User talk:Satchel

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 07:03, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Bullet Rogan nominated as a "Good article"

I've nominated the article Bullet Rogan, to which you were a major contributor, for consideration as a Good article. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. BRMo (talk) 07:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keystones

Hello, Satchel! I have two comments. First, I left a question for you at Talk:Pittsburgh Keystones (baseball)#Associate team in 1921. I am curious about seamheads.com as I don't really know too much about it yet (regarding sourcing).

My second comment has nothing to do with Negro league baseball, it is a Wikipedia comment -- I just wanted to make you aware of Wikipedia:SELFCITING. I am not implying anything, I just wanted to make sure you were aware of it (I know you've been on WP forever, but I didn't know if you've read every stinkin' policy!).

I'll watch the article talk page for a response on my first comment, and I'll also watch your talk page in case you have a question on the second comment. Thanks for your time, Rgrds. (Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) --64.85.214.2 (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm confident my edits conform to Wikipedia policies, particularly the one you mention. If you disagree or think you've got better citations, feel free to speak up or make your own edits.Satchel (talk) 15:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ILBCAC / ILIP

Hello, Satchel! I'm the same IP as in the above section. I was wondering if you could solve something for me. The ILBCAC is mentioned in a source used for the Philadelphia Giants, Brooklyn Royal Giants, Cuban X-Giants and Nat Strong articles [1]. Its timeline seems to overlap with the Ilip. Do you know if these two leagues are the same league? I can't find anything else about the ILBCAC so I thought it may have been an alternate name. Rgrds. --64.85.216.231 (talk) 05:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the International League of Independent Professional Base Ball Clubs was an organization of black, Cuban, and white independent teams in the Philadelphia area in 1906. In 1907 the white teams left, and it became the National Association of Colored Professional Clubs of the United States and Cuba. Sol White, in his chapter on the 1907 season, calls it the International League of Colored Base Ball Teams, though he may just have been remembering the former (1906) name of the league.Satchel--Satchel (talk) 02:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying, I hope you're still following Wikipedia at the moment. I'm still a bit confused, so ILIP & ILBAC were the same league? And, either way, you're saying that league survived for additional seasons, so what ever became of that league? I've not read anything on it and this is the first I'm hearing of it. I'd like to update the ILIP article with this info.

(Also, I used Seamheads.com as a reason for a proposal, so please drop by Talk:Cuban Stars (West)#Merge All Cubans into CSW article if you have an opinion there.) Rgrds. --64.85.216.47 (talk) 14:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the source cited above[2] is actually about the National Association of Colored Baseball Clubs of the United States and Cuba, and doesn't mention any International League or ILBCAC. Simply put, there was no ILBCAC. I've just written a lengthy post on my blog (goo.gl/Xj4Nrr) about the two leagues that did exist: the International League of Independent Professional Base Ball Clubs (1906), which was not a "colored" league (as it included two white teams), and the National Association (1907-1909), which was. Note that when I wrote the comment above I was assuming the National Association was a continuation of the International League; further research has led me to believe that they were almost certainly two distinct organizations. The National Association deserves its own article. And IMO the International League article should probably not be titled "ILIP" (or worse "Ilip")--that acronym was never used in 1906.--Satchel (talk) 03:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, the National Association championship was occasionally referred to informally as "International," which may have created some of the confusion (Sol White, as noted above; also Nat Strong referred to the "International Colored Championship" once in 1909). But there's no doubt that the National Association was the body organizing the schedule and awarding the pennant.--Satchel (talk) 16:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Intriguing blog post, thanks very much for that. I need to read over it a few more times to make sure I have my timelines of the teams straight. Thanks again. Rgrds. (Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) --64.85.214.177 (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I spoke too soon on there being "no ILBCAC." The National Association was also referred to as the International League of Colored Baseball Clubs of America and Cuba in 1909, at least in the pages of the New York Age. The National Association name was also used that year, so it's hard to say which was the actual name of the organization. I do think it was a single organization, though (and that it was NOT the same as the International League of Independent Professional Base Ball Clubs of 1906.--Satchel (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oy! I had already changed the occurrences of ILBCAC to the National Association. Fortunately I did link all of the changes, and the link is still a redlink (National Association of Colored Baseball Clubs of the United States and Cuba), so once it is created it can contain both of the names (ILBCAC can then redirect to the National Association or, if further research shows the other name is predominant, the redirect can be swapped with the article name). Rgrds. --64.85.216.222 (talk) 11:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cuban Giants

Alright, the above source [3] and your blog list the Cuban Giants in the National Association in 1907, but the Cuban Giants I know of ceased operations in 1899. What team is this referring to? Rgrds. --64.85.216.189 (talk) 14:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. J. M. Bright ran the Cuban Giants from 1887 until his death in 1913, and then it was run for a year or two by one of his sons. I've never heard of them ceasing operations in 1899--they played a full schedule in both 1899 and 1900, as far as I know.--Satchel (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The WP article doesn't have any implications the team lasted into the 1900s (it actually states the duration of the team was "1885-1899"), and I don't have any good refs for pre-1920 teams myself, so I thought otherwise. I've never liked that particular WP article anyway -- it reads too much like an essay from a SABR research journal rather than an encyclopedic article. Rgrds. --64.85.216.222 (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

X-Giants

One more thing, the "'Slick' and Strong Organize League" article lists the X-Giants as a member of the National Association, but the later standings don't include the X-Giants at all. I believe the X-Giants ceased to exist after the '07 season, correct? So what became of their '07 NA season? Rgrds. --64.85.216.222 (talk) 12:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed this one. The Cuban X-Giants were involved in the organization of the National Association in late 1906, but they ceased to exist before the 1907 season started. Their last games were actually played in Cuba in fall 1906.--Satchel (talk) 01:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Satchel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Satchel. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Satchel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Richmond (IN) Giants

Hello, Satchel! I'm the 64.85 IP from all of the above posts from, wow, a long time ago. Anyway, I am stumped on another team and would like your input. I know you don't edit very often, so I've watchlisted this page. An editor has created an article on the Richmond (IN) Giants from 1918-1919, split from the ABCs. The online sites all recognize a 1922 edition of the team, but not 1918-1919. I see no sources listing Oscar Charleston, Connie Day or Bill Hamilton on their roster. My gut says this was a semi-pro team that had some stars passing thru, which may or may not have played a real Negro team on occasion. If you have a chance, can you share what info you have on this team? Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 04:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe they're just a remnant of the busted up Indianapolis ABCs. I glossed over that connection. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 05:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much personally about this team. There's a recent book on it, "Black Baseball in the Hoosier Heartland: Unearthing the Negro Leagues Baseball History of Richmond, Indiana," by Alex Painter, and I suspect that's the origin of the article. The 1918 Richmond Giants were evidently really the relocated Jewell's ABCs of Indianapolis (a different team from the more famous ABCs run by C. I. Taylor). The 1922 Richmond Giants that appear in the Seamheads DB were from Richmond, Virginia, so they're totally unrelated. Satchel (talk) 18:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The author offered some newspaper articles as sources (which unfortunately I can't access online), but with your comment and some additional poking around on the 'net, I think the article is acceptable now. Thanks for your input, and good to see you around still. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 05:58, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Moore (baseball)

Hello, Satchel! In trying to save this article from deletion, I was wondering (hoping) that you may have a newspaper reference that we can add to the article? It appears that just because Mr. Moore only has listings on stats sites they want to disremember him. Hope you are well, Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 17:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Columbus Buckeyes (minor league)

The article Columbus Buckeyes (minor league) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

If this team is notable why has the article been tagged uncited for 15 years?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]