2 ( 8:00 8:00 x 8:00 7:00 7:00 x 8:00 ) 8:00

NLCS ** Cin v Atl 2-3-2 ( 8:00 8:00 x 8:00 7:00 ) 7:00 x 8:00 8:00

(** ABC for G1-G2 and G7; NBC for G3-G6)

1995 Sat 10/21 10/22 10/23 10/24 10/25 10/26 10/27 10/28 10/29

                                 -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----

WS * Atl v Cle 2-3-2 ( 7:00 7:00 x 8:00 8:00 8:00 x 7:00 ) 7:00

(* ABC for G1/G4/G5; NBC for G2/G3/G6/G7) User:TMC1982 Actually ABC aired the first six nights, and NBC aired the second six. ABC did four Saturdays and two Mondays. NBC aired the last six Fridays of the regular season.Politician818 23:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want the way the page is formatted to be radically altered. For example, I want the quotes to be in italic so that they're easier to seperate from the rest of the paragraphs. To me it doesn't make things look neater, it just makes it look more rough around the edges.TMC1982 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit war

I noticed an edit war brewing, so I decided to end it while it was still young. I would appreciate if One and TMC1982 each explained their view of what the situation is. —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 06:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per precedent in other articles pertaining to television networks, we don't italicize every mention of the title (in this case, The Baseball Network) after the initial bolding. However, TMC1982 has kept reverting precedent, stating that he 'wants it' to be a certain way, and then going on to state (as he did a long while ago on my talk page) that he feels that he knows more about The Baseball Network than anyone else on Wikipedia. That, to me, is claiming ownership of an article. One 06:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Baseball Network was technically, an umbrella title for ABC and NBC's 1994-1995 Major League Baseball coverage. It wasn't a full-fledged, 24 hour television network a la ESPN. What exactly is your rationale, One for removing the itlaics!? At least I've given an explaination. My point is that The Baseball Network was more or less, a television program within itself. Why don't you think of something more original as a response than to repeatedly take my words out of context!? All you've done in response is beat me over the head with me wanting to "Own" the Baseball Network article. You haven't even explained why you feel it should be formatted a particular way. TMC1982 11:45 p.m., 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll quote myself: "Per precedent in other articles pertaining to television networks, we don't italicize every mention of the title (in this case, The Baseball Network) after the initial bolding." It doesn't matter if it wasn't a twenty-four hour network. It doesn't matter what it technically was. It matters that it was a network, and read what I've already written. Why am I beating you over the head with "you don't own the article?" Because that's the rationale you kept giving. One 06:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mind specifying which guideline says that articles do not italicize after the first mentioning? —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 06:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles)#Italics does not state that italics should be used for television networks. As far as I know, this was a television network. —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 07:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is getting absolutely absured and boarderline pointless with what One is doing. I get rid of the italics and simply use lowercasing for "The" in "The Baseball Network". Yet, he still has to revert to whatever format fits his vision. At the end of the day, there has to be some sort of compromise arrangment. And you wander why an editing block is currently on this particular article! TMC1982 10:02 p.m., 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Since One hasn't or won't respond to my latest message, then I feel rather justified to revert back to my most recent edit. TMC1982 9:58 p.m., 5 July 2007 (UTC)

As I reported below, the sources oscillate on capitalization of "the" -- even within the same article! So technically, neither is correct, and the style guide doesn't seem to have any rules in regards to the capitalization of "the". That's why I suggest the two of you agree whether you want "the" or "The" and stick to it. MessedRocker (talk) 06:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, there wasn't any rhyme or reason behind my last revisial getting reverted by One. To me, it just seems like he revised it purely to spite me (not for the benefit of Wikipedia). I would consider that to be boarderline abuse. It's not right to simply change the look of an article without any rationale beyond one particular person daring to edit it. TMC1982 7:54 p.m., 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Please consider redacting that comment -- it does not help your case. User:One believes (or believed) that the way he addressed it is best. After research I concluded that both ways are acceptable, and so I want the two of you to settle on a version once and for all. MessedRocker (talk) 04:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My stance on this is the same as MessedRocker's: "Based on three articles: [1] [2] [3], there seems to be alternation between "the Baseball Network" (with lowercase the) and "The Baseball Network" (with capital The). I suppose neither is official; furthermore, the Manual of Style is of no help. I guess we're left to picking a capitalization method and not only sticking to it but using it consistently throughout the article." Now, TMC, will you state how there was 'no rhyme or reason', please? One 04:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since I've been asked by MessedRocker to pick a stance on capitalization or else my point is moot, here it is: I favor using 'The'. One 15:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this point in time, I don't really care about capitalization in the "The" in "The Baseball Network." What really bothers me, is that I added additional information about the venture (for example, Mel Allen's comments via the Curt Smith penned biography The Voice) only to have it completely revised. TMC1982 1:34 p.m., 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1995 World Series Trophy Presentation.JPG

Image:1995 World Series Trophy Presentation.JPG 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Chipper Jones 1995 World Series Introduction.JPG

Image:Chipper Jones 1995 World Series Introduction.JPG 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Okay, I am not going to unlock the article until this dispute of yours comes to a settlement and a conclusion. (messedrocker • talk) 10:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

Based on three articles: [1] [2] [3], there seems to be alternation between "the Baseball Network" (with lowercase the) and "The Baseball Network" (with capital The). I suppose neither is official; furthermore, the Manual of Style is of no help. I guess we're left to picking a capitalization method and not only sticking to it but using it consistently throughout the article. (messedrocker • talk) 06:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Manny Ramirez at-bat 1995 World Series.JPG

Image:Manny Ramirez at-bat 1995 World Series.JPG 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Tony Gwynn 1994 MLB All-Star Game The Baseball Network.JPG

Image:Tony Gwynn 1994 MLB All-Star Game The Baseball Network.JPG 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meditation Cabal

Okay, I've signed on as the mediator. What I'd like you guys to do is simple. First, whoever wants it not capialized, why don't you want it capitalized? The user who does want it capitalized, why do you want it capitalized? We'll go from there. Wizardman 01:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We'll, I initially wanted things listed as The Baseball Network. I assumed that it was purely an umbrella title (as opposed to a full-fledged network) for ABC and NBC's 1994-1995 Major League Baseball television coverage. Then, about a month or two ago, I got into this pissing match (to use a better term) with One. Without giving me much of an upfront explaination, he decided that the article would be better without all the itallics. I got really annoyed, with this constant meddling over an article that I built from scrap. One seemingly (in my point-of-view) liked to use my defensive words out of context to make his point. It got to a point where I relented, and decided that the article would be better off without the itallics. But another problem arised, when One reversed my further edits because he didn't appreciate me not capitalizing The in The Baseball Network. My logic is that since the word The is one of the most commonly used words in the English language (just like A and An), it made sense to not captalize it outside of the start of a sentence. TMC1982 4:54 p.m., 15 July 2007 (2007)

At this point in time, I don't really care about capitalization in the "The" in "The Baseball Network." What really bothers me, is that I added additional information about the venture (for example, Mel Allen's comments via the Curt Smith penned biography The Voice) only to have it completely revised. TMC1982 10:56 p.m., 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if the capitalization's no big deal to you, then that solves part of the case. As for the revisions, could you show me some diffs? Also, You may want to point out One to this discussion, he' probably completely unaware of it. Wizardman 15:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization issue

If the sources seem to be [[split, then I just want to say that a Google search turns up more capitalized Thes than non-capitalized, when referring to this network. That is my preference also. Ab e g92contribs 20:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest the usage of acronyms (i.e. TBN) for subsequent usages of The Baseball Network. TMC1982 6:12 p.m., 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Acronyms might not be a bad idea. Plus, from the looks of it, it seems like the sources that have the in lowercase are more likely to be blogs and less reliable sources. Wizardman 22:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, based on my findings I'll say that capitalization is probably better, with the use of acronyms being acceptable ass well. I'm gonna close this case if there are no objections. Wizardman 15:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then please explain why it's been eight days later, and this article is still locked!? TMC1982 8:50 p.m., 13 August 2007 (UTC)