Talk:Ron Gant

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Baseball: Braves / Reds / Angels / Phillies / Padres / Cardinals Mid‑importance

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.

Associated task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Atlanta Braves.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Cincinnati Reds.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Philadelphia Phillies.
	This article is supported by WikiProject San Diego Padres.
	This article is supported by WikiProject St. Louis Cardinals.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group.

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Gant/Hurbek controversy[edit]

Uh, Sean, I did check here for a discussion - there isn't any here, nor are the links to anydiscussions elsewhere. And if you revert me agin without a clear consensus here to do so, you'll be reported for violating 3RR. - BilCat (talk) 00:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something's quite fishy here. An editor from MN, and an IP from MN also. Checkuser time! Using IPs to bypass 3rr is a no-no! - BilCat (talk) 01:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fishy? Not sure what you are implying. As to before...my apologies, the previous discussion was at the Kent Hrbek article talkpage. It was also brought up at the time on the WP:NPOV noticeboard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_10#Kent_Hrbek. This was highly contentious in 1991 and it appears it still is. Rapier (talk) 01:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, got logged out somehow when I left my computer for a time and made an annonymous edit accidently. My bad. It was never my intention to hide my identity, and I didn't notice because the tildes simply left my IP address as opposed to SineBot fixing it. The same thing happened here on the talk page. The point stands. Rapier (talk) 01:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only contention is from Twins fans who are hiding behind a technicality. Video is verifiable evidence on WP, as with movies. It doesn't need any more verifiction than that. Btw, I was implying you were using an IP to bypass any 3RR restrictions. My apologies for the lack of good faith. - BilCat (talk) 01:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The NPOV item is inconclusive - no decision was made their. The Hrbek page is irrelevent, this is not his page.

Back to the issue, the ump's call is his call, but that doesn't erase what actually happened - we can and should report both. Many sources, as pointed out in the noticeboard, agree with Gant. Feel fee to provide sources that don't. But sticiking only to the ump's call is not NPOV. - BilCat (talk) 02:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the current version makes it seem like Gant is the only one who claims that Hrbek grabbed his ankle. That is misleading. How can we correct that implication? Is there an article on the game itself somewhere where this can be adressed in more detail? - BilCat (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

The event is covered at 1991 World Series, and is mnore expanisve and neutral (presents more sides than just the ump's call and Gant's claim. I propose that we add some of the wording from that incident to the article. (Since Gant apparently didn't make any death threats towards Hrbek himself, that part from the article can be left out.

CBS television announcers Jack Buck and Tim McCarver were adamant in their insistence that Hrbek had pulled Gant off the bag, as was at least one Minnesota reporter. But the call stood.

The part on the broadcasters definetly need to be sourced, however. If that can be done and if we can add something along those lines, I'll accept the "claimed" wording. Feel free to add to that if needed, and we'll see what we can work out. - BilCat (talk) 02:38, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we add Drew Coble's comments as well then I'd have no problem with that wording. My goodness...did we just negotiate??? ;-) Nice to meet a reasonable editor and I hope we can come to an agreement. Rapier (talk) 03:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we have reliable sources for all of it, I'd agree. I haven't checked the sources in this article, but the article only had a weak one. I'm busy repairing another comp at the moment, but I'll chack later tonight or tomorrow. I do try to be reasonalbe, but it has been a bit difficult at times. :) - BilCat (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]