User talk:Yuriy 43
8/31/21: The Boston Bees page has been expanded. In the win/loss section, the numbers are wins/loss/tie (pct.) RS/RA and then Run Differential which I got from MLB.com. The 1935 off-season and early into the 1941 season should be included as both pertain to the Bees. Yes the team ends the 1941 season as the Braves, but until Apr. 30th the team is still called the Bees. The 1935 off-season should be included as it tells of how the team became the Bees in the first place. The names Boston National Sports, Inc. and The National League Club of Boston is the team's corporate names. BTW: I don't think the previous names (Red Stockings, Beaneaters Doves and Rustlers) should be included. I think those names should only be recapped on the Boston Braves page. To me the names should only be included if the team had adopted the Bees name and had not been previously known as the Braves. (Like the Brooklyn Dodgers for example). But that's just me.
9/4/21: I'm not absolutely certain, but I think the Braves adopted their present nickname on Dec. 20, 1911 according to the Milwaukee Journal (Possibly the 19th). However the El Paso Herald mentions the name change in their newspaper on December 30th. This was probably a due to the slow travel of news in the early 20th century.
- There's references to the "Boston Braves" as far back as 1904 The Boston Globe 9/4/04, but nicknames weren't nearly as formal back in the day. The Doves, Rustlers, and Braves nicknames previously applied were just not official. Even the 1911 announcement was more of a suggestion by John Ward for the team to be called Braves in difference to James Gaffney then a formal naming of the club. Jeff (talk) 19:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC).
- (9/8/21) Yes I recall seeing similar articles during my research of the Braves name. So would it be safe to say that the team announced they were changing their name and that the Braves were in consideration for usage on Dec. 20th, and that the name was formally adopted on the 30th? Either way I'm still continuing to look.
10/6/21: Concerning the Braves names, would it not make more sense to have the Boston Red Caps listed as also known as instead of formerly known as seeing as how from an "official" standpoint, the team was never known as the Red Caps and that the name only is only used by baseball historians. 1876, 1877, 1878, 1879
- Leave it as it is; I know your position that the name was never really used at the time, but it's become conventional to refer to the teams from these early NL years as the Red Caps, so we will just follow that practice here, as we track the main Baseball-Reference site. If you want to change that, join SABR, become a member of the 19th century committee, and get your researched published; your input will be welcome, and that's the venue to use if you want such changes to be accepted into mainstream baseball writing. Philippe (talk) 17:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
10/10/21: Let me try this again, since I think you're missing the point. It's not about the main page. That's your business. It's about the Bullpen Reference page on the Braves: Braves. On the line for previously known as is included the Red Caps. As I said I think the Red Caps should be included under the also known as. I get that you guys want a distinction between the two with regards to the NA era and the NL era. By including it in the AKA line, it is still included, it's not completely gone, it's just in another spot. Which I think works better anyways. I forgot to include this: Nicknames.
- (I fixed your two links). You can make the change. I see B-Ref now calls the 1876 team the "Red Stockings", and no longer the "Red Caps", so you could change the yearly team pages as well to match what's on B-Ref. Philippe (talk) 17:32, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
10/11/21: Thank you.
Current: User: Yuriy 43/Notes and Changes 7