Template talk:Los Angeles Dodgers roster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Los Angeles Dodgers roster is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion. |
| NA | This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale. |
| NA | This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale. |
[edit] Numbers
YOU HAVE 2 GUYS WITH #49 and #6Dshibshm (talk) 20:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Stop reverting. You got Meloan and Young with same, and Manager and Abreu too20:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)20:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Dshibshm (talk) 20:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- WE do not get to choose who gets the uniform numbers. How do you know which gets which? The official site is the source! Spanneraol (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Because Young's and Torre's have been on here for a long time, and the Astros are not completed on the source, but are complete here.20:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)20:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshibshm (talk • contribs)
You can go beyond the mlb.com rosters when there is a good reason for it (and legit proof). Torre is #6 because of his news conference jersey. MLB.com rosters aren't perfect - and we can fix them here IF AND ONLY IF there is good reasonJustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok on Torre but there is no evidence that meloan is going to be 48 as he keeps putting. Spanneraol (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Then leave his blank. Obviously, 49 is takenDshibshm (talk) 20:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe Young is changing his number? He could do that easily as a second year player.. you cant just pick some random number for meloan. Spanneraol (talk) 20:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Then leave one blankDshibshm (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Leave both until you know for sure one can't be that # anymore. In the case of Abreu - we know 100% he's not #6 anymore. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Until they change the # on the site or someone spots one of these guys at spring training wearing a different # they should both be listed as 49. Spanneraol (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- That makes no sense!Dshibshm (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Until they change the # on the site or someone spots one of these guys at spring training wearing a different # they should both be listed as 49. Spanneraol (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Leave both until you know for sure one can't be that # anymore. In the case of Abreu - we know 100% he's not #6 anymore. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
In the past whenever the listed someone with 2 numbers, the person who recently took it kept that number and the person who originally had the number changed it. Always. MLB.com is just slow. Just look at Tony Abreu. --Street20 (talk) 06:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Here's the problem... you don't know that for sure... it could just be a typo for the "2nd person"... we don't have any way of knowing for sure. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 06:50, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Well we obviously can't list both of them with #49. So we blank one or we blank both. --Street20 (talk) 06:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- See they fixed the roster on mlb.com. Young remains 49, meloan is still 63 like he was last season. Thats why it was premature to change everything yesterday. Better to wait and get it right than jump the gun and have edit wars like we did yesterday. 14:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
