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 (61) talk  → Featured lists (211) talk  → Good articles (546) 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

Adding (or removing?) stats to League leaders sections in season pages

Currently, hitting and pitching leaders tables each have 6 stats each. I'm of the belief that OPS should be added to hitting leaders and less so adamant that WHIP be added to pitching leaders. Why OPS? It seems that most of the league at this point focuses more on OPS than AVG. Why WHIP? Though not as focused on compared to ERA, it portrays a pitchers effectiveness against batters and is typically on even smaller pitching stats tables (such as CBS Sports, which for pitching stats, shows Wins, ERA, Saves, Strikeouts, and WHIP). Plus, adding WHIP would keep both hitting and pitching leaders to show 7 stats each.

I know I read somewhere in the talk page someone had suggested reducing the stats listed. I personally disagree but I wanted to mention it.

Regarding an addition or removal, I'm willing to go through all 124 season pages to update them. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 17:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Creating pages for Milwaukee Braves, Kansas City Athletics, and Washington Senators (1961–1971)

In my sandbox, I have created pages for the Milwaukee Braves, Kansas City Athletics, and Washington Senators (1961–1971). I'd like to copy/paste the content to the redirect pages or move the sandbox page itself to proper articles (with admin support, as I cannot do that myself), but I wanted input from other WikiProject Baseball users before doing any sort of implementation. I've modeled these pages mostly after the Boston Braves article, but most mentioned below follow a similar format.

Mind you, there is heavy precedent for having separate pages for the same franchise but of different locations, such as:

• Baltimore Orioles with franchise pages Milwaukee Brewers (1894–1901) and St. Louis Browns
• Atlanta Braves with franchise page Boston Braves
• Oakland Athletics with franchise page Philadelphia Athletics
• San Francisco Giants with franchise page New York Giants (baseball)
• Los Angeles Dodgers with franchise page Brooklyn Dodgers
• Minnesota Twins with franchise page Washington Senators (1901–1960)
• Milwaukee Brewers with franchise page Seattle Pilots
• Washington Nationals with franchise page Montreal Expos

Some of these teams existed longer in previous locations (Braves, Giants, Dodgers, Expos) and some existed for only one season (Seattle Pilots).

These three pages would simply complete the set of prior locations of current MLB franchises. Much of the content is largely taken from existing articles (as are stated at the top of each of the three sandbox articles at the moment), but each have been expanded with Infoboxes, and "Legacy", "Notable [Team Name players]", "Uniforms", and "List of [Team Name] seasons" sections. Some areas of the articles have been expanded within the already existing-from-other-articles sections. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 16:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

For the Milwaukee Braves I believe the History of the Atlanta Braves article is the best place for covering the franchise history in Milwaukee, especially since the franchise wasn't in Milwaukee for very long. This probably opens up a can of worms but the Boston Braves article pretty much covers the exact same information that's already included in the Atlanta Braves article what's left could be put in the "History of..." article as well. Nemov (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I believe there already was an RFC held a few years ago, on how to handle relocated MLB franchises. GoodDay (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep, here's the RFC. Nemov (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

A 2022 request for comments discussion resulted in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports teams) § North American sports teams being modified to state that if there is sufficient content, keep an article at the old franchise name. Otherwise, the old name is redirected to either the appropriate section in the new franchise article or the "History of new franchise" article. So it's up to editorial judgement if these former franchises have enough content for an independent article. isaacl (talk) 17:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm definitely new to the discussion history regarding this topic, but my understanding from reading through the past discussions on this talk page, mainly Archive 41 from 2015 and Archive 47 from 2022 (in which the next section was to the RfC related to sports team names), I get the sense that the initial solution to this reoccurring question was to split each teams history in a previous location to its own (for example) "History of the Boston Braves" page, though in some cases, there weren't any splits (such as with the Milwaukee Braves, as the history was not long/detailed enough to warrant its own page).

Then, that decade-ish long consensus had the rug swept out from underneath when the RfC on naming conventions took all of these dedicated "History of [FORMER LOCATION TEAM NAME]" articles and removed the "History of", making it so the 9 of the 12 previous-locations-of-current-franchise pages (excluding the three team iterations that sparked this section) now all had separate articles, when before that wasn't the case. The "history of..." seemed to be a compromise between keeping all team history in the current franchise "History of..." pages and simply breaking off each previous-locations-of-current-franchise pages.

I'm coming into this only now (and just read the archives while typing this comment). I made these three sandbox pages because my thinking was "well if these 9 articles mentioned above can exist, why not the other 3? Especially considering a page like Seattle Pilots only covers one season".

Personally, I'm of the belief that while the franchises are technically the same, I'd argue simply being in different cities (especially of considerable distance as Boston>Milwaukee>Atlanta or Philadelphia>Kansas City>Oakland) is enough to warrant their own articles (again, see Seattle Pilots). For example, the Milwaukee Brewers and Philadelphia Phillies celebrate other franchises' histories, with the Milwaukee Braves Wall of Honor and Philadelphia Phillies Wall of Fame (which includes many Philadelphia Athletics players), respectively. There's a history of baseball in that location. Though of course, at the same time, these histories are celebrated by the Atlanta Braves and Oakland Athletics franchises, respectively. These two simultaneous views on how to look at these now-relocated teams, to me, warrants their own articles.

Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 18:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Based on the RFC, Milwaukee squarely falls into the "not enough history to justify an article" camp. The Atlanta Braves and History of the Atlanta Braves covers that period well. Nemov (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I think there should be enough history in thirteen seasons to have a separate article. If editors like Spesh531 are interested in developing more coverage of the Milwaukee Braves, then I think it's reasonable to have a standalone article. (If there is no interest at the moment in expanding coverage, then I'm less opinionated about spinning out the Milwaukee history.) isaacl (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I too fail to see how one season of the Seattle Pilots and eight seasons in the late 1800s of the early-era Milwaukee Brewers (1894–1901) are both worthy of articles, but thirteen seasons of the Milwaukee Braves, thirteen seasons of the Kansas City Athletics, and eleven seasons of the Washington Senators (1961–1971) somehow are not. If editors are eager and willing to work on developing articles for those three teams, I say go ahead and do it. After all, the history of those three franchises in those three cities would most definitely meet WP:GNG. Ejgreen77 (talk) 22:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I do agree if new content laser focused on the Milwaukee Braves is created I wouldn't object. However, a new article simply covering the same exact content found elsewhere it's not necessary. The Boston Braves article could be improved a lot in this regard. Nemov (talk) 13:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

The RfC didn't address whether or not an article should exist -- it only covered if it did exist what the title should be. Basically, you shouldn't have a "History of the Brooklyn Dodgers" unless you first have a "Brooklyn Dodgers" article. IMO, Spesh531 could have created these articles per WP:BRD. I always figured someone would eventually fill in the blanks and turn the redirects into articles one of these days.

It looks like the 3 redirects all meet the "minor history" requirement so you can probably tag all 3 with {{Db-g6}} and an admin can complete the page move. (You can't copy/paste your Milwaukee article because more than one user has edited the page.) Also since you copied content from the old History article, be sure to give proper attribution by putting {{copied}} on the talk pages (see Talk:St. Louis Stars (baseball) & Talk:St. Louis Stars (1937) for {{copied}} examples). Rgrds. --BX (talk) 04:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Request for Comment on shading of MLB rivalry tables

In late 2023 and early 2024, User:Spesh531 modified rivalry tables by adding team colors to home/away results columns and overall series columns of the table. Previously, only the individual season series column was shaded After some WP:BRD edits today, I believe it should be examined by the the Baseball wikiproject to gain some consensus moving forward. Below is an excerpt from the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry page, in two versions. Frank Anchor 19:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Version 1

2021	Red Sox	10‍–‍9	Yankees, 5‍–‍4	Red Sox, 6‍–‍4	Yankees 1233‍–‍1018‍–‍14	Red Sox win 8 straight meetings (September 2020 to July 2021) immediately following Yankees' 12-game winning streak in the series.
2021 ALWC	Red Sox	1‍–‍0	—	Red Sox, 1‍–‍0	Yankees 1233‍–‍1019‍–‍14	First meeting in the Wild Card Game since the round was added in 2012.
2022	Yankees	13‍–‍6	Yankees, 8‍–‍2	Yankees, 5‍–‍4	Yankees 1246‍–‍1025‍–‍14
2023	Red Sox	9‍–‍4	Red Sox, 5‍–‍1	Red Sox, 4‍–‍3	Yankees 1250‍–‍1034‍–‍14	Schedule structure modified this season to allow every team to play one series against every interleague team. This reduced the number of meetings from 19 to 13 per season.
2024	Red Sox	4‍–‍2	Red Sox, 2‍–‍1	Tie, 3‍–‍3	Yankees 1254‍–‍1039‍–‍14	Four games remaining in New York.

Version 2

2021	Red Sox	10‍–‍9	Yankees, 5‍–‍4	Red Sox, 6‍–‍4	Yankees 1233‍–‍1018‍–‍14	Red Sox win 8 straight meetings (September 2020 to July 2021) immediately following Yankees' 12-game winning streak in the series.
2021 ALWC	Red Sox	1‍–‍0	—	Red Sox, 1‍–‍0	Yankees 1233‍–‍1019‍–‍14	First meeting in the Wild Card Game since the round was added in 2012.
2022	Yankees	13‍–‍6	Yankees, 8‍–‍2	Yankees, 5‍–‍4	Yankees 1246‍–‍1025‍–‍14
2023	Red Sox	9‍–‍4	Red Sox, 5‍–‍1	Red Sox, 4‍–‍3	Yankees 1250‍–‍1034‍–‍14	Schedule structure modified this season to allow every team to play one series against every interleague team. This reduced the number of meetings from 19 to 13 per season.
2024	Red Sox	4‍–‍2	Red Sox, 2‍–‍1	Tie, 3‍–‍3	Yankees 1254‍–‍1039‍–‍14	Four games remaining in New York.

Discussion

• I support Version 2 as nominator. The first version uses TOO MUCH color. Only having the individual season series shaded allow it to better "stand out" since it is more relevant information (most of the tables are in a section entitled "Season-by-season results" or similar). Whichever team won more games at home is in a given year trivial, as is who led an ongoing series after each year (the overall series is summarized at the end of each table, using team colors). Frank Anchor 19:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
• I support Version 1, as the editor referenced in the intial RfC in question here.
  First off, there was no consensus prior to my edits of adding this table to all rivalry pages. Some tables existed as Mets/Phillies (Version 1), while some existed as Yankees/Red Sox (Version 2) (which in this case, didn't even feature an 'Overall series' column). Both linked versions are prior to me ever editing either page (save for a single minor edit in 2022 where I changed the "i" in the last names of Joely Rodriguez and Edwin Diaz to "í" on the Mets/Phillies page). By not shading the (for this example) 'at New York', 'at Boston', or 'Overall series' columns, at least to me, the information becomes noise. IMO, everything colored in Version 1 is relevant to the season-by-season results. It's information that becomes less accessible if colorless. Also, the section of the article isn't called "Season series results", it's "Season-by-season results", so there isn't anything explicit about the table that says "only Season series results is relevant".
  Here are the tables with the column headers, as above examples have no context.

Yankees vs. Red Sox Season-by-Season Results
2020s (Yankees, 39–32) (with each column colored) Season Season series at New York Yankees at Boston Red Sox Overall series Notes 2020 Yankees 9‍–‍1 Yankees, 7‍–‍0 Yankees, 2‍–‍1 Yankees 1224‍–‍1008‍–‍14 Season shortened to 60 games (with 10 meetings) due to COVID-19 pandemic. Yankees win 12 straight meetings (September 2019 to September 2020). With a .900 win percentage, this was the most one-sided season series for the Yankees in the history of the rivalry and the most one-sided season series for either team since 1912. 2021 Red Sox 10‍–‍9 Yankees, 5‍–‍4 Red Sox, 6‍–‍4 Yankees 1233‍–‍1018‍–‍14 Red Sox win 8 straight meetings (September 2020 to July 2021) immediately following Yankees' 12-game winning streak in the series. 2021 ALWC Red Sox 1‍–‍0 — Red Sox, 1‍–‍0 Yankees 1233‍–‍1019‍–‍14 First meeting in the Wild Card Game since the round was added in 2012. 2022 Yankees 13‍–‍6 Yankees, 8‍–‍2 Yankees, 5‍–‍4 Yankees 1246‍–‍1025‍–‍14 2023 Red Sox 9‍–‍4 Red Sox, 5‍–‍1 Red Sox, 4‍–‍3 Yankees 1250‍–‍1034‍–‍14 Schedule structure modified this season to allow every team to play one series against every interleague team. This reduced the number of meetings from 19 to 13 per season. 2024 Red Sox 4‍–‍2 Red Sox, 2‍–‍1 Tie, 3‍–‍3 Yankees 1254‍–‍1039‍–‍14 Four games remaining in New York.
2020s (Yankees, 39–32) (with only season series columns colored) Season Season series at New York Yankees at Boston Red Sox Overall series Notes 2020 Yankees 9‍–‍1 Yankees, 7‍–‍0 Yankees, 2‍–‍1 Yankees 1224‍–‍1008‍–‍14 Season shortened to 60 games (with 10 meetings) due to COVID-19 pandemic. Yankees win 12 straight meetings (September 2019 to September 2020). With a .900 win percentage, this was the most one-sided season series for the Yankees in the history of the rivalry and the most one-sided season series for either team since 1912. 2021 Red Sox 10‍–‍9 Yankees, 5‍–‍4 Red Sox, 6‍–‍4 Yankees 1233‍–‍1018‍–‍14 Red Sox win 8 straight meetings (September 2020 to July 2021) immediately following Yankees' 12-game winning streak in the series. 2021 ALWC Red Sox 1‍–‍0 — Red Sox, 1‍–‍0 Yankees 1233‍–‍1019‍–‍14 First meeting in the Wild Card Game since the round was added in 2012. 2022 Yankees 13‍–‍6 Yankees, 8‍–‍2 Yankees, 5‍–‍4 Yankees 1246‍–‍1025‍–‍14 2023 Red Sox 9‍–‍4 Red Sox, 5‍–‍1 Red Sox, 4‍–‍3 Yankees 1250‍–‍1034‍–‍14 Schedule structure modified this season to allow every team to play one series against every interleague team. This reduced the number of meetings from 19 to 13 per season. 2024 Red Sox 4‍–‍2 Red Sox, 2‍–‍1 Tie, 3‍–‍3 Yankees 1254‍–‍1039‍–‍14 Four games remaining in New York.

Keeping in mind that each collapsible section of the table is a decade, and in the case of this series, there are 13 sections of 10 seasons each, it's hard to parse through the results of the series specifically in NY or in Boston year-to-year if they are entirely colorless/shaded gray. It's impossible to see trends of how, say, the Yankees performed at Fenway Park from year-to-year. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to look at the headers of the table and understand what's happening in each column. As arguably the most important information, the 'Season series' columns are immediately to the right of the 'Season' column. It doesn't get lost because other columns to the right are colored; there's no separation between the season year and season result. The ability to see the information isn't reduced. The focus is already on the 'Season series' by virtue of where it is in the table.

Regarding the idea that this is WP:TRIVIA: I want to note that showing the home and overall column data is not in question here. Simply the coloring of said information is. I'm not sure how coloring suddenly makes the information WP:TRIVIA. If it is trivia, then remove the 'at New York', 'at Boston', and 'Overall series' columns completely (which I'm not in favor of). The 'Overall series' column shows legitimate historical context to the history of the rivalry and having said information colorless in an expansive table of colorless information, again, renders it as noise. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 21:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

The coloring is supposed to highlight the main component of the table, which is “season-by-season results” as is the title of the section for many of these charts. The home/away games and the overall series to that point are secondary information and do not need to be as prominently displayed. I would not be opposed to removing this home/away information as trivia, but having it displayed less prominently is acceptable as well. Thank you for adding the column headers on the tables. Not including them was an oversight on my part. Frank Anchor 22:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I don't support using any custom background cell colour. It's long been an accessibility issue, and its legibility needs to be tested with all themes and reading modes. Plus I don't feel it has sufficient utility in the current format. A separate table with just indicators for the season outcome and no text (beyond a single letter to distinguish between the two victors) would be able to better illustrate the trends over the entire history in a more compact format. isaacl (talk) 00:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Placement of Wildcard races

Since the League/Division standings are no longer side-by-side, but rather one under the other. Where are we going to locate the wildcard races, once it turns September? GoodDay (talk) 02:25, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I have two ideas. It should be noted that the standings are side-by-side, but only when the screen resolution is wide enough. If they're not, then the National League wraps around to be below the American League. There are 2 ways we can do this. Either have it so the AL Division standings & AL Wild Card standings wrap together (FORMAT 1), or to have the Wild Card standings entirely below both AL & NL Division standings (FORMAT 2).

FORMAT 1

American League

AL East

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
New York Yankees	74	53	.583	—	33‍–‍28	41‍–‍25
Baltimore Orioles	74	54	.578	½	37‍–‍28	37‍–‍26
Boston Red Sox	67	59	.532	6½	29‍–‍32	38‍–‍27
Tampa Bay Rays	64	62	.508	9½	34‍–‍34	30‍–‍28
Toronto Blue Jays	59	68	.465	15	30‍–‍33	29‍–‍35

AL Central

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Cleveland Guardians	73	53	.579	—	38‍–‍20	35‍–‍33
Kansas City Royals	71	56	.559	2½	40‍–‍26	31‍–‍30
Minnesota Twins	71	56	.559	2½	36‍–‍24	35‍–‍32
Detroit Tigers	62	65	.488	11½	31‍–‍32	31‍–‍33
Chicago White Sox	31	97	.242	43	18‍–‍44	13‍–‍53

AL West

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Houston Astros	68	58	.540	—	35‍–‍29	33‍–‍29
Seattle Mariners	64	64	.500	5	37‍–‍26	27‍–‍38
Texas Rangers	59	69	.461	10	34‍–‍31	25‍–‍38
Los Angeles Angels	54	73	.425	14½	27‍–‍40	27‍–‍33
Oakland Athletics	54	73	.425	14½	31‍–‍33	23‍–‍40

American League Wild Card

Division leaders

Team	W	L	Pct.
New York Yankees	74	53	.583
Cleveland Guardians	73	53	.579
Houston Astros	68	58	.540

Wild Card teams
(Top 3 teams qualify for postseason)

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB
Baltimore Orioles	74	54	.578	+2½
Kansas City Royals	71	56	.559	—
Minnesota Twins	71	56	.559	—
Boston Red Sox	67	59	.532	3½
Tampa Bay Rays	64	62	.508	6½
Seattle Mariners	64	64	.500	7½
Detroit Tigers	62	65	.488	9
Toronto Blue Jays	59	68	.465	12
Texas Rangers	59	69	.461	12½
Los Angeles Angels	54	73	.425	17
Oakland Athletics	54	73	.425	17
Chicago White Sox	31	97	.242	40½

National League

NL East

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Philadelphia Phillies	74	52	.587	—	42‍–‍23	32‍–‍29
Atlanta Braves	67	59	.532	7	33‍–‍27	34‍–‍32
New York Mets	66	61	.520	8½	35‍–‍33	31‍–‍28
Washington Nationals	57	70	.449	17½	29‍–‍33	28‍–‍37
Miami Marlins	46	81	.362	28½	24‍–‍42	22‍–‍39

NL Central

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Milwaukee Brewers	73	53	.579	—	38‍–‍24	35‍–‍29
St. Louis Cardinals	62	64	.492	11	33‍–‍30	29‍–‍34
Chicago Cubs	62	65	.488	11½	35‍–‍29	27‍–‍36
Cincinnati Reds	62	65	.488	11½	31‍–‍34	31‍–‍31
Pittsburgh Pirates	59	67	.468	14	29‍–‍32	30‍–‍35

NL West

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Los Angeles Dodgers	76	52	.594	—	41‍–‍22	35‍–‍30
Arizona Diamondbacks	72	56	.562	4	37‍–‍26	35‍–‍30
San Diego Padres	72	56	.562	4	35‍–‍30	37‍–‍26
San Francisco Giants	65	64	.504	11½	38‍–‍28	27‍–‍36
Colorado Rockies	47	80	.370	28½	29‍–‍33	18‍–‍47

National League Wild Card

Division leaders

Team	W	L	Pct.
Los Angeles Dodgers	76	52	.594
Philadelphia Phillies	74	52	.587
Milwaukee Brewers	73	53	.579

Wild Card teams
(Top 3 teams qualify for postseason)

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB
Arizona Diamondbacks	72	56	.562	+4
San Diego Padres	72	56	.562	+4
Atlanta Braves	67	59	.532	—
New York Mets	66	61	.520	1½
San Francisco Giants	65	64	.504	3½
St. Louis Cardinals	62	64	.492	5
Chicago Cubs	62	65	.488	5½
Cincinnati Reds	62	65	.488	5½
Pittsburgh Pirates	59	67	.468	8
Washington Nationals	57	70	.449	10½
Colorado Rockies	47	80	.370	20½
Miami Marlins	46	81	.362	21½

FORMAT 2

American League

AL East

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
New York Yankees	74	53	.583	—	33‍–‍28	41‍–‍25
Baltimore Orioles	74	54	.578	½	37‍–‍28	37‍–‍26
Boston Red Sox	67	59	.532	6½	29‍–‍32	38‍–‍27
Tampa Bay Rays	64	62	.508	9½	34‍–‍34	30‍–‍28
Toronto Blue Jays	59	68	.465	15	30‍–‍33	29‍–‍35

AL Central

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Cleveland Guardians	73	53	.579	—	38‍–‍20	35‍–‍33
Kansas City Royals	71	56	.559	2½	40‍–‍26	31‍–‍30
Minnesota Twins	71	56	.559	2½	36‍–‍24	35‍–‍32
Detroit Tigers	62	65	.488	11½	31‍–‍32	31‍–‍33
Chicago White Sox	31	97	.242	43	18‍–‍44	13‍–‍53

AL West

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Houston Astros	68	58	.540	—	35‍–‍29	33‍–‍29
Seattle Mariners	64	64	.500	5	37‍–‍26	27‍–‍38
Texas Rangers	59	69	.461	10	34‍–‍31	25‍–‍38
Los Angeles Angels	54	73	.425	14½	27‍–‍40	27‍–‍33
Oakland Athletics	54	73	.425	14½	31‍–‍33	23‍–‍40

National League

NL East

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Philadelphia Phillies	74	52	.587	—	42‍–‍23	32‍–‍29
Atlanta Braves	67	59	.532	7	33‍–‍27	34‍–‍32
New York Mets	66	61	.520	8½	35‍–‍33	31‍–‍28
Washington Nationals	57	70	.449	17½	29‍–‍33	28‍–‍37
Miami Marlins	46	81	.362	28½	24‍–‍42	22‍–‍39

NL Central

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Milwaukee Brewers	73	53	.579	—	38‍–‍24	35‍–‍29
St. Louis Cardinals	62	64	.492	11	33‍–‍30	29‍–‍34
Chicago Cubs	62	65	.488	11½	35‍–‍29	27‍–‍36
Cincinnati Reds	62	65	.488	11½	31‍–‍34	31‍–‍31
Pittsburgh Pirates	59	67	.468	14	29‍–‍32	30‍–‍35

NL West

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB	Home	Road
Los Angeles Dodgers	76	52	.594	—	41‍–‍22	35‍–‍30
Arizona Diamondbacks	72	56	.562	4	37‍–‍26	35‍–‍30
San Diego Padres	72	56	.562	4	35‍–‍30	37‍–‍26
San Francisco Giants	65	64	.504	11½	38‍–‍28	27‍–‍36
Colorado Rockies	47	80	.370	28½	29‍–‍33	18‍–‍47

American League Wild Card

Division leaders

Team	W	L	Pct.
New York Yankees	74	53	.583
Cleveland Guardians	73	53	.579
Houston Astros	68	58	.540

Wild Card teams
(Top 3 teams qualify for postseason)

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB
Baltimore Orioles	74	54	.578	+2½
Kansas City Royals	71	56	.559	—
Minnesota Twins	71	56	.559	—
Boston Red Sox	67	59	.532	3½
Tampa Bay Rays	64	62	.508	6½
Seattle Mariners	64	64	.500	7½
Detroit Tigers	62	65	.488	9
Toronto Blue Jays	59	68	.465	12
Texas Rangers	59	69	.461	12½
Los Angeles Angels	54	73	.425	17
Oakland Athletics	54	73	.425	17
Chicago White Sox	31	97	.242	40½

National League Wild Card

Division leaders

Team	W	L	Pct.
Los Angeles Dodgers	76	52	.594
Philadelphia Phillies	74	52	.587
Milwaukee Brewers	73	53	.579

Wild Card teams
(Top 3 teams qualify for postseason)

Team	W	L	Pct.	GB
Arizona Diamondbacks	72	56	.562	+4
San Diego Padres	72	56	.562	+4
Atlanta Braves	67	59	.532	—
New York Mets	66	61	.520	1½
San Francisco Giants	65	64	.504	3½
St. Louis Cardinals	62	64	.492	5
Chicago Cubs	62	65	.488	5½
Cincinnati Reds	62	65	.488	5½
Pittsburgh Pirates	59	67	.468	8
Washington Nationals	57	70	.449	10½
Colorado Rockies	47	80	.370	20½
Miami Marlins	46	81	.362	21½

Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but with the current Template:Flexbox wrap format, I think these are the two options. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 19:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I've wondered.. why do we have the division winners are part of the wild card templates? They are usually on the same page as the division standings templates so it seems redundant. For what it's worth.. format 2 looks better than format 1 to me. Spanneraol (talk) 20:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Trois-Rivières Aigles (2013–)#Requested move 1 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Trois-Rivières Aigles (2013–)#Requested move 1 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 21:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ernie Johnson Jr.#Requested move 5 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ernie Johnson Jr.#Requested move 5 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:06, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Page move regarding A's/Giants and the Bay Bridge Series

I've started a discussion regarding the move of Bay Bridge Series to Athletics–Giants rivalry here. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 21:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (baseball players)

This baseball specific guideline is in a standalone page, but a copy of it is also at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople) § Baseball. Is there a reason to maintain two copies, and risk having them go out of sync? There might have been a historical reason, but is it still viable? Any objections to redirecting to the general sports page? —Bagumba (talk) 09:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Since the standalone page predates the common page, personally I prefer removing the content at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sportspeople) § Baseball, leaving just the pointer to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (baseball players). This will keep the history of changes in one location. isaacl (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Spanneraol (talk) 16:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguating people with multiple roles

There's Tom Williams (outfielder/pitcher) (from an RM) and Rick Anderson (pitcher/coach), among others. Are slashes in parenthetical disambiguation a thing for baseball? If so, why do we settle on Dave Roberts (baseball manager), who also had a long career as an outfielder? And what is the criteria for adding "coach" to the titles of all these ex-players turned coaches? —Bagumba (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Cleveland Guardians vs Cincinnati Reds Ohio Cup

Hello there, just wanted to give a heads up that the Cleveland Guardians vs Cincinnati Reds “Ohio Cup” Rivalry Wiki Page in season by season results does not show who won the annual series year by year (1997-present day) They appear blank. It’s the last part of the Ohio Cup Wiki Page. It’s blank.

Thank you! Hope you have a good day. Be safe AhBigKev (talk) 15:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Steve Boros and His Apple II.png

There is a discussion underway at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 August 20 as to whether or not the above image has sufficient importance. Cbl62 (talk) 23:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)