![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
This is not a fanboy web page. This is an encyclopedia. Negative information and positive information can co-exist together. No Guru 02:19, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I give up. Knock yourself out fanboy. No Guru 02:56, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This and every page requires a balanced and neutral point of view if it is to be encyclopedic. If there is to be a section on Derek Jeter's post season successes it is fair to point out occasions when his play has been less than brilliant. Deleting information that is relevant and factual makes the article less useful and more biased. If both positive and negative about a subject is included the readers can be left to come to their conclusions. For example the article on Barry Bonds would be incomplete if it mentioned only his playing record and not the Balco scandal. The Bill Buckner article details both his successes as a player and his famous error.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a fan site. The difference is crucial.
No Guru 19:16, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I blocked the anonymous Jeter fan for repeatedly blanking this talk page. 66.254.235.147, when your block expires, please use your words and describe why you believe negative information should be deleted from this article. If you continue to vandalize pages instead of engaging in rational discussion, you'll only be blocked for longer amounts of time. Rhobite 23:28, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
Jeter injured his back and shoulder in Game 5 of the Division Series vs. Oakland in 2001. That's why his average against Arizona wasn't high. Labelling that a "postseason failure" is both biased and innaccurate.
Including a few exceptions that go against the vast body of Jeter's postseason work is akin to saying an 80% free throw shooter "is not without his failures" since he misses 20% of the time, which is silly because we all know 80% is an excellent free throw shooter. You want to make it seem like he's something less than what he is (fact: he is generally regarded as a great clutch performer) just because he's not perfect. Such a view reveals your bias and violates the NPOV standard.
RESPONSE:
Derek Jeter did not hit well in the 2 seven game series referenced in the "postseason failures" article. That is a fact that does not change depending on how one feels about it.
Furthermore, since the Yankees lost those series in 7 games, a reasonable person might conclude that Jeter's poor performances in those series heavily contributed to his teams' failure to win them.
Showing that Jeter is not always 100% perfect and clutch in the postseason presents a more accurate and complete picture of him as a player. Since the paragraph discussing his postseason play begins with "Throughout his career, Jeter has been known as one of the best postseason players in baseball history", one would think that such performances such as the two mentioned above would suffice to clarify that original statement.
Regarding the 80% free throw shooter analogy: if an 80% free throw shooter misses a crucial free throw at the end of a game that would give his team a win, it's valid to mention that failure to perform along with his successes. That's what's been done here with Jeter. Smiling Joe Hesketh 19:01, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've done my best to save previous discussion after page blanking by 129.74.146.173 No Guru 19:16, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
As the other poster has pointed out, it's inappropriate for several reasons:
A. He was injured and played in the 2001 World Series against Arizona with a strained shoulder, sore back, and pulled hamstring, results of the diving catch he made in the last game of the Oakland series.
B. HE WON GAME FOUR OF THE SERIES WITH A WALK-OFF HOME RUN!
C. The previous poster's 80% free throw shooter analogy holds. Smiling Joe tries to say that "if an 80% free throw shooter misses a crucial free throw at the end of a game that would give his team a win, it's valid to mention that failure to perform along with his successes" and that this is what's being done here with Jeter. THIS IS SIMPLY INCORRECT. Jeter never "missed a game winning free throw" against Arizona: In the only opportunity he had to "make a game winning free throw," HE WON THE GAME WITH A HOME RUN!
D. Smiling Joe claims "a reasonable person might conclude that Jeter's poor performances in those series heavily contributed to his teams' failure to win them." Again, this is an untenable position for several reasons: (1) He won Game 4 on a walk-off HR; (2) The Yankees lost Game 1 by a score of 9-1, Game 2 by a score of 4-0, and Game 6 by a score of 15-2--it's impossible to sustain an argument that Jeter heavily contributed to those losses in light of the fact they lost because of horrible pitching; (3) They were three outs away from winning Game 7 and the Series before Mariano Rivera blew the save. In sum, you can't point to a single game where Jeter's performance at the plate "heavily contributed" to a loss, BUT YOU CAN POINT TO A GAME WHERE HIS HITTING WON IT...Quad erat demonstrandum
Thus, the previous user's argument that including statistics from two random series that go against the vast weight of Jeter's postseason record parallels stating that an 80% free throw shooter is not without his failures because he misses 20% of the time--which skews perspective because an 80% free throw shooter is considered to be excellent. Sticking in two aberrations is petty and irrelevant when weighed against the body of Jeter's work, and evinces a bias that cannot be reconciled with Wiki's neutral point of view requirements.-- Brian Brockmeyer 00:04, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am a lifelong Yankees fan and this article is way over the top. POV-flavored nonsense like "Jeter left the Wolverines behind to follow his dream" and "During his rookie season the young shortstop gained instant fame, as much for his matinee idol looks as for his on-the-field play" have no place in an encyclopedia article. Besides the silly biases, I think this article needs a lot of organization as most of Jeter's highlights are needlessly mentioned twice. -- Feitclub 05:14, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Question: Why doesn't he have a birthday? ~Anonymous Answer: Because the page has been locked for almost a month and nobody can get in to edit.
There was no reason to delete the relevant information. The info on the talk page does not support such a deletion.
This topic has been discussed ad nauseum already. The consensus is that its inclusion is inappropriate and purposely skews perception. Give it up. Brian Brockmeyer 07:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
There was no such consensus. However, I will edit this article no further. I would like to point out that there is never a need to delete information from an article that is relevant, accurate and factual. Cheers and happy editing. No Guru 08:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Not just Jeter bashing, but Yankee bashing is a cottage-industry, and I would say obsession in Boston. DigiBullet 17:14, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Met fans bash the Yankees too. And guess what! Yankee fans tend to bash the Red Sox and Mets as well! Primeoffense 21:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Brian Brockmeyer, perhaps you can submit a reason for continually editing out the factoid regarding Derek Sanderson beyond that you don't want it there. As No Guru states accurately above, there is never a need to delete information from an article that is relevant, accurate and factual. Add, don't subtract. RGTraynor 19:40, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
I will offer support for RGTraynor. I offered perfectly viable evidence from this link http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/Jeter/Jeter_bio.html, but for some reason Brian Brockmeyer| dismissed this. What exactly is the problem with offering background on Derek Jeter's name? Googie Man 18:46 EST October 12, 2005.
Well, there's a blocked page now. As has been stated here and elsewhere, Brian Brockmeyer has been reverting this information for months now, has consistently declined to either discuss his reasons for doing so or present facts to the contrary, and has failed to seek any manner of consensus. From what I glean from his Talk page (including from the history, since a few such disputes have been subsequently deleted from it) this behavior has cropped up a number of times before. That Mr. Brockmeyer is a Jeter fanatic is apparent, but his motive for censoring this information is not. RGTraynor 05:58, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Besides the fact that (1) there's no mention of Jeter being named after Derek Sanderson in Jeter's own autobiography, (2) there's no mention in any type of official biographical statement, and (3) there are no statements from Jeter, his parents, or his family stating this to be the case, Jeter flatly denied the rumor when asked about his distinctive middle name on the Michael Kay show, responding that it's a family name. Despite what Mr. Traynor (who not so coincidentally just happens to be a hockey fanatic from Boston) may think, the world does not revolve around hockey and the Boston Bruins.-- Brian Brockmeyer 08:59, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Considering that the most acrimonious sports rivalry in history is between the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox, it's actually quite smart of Jeter not to mention that he was named after a sports hero of Boston. Furthermore, his family is more than likely offering support for Jeter's career considerations by not mentioning this fact. This fact of Jeter's name is known most likely by him telling some member of the press in one of his numerous interviews. Do you have a link, or any other type of evidence, confirming that Jeter "flatly denied" "the rumor" about his "distinctive" middle name? The fact that the name *is* distinctive (in fact so distinctive to make it a very unlikely coincidence) is the only fact you've written upon which most people can agree, or one that isn't conveyed in an either hostile or condescending tone, both of which are very much against the spirit and intent of Wikipedia. Finally, I'm indifferent personally to Derek Jeter, nor am I particularly enthusiastic about any Boston sports team.
-- Googie Man 13:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
As it happens, I am a hockey fan from Boston, but since I neither particularly follow the Yankees nor Mr. Jeter's career, where I found out about this was on Wikipedia. I will put the letter I received from Jeter's official website (which is the letter to which I alluded above) confirming the rumor against your premise that Jeter and his family failing to trumpet the fact means it never happened. I wouldn't speculate on the reasons for his family's failure to make a big public deal about this fact, which in any event is their business. I am speculating on the degree of hostility and arrogance it takes to chase all over Wikipedia making related deletions (as from Derek Sanderson's page earlier today) when there's an ongoing dispute; perhaps, given the likelihood this is going to arbitration, you might consider acting with a measure of integrity here. RGTraynor 15:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Once the edit protection is gone, does anyone think this would be useful in the "Captain" section? George Steinbrenner said, "I have always been very, very careful about giving such a responsibility (Captain of the New York Yankees) to one of my players, but I can not think of a single player that I have ever had who is more deserving of this honor than Derek Jeter. He is a young man of great character and has shown great leadership qualities. He believes, as I do, what General (Douglas) MacArthur said, that 'there is no substitute for victory.' To him, and to me, it's second only to breathing." AriGold 14:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Nlu has requested unprotection. I'd like input from the other editors here. We never like to protect articles, but I want to warn you all not to go right back to the same edit warring behavior that led to protection. So, unprotection? Dmcdevit· t 05:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I've unprotected this anyway. If it should be a problem of one editor (not that I'm saying that it necessarily is) then that editor's behavior should be addressed. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 10:21, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Although I decry Brian Brockmeyer's methods, I think he's got a point. If all we have to go on for the "Derek Sanderson" story are websites like Jockbio.com, and nobody can for instance cite a paper biography of Jeter that confirms the story, then it probably doesn't belong in the article because we don't know with confidence that it is true. If Jeter himself has denied it, then this makes it something we don't want in Wikipedia. We do not put rumors, speculation, and good stories into Wikipedia.
Moreover this is an incredibly trivial bit of information. Even if it can be confirmed to be true, why include it at all? Jeter is famous for his extraordinary achievements on the field, not for the story of his middle name. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 06:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Despite my reservations about doing so, I'm going to post this though I know most of you probably will not believe it. I say this in a most understanding way, as I really have nothing but heresay as evidence, in a different position I probably would not believe it either. Anyways, as both a die-hard Yankee and Jeter fan and as the nephew of Derek Sanderson, I can tell you that Derek Jeter was in fact named after my uncle. I have not however, recieved an explanation as to why it is denied by the Jeter family publicly. Again, I am not coming on here to really say anything about the matter, I simply figured some of the people interested enough in the discussion would also be interested in my bit of information, unproven as it may be. Thanks.
No mention of the phantom tag or the unsportsmanlike slap? Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Well the phantom tag, I think you're refering to, was made by Chuck Knoblock.
And the "slap" a brilliant move by A-Rod, if it had worked.
Damn, that's a lot of quotes. Could we squeeze a few more in there. Let's make this the longest article on Wikipedia. No Guru 07:04, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
I think the wording is good, but not the location. Before, the article transitioned nicely from being drafted by the Yankees to his pro-baseball debut. Now it's kind of fractured by this information which doesn't really fit there. How about a "trivia" section or something near the bottom of the article? — Cleared as filed. 21:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Is this page only to reference Jeter's Baseball career? Derek has a very successful charity organization called the Turn Two foundation, which surprisingly has no mention here. If it has no other mention in Wikipedia, I'll add a section on it. BambinoPrime 05:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I see that User:No Guru insists on including incorrect information in the article because it comes from the IMDB. Unfortunately, as we all know, IMDB is the product of nothing more than user submissions. It's also worth noting the numerous inaccuracies within this particular IMDB article, such as listing Jeter's first MLB home run as coming on May 2, 1996. Everyone who knows anything about baseball knows his first home run came on opening day 1996 to left field off of Dennis Martinez.- DSJ2 04:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I removed the promotional picture from the article and replaced it with the image that was already there, which was released under the GFDL, and deleted the promotional image under
WP:CSD I1. GFDL images are always preferable to those released under fair use. —
BorgHunter
ubx (
talk)
12:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Added "The Dive" to the page, since it's as much an iconic part of Jeter's career as "The Flip". JAF1970 19:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You must not watch baseball 76, if you watch the play it was obviously foul, and you never let a ball drop... even in foul territory, if you can make the play, but you don't you are obviously, Manny Ramirez.
While User:164.55.254.106's edits were over-zealous, the Mr. Clutch section does present some POV and weasely wording. Are there some reliable sources we can cite describing DJ as "one of the best clutch postseason players in baseball history"? -- MichaelZimmer ( talk) 19:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there are. It's called the statistics section of mlb.com.
I'm a yankee fan, own a jeter shirt and what not, but I have to say, I've never heard of a "Holy Trinity of Shortstops," and that should probably be removed from the beginning of the article. Any other opinions?
Jma2133 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I've also done some clean-up; the trivia regarding when Jeter was picked in the amateur draft was incorporated into the early life section, and i think that the sports illustrated poll marking him as the most overrated player should be removed. He got 9% of the vote, when one goes to the link, two points ahead of Carlos Beltran who got 7% and a plethora of other players who received vote percentages in the single digits. Also, the very same website shows he was voted top shortstop in a players poll on year earlier. the poll has dubious results - but I won't just remove that trivia - does anyone else agree?
Jma2133 20:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think Miguel Tejada should be on the list as well... Many people (myself included) thought he was one of the best since hes been playing.
A lot of people don't like Derek Jeter, but to continue the idea of open-sourcing we must try to be as unbias as possible otherwise we violate the whole meaning of what wikipedia means and all what we do. We just must discuss and come to a conlusion trying to be as unbias as possible regardless if you dont like him or any other person. If we just stick to the facts and tell it from an objective point of view. Even though it might annoy a lot of fans that Jeter was voted overrated, its a fact that people voted and that should be put in the article to keep the bias out. He batted .087 in the 2001 world series before he hit the game winning home run over the right field wall. Its a fact. But people have called Jeter clutch and some people think he isn't, its to speculative so keep it that way in the article or just take it off. He lifetime batting avg. in the postseason is .307 and he is the all time leader in hits in the postseason (mlb.com). Through ten seasons he has more hits than Pete Rose did at that time. Four 200 hit seasons, every year he gets votes for mvp. The point is he is one of the greatest players to play the game, and that is an unbias because any one and I mean anyone who watches and follows baseball knows this regardless of what you think of the man.
Please revert the change made by 66.192.84.194 More specifically, the xchange from:
"During a July 1, 2004 extra-inning game versus the Boston Red Sox, Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands while chasing a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon. His forward momentum forced him to keep running and jump into the stands, rather than potentially injuring his knees by stopping short of the two foot high fence on the left field line. He bruised his cheek and required stitches in his chin, but managed to hold onto the ball, ending a 12th inning threat by the Red Sox. The Yankees went on to win the game and Jeter played the next day against the New York Mets."
to
"During a July 1, 2004 extra-inning game versus the Boston Red Sox, Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands after catching a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon. He bruised his cheek and required stitches in his chin, but managed to hold onto the ball, ending a 12th inning threat by the Red Sox. The Yankees went on to win the game and Jeter played the next day against the New York Mets."
Saying: "Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands after catching a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon."
makes no sense. It implies he leapt into the stands AFTER catching the ball.
I-baLL 19:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
On October 3,
2006, Jeter became the 6th player in
Major Leagues history to go 5 for 5 in a playoff game leading the Yankees to an 8-4 Game 1 victory over the
Detroit Tigers. Hitting two doubles and a homerun, scoring three.
Is Derek Jeter a first ballot HOF?
I don't think so because, although he is a solid player and clutch, he doesn't have the stats to get him in first ballot. If he finishes with a .315 BA and 3,000 hits on the other hand, it could be a different story. Still thinks he needs a batting title or league MVP. One WS MVP won't do it.
he has 2000 + hits already and 4 WS rings, hes in there today if he retires
no hall yet, maybe later, but if he was on the royals all his life, nobody would know much about him, just another David DeJesus. He's a lucky guy to have his career turn out this great
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
This is not a fanboy web page. This is an encyclopedia. Negative information and positive information can co-exist together. No Guru 02:19, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I give up. Knock yourself out fanboy. No Guru 02:56, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This and every page requires a balanced and neutral point of view if it is to be encyclopedic. If there is to be a section on Derek Jeter's post season successes it is fair to point out occasions when his play has been less than brilliant. Deleting information that is relevant and factual makes the article less useful and more biased. If both positive and negative about a subject is included the readers can be left to come to their conclusions. For example the article on Barry Bonds would be incomplete if it mentioned only his playing record and not the Balco scandal. The Bill Buckner article details both his successes as a player and his famous error.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a fan site. The difference is crucial.
No Guru 19:16, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I blocked the anonymous Jeter fan for repeatedly blanking this talk page. 66.254.235.147, when your block expires, please use your words and describe why you believe negative information should be deleted from this article. If you continue to vandalize pages instead of engaging in rational discussion, you'll only be blocked for longer amounts of time. Rhobite 23:28, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
Jeter injured his back and shoulder in Game 5 of the Division Series vs. Oakland in 2001. That's why his average against Arizona wasn't high. Labelling that a "postseason failure" is both biased and innaccurate.
Including a few exceptions that go against the vast body of Jeter's postseason work is akin to saying an 80% free throw shooter "is not without his failures" since he misses 20% of the time, which is silly because we all know 80% is an excellent free throw shooter. You want to make it seem like he's something less than what he is (fact: he is generally regarded as a great clutch performer) just because he's not perfect. Such a view reveals your bias and violates the NPOV standard.
RESPONSE:
Derek Jeter did not hit well in the 2 seven game series referenced in the "postseason failures" article. That is a fact that does not change depending on how one feels about it.
Furthermore, since the Yankees lost those series in 7 games, a reasonable person might conclude that Jeter's poor performances in those series heavily contributed to his teams' failure to win them.
Showing that Jeter is not always 100% perfect and clutch in the postseason presents a more accurate and complete picture of him as a player. Since the paragraph discussing his postseason play begins with "Throughout his career, Jeter has been known as one of the best postseason players in baseball history", one would think that such performances such as the two mentioned above would suffice to clarify that original statement.
Regarding the 80% free throw shooter analogy: if an 80% free throw shooter misses a crucial free throw at the end of a game that would give his team a win, it's valid to mention that failure to perform along with his successes. That's what's been done here with Jeter. Smiling Joe Hesketh 19:01, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've done my best to save previous discussion after page blanking by 129.74.146.173 No Guru 19:16, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
As the other poster has pointed out, it's inappropriate for several reasons:
A. He was injured and played in the 2001 World Series against Arizona with a strained shoulder, sore back, and pulled hamstring, results of the diving catch he made in the last game of the Oakland series.
B. HE WON GAME FOUR OF THE SERIES WITH A WALK-OFF HOME RUN!
C. The previous poster's 80% free throw shooter analogy holds. Smiling Joe tries to say that "if an 80% free throw shooter misses a crucial free throw at the end of a game that would give his team a win, it's valid to mention that failure to perform along with his successes" and that this is what's being done here with Jeter. THIS IS SIMPLY INCORRECT. Jeter never "missed a game winning free throw" against Arizona: In the only opportunity he had to "make a game winning free throw," HE WON THE GAME WITH A HOME RUN!
D. Smiling Joe claims "a reasonable person might conclude that Jeter's poor performances in those series heavily contributed to his teams' failure to win them." Again, this is an untenable position for several reasons: (1) He won Game 4 on a walk-off HR; (2) The Yankees lost Game 1 by a score of 9-1, Game 2 by a score of 4-0, and Game 6 by a score of 15-2--it's impossible to sustain an argument that Jeter heavily contributed to those losses in light of the fact they lost because of horrible pitching; (3) They were three outs away from winning Game 7 and the Series before Mariano Rivera blew the save. In sum, you can't point to a single game where Jeter's performance at the plate "heavily contributed" to a loss, BUT YOU CAN POINT TO A GAME WHERE HIS HITTING WON IT...Quad erat demonstrandum
Thus, the previous user's argument that including statistics from two random series that go against the vast weight of Jeter's postseason record parallels stating that an 80% free throw shooter is not without his failures because he misses 20% of the time--which skews perspective because an 80% free throw shooter is considered to be excellent. Sticking in two aberrations is petty and irrelevant when weighed against the body of Jeter's work, and evinces a bias that cannot be reconciled with Wiki's neutral point of view requirements.-- Brian Brockmeyer 00:04, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am a lifelong Yankees fan and this article is way over the top. POV-flavored nonsense like "Jeter left the Wolverines behind to follow his dream" and "During his rookie season the young shortstop gained instant fame, as much for his matinee idol looks as for his on-the-field play" have no place in an encyclopedia article. Besides the silly biases, I think this article needs a lot of organization as most of Jeter's highlights are needlessly mentioned twice. -- Feitclub 05:14, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Question: Why doesn't he have a birthday? ~Anonymous Answer: Because the page has been locked for almost a month and nobody can get in to edit.
There was no reason to delete the relevant information. The info on the talk page does not support such a deletion.
This topic has been discussed ad nauseum already. The consensus is that its inclusion is inappropriate and purposely skews perception. Give it up. Brian Brockmeyer 07:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
There was no such consensus. However, I will edit this article no further. I would like to point out that there is never a need to delete information from an article that is relevant, accurate and factual. Cheers and happy editing. No Guru 08:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Not just Jeter bashing, but Yankee bashing is a cottage-industry, and I would say obsession in Boston. DigiBullet 17:14, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Met fans bash the Yankees too. And guess what! Yankee fans tend to bash the Red Sox and Mets as well! Primeoffense 21:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Brian Brockmeyer, perhaps you can submit a reason for continually editing out the factoid regarding Derek Sanderson beyond that you don't want it there. As No Guru states accurately above, there is never a need to delete information from an article that is relevant, accurate and factual. Add, don't subtract. RGTraynor 19:40, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
I will offer support for RGTraynor. I offered perfectly viable evidence from this link http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/Jeter/Jeter_bio.html, but for some reason Brian Brockmeyer| dismissed this. What exactly is the problem with offering background on Derek Jeter's name? Googie Man 18:46 EST October 12, 2005.
Well, there's a blocked page now. As has been stated here and elsewhere, Brian Brockmeyer has been reverting this information for months now, has consistently declined to either discuss his reasons for doing so or present facts to the contrary, and has failed to seek any manner of consensus. From what I glean from his Talk page (including from the history, since a few such disputes have been subsequently deleted from it) this behavior has cropped up a number of times before. That Mr. Brockmeyer is a Jeter fanatic is apparent, but his motive for censoring this information is not. RGTraynor 05:58, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Besides the fact that (1) there's no mention of Jeter being named after Derek Sanderson in Jeter's own autobiography, (2) there's no mention in any type of official biographical statement, and (3) there are no statements from Jeter, his parents, or his family stating this to be the case, Jeter flatly denied the rumor when asked about his distinctive middle name on the Michael Kay show, responding that it's a family name. Despite what Mr. Traynor (who not so coincidentally just happens to be a hockey fanatic from Boston) may think, the world does not revolve around hockey and the Boston Bruins.-- Brian Brockmeyer 08:59, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Considering that the most acrimonious sports rivalry in history is between the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox, it's actually quite smart of Jeter not to mention that he was named after a sports hero of Boston. Furthermore, his family is more than likely offering support for Jeter's career considerations by not mentioning this fact. This fact of Jeter's name is known most likely by him telling some member of the press in one of his numerous interviews. Do you have a link, or any other type of evidence, confirming that Jeter "flatly denied" "the rumor" about his "distinctive" middle name? The fact that the name *is* distinctive (in fact so distinctive to make it a very unlikely coincidence) is the only fact you've written upon which most people can agree, or one that isn't conveyed in an either hostile or condescending tone, both of which are very much against the spirit and intent of Wikipedia. Finally, I'm indifferent personally to Derek Jeter, nor am I particularly enthusiastic about any Boston sports team.
-- Googie Man 13:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
As it happens, I am a hockey fan from Boston, but since I neither particularly follow the Yankees nor Mr. Jeter's career, where I found out about this was on Wikipedia. I will put the letter I received from Jeter's official website (which is the letter to which I alluded above) confirming the rumor against your premise that Jeter and his family failing to trumpet the fact means it never happened. I wouldn't speculate on the reasons for his family's failure to make a big public deal about this fact, which in any event is their business. I am speculating on the degree of hostility and arrogance it takes to chase all over Wikipedia making related deletions (as from Derek Sanderson's page earlier today) when there's an ongoing dispute; perhaps, given the likelihood this is going to arbitration, you might consider acting with a measure of integrity here. RGTraynor 15:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Once the edit protection is gone, does anyone think this would be useful in the "Captain" section? George Steinbrenner said, "I have always been very, very careful about giving such a responsibility (Captain of the New York Yankees) to one of my players, but I can not think of a single player that I have ever had who is more deserving of this honor than Derek Jeter. He is a young man of great character and has shown great leadership qualities. He believes, as I do, what General (Douglas) MacArthur said, that 'there is no substitute for victory.' To him, and to me, it's second only to breathing." AriGold 14:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Nlu has requested unprotection. I'd like input from the other editors here. We never like to protect articles, but I want to warn you all not to go right back to the same edit warring behavior that led to protection. So, unprotection? Dmcdevit· t 05:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I've unprotected this anyway. If it should be a problem of one editor (not that I'm saying that it necessarily is) then that editor's behavior should be addressed. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 10:21, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Although I decry Brian Brockmeyer's methods, I think he's got a point. If all we have to go on for the "Derek Sanderson" story are websites like Jockbio.com, and nobody can for instance cite a paper biography of Jeter that confirms the story, then it probably doesn't belong in the article because we don't know with confidence that it is true. If Jeter himself has denied it, then this makes it something we don't want in Wikipedia. We do not put rumors, speculation, and good stories into Wikipedia.
Moreover this is an incredibly trivial bit of information. Even if it can be confirmed to be true, why include it at all? Jeter is famous for his extraordinary achievements on the field, not for the story of his middle name. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 06:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Despite my reservations about doing so, I'm going to post this though I know most of you probably will not believe it. I say this in a most understanding way, as I really have nothing but heresay as evidence, in a different position I probably would not believe it either. Anyways, as both a die-hard Yankee and Jeter fan and as the nephew of Derek Sanderson, I can tell you that Derek Jeter was in fact named after my uncle. I have not however, recieved an explanation as to why it is denied by the Jeter family publicly. Again, I am not coming on here to really say anything about the matter, I simply figured some of the people interested enough in the discussion would also be interested in my bit of information, unproven as it may be. Thanks.
No mention of the phantom tag or the unsportsmanlike slap? Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Well the phantom tag, I think you're refering to, was made by Chuck Knoblock.
And the "slap" a brilliant move by A-Rod, if it had worked.
Damn, that's a lot of quotes. Could we squeeze a few more in there. Let's make this the longest article on Wikipedia. No Guru 07:04, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
I think the wording is good, but not the location. Before, the article transitioned nicely from being drafted by the Yankees to his pro-baseball debut. Now it's kind of fractured by this information which doesn't really fit there. How about a "trivia" section or something near the bottom of the article? — Cleared as filed. 21:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Is this page only to reference Jeter's Baseball career? Derek has a very successful charity organization called the Turn Two foundation, which surprisingly has no mention here. If it has no other mention in Wikipedia, I'll add a section on it. BambinoPrime 05:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I see that User:No Guru insists on including incorrect information in the article because it comes from the IMDB. Unfortunately, as we all know, IMDB is the product of nothing more than user submissions. It's also worth noting the numerous inaccuracies within this particular IMDB article, such as listing Jeter's first MLB home run as coming on May 2, 1996. Everyone who knows anything about baseball knows his first home run came on opening day 1996 to left field off of Dennis Martinez.- DSJ2 04:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I removed the promotional picture from the article and replaced it with the image that was already there, which was released under the GFDL, and deleted the promotional image under
WP:CSD I1. GFDL images are always preferable to those released under fair use. —
BorgHunter
ubx (
talk)
12:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Added "The Dive" to the page, since it's as much an iconic part of Jeter's career as "The Flip". JAF1970 19:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You must not watch baseball 76, if you watch the play it was obviously foul, and you never let a ball drop... even in foul territory, if you can make the play, but you don't you are obviously, Manny Ramirez.
While User:164.55.254.106's edits were over-zealous, the Mr. Clutch section does present some POV and weasely wording. Are there some reliable sources we can cite describing DJ as "one of the best clutch postseason players in baseball history"? -- MichaelZimmer ( talk) 19:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there are. It's called the statistics section of mlb.com.
I'm a yankee fan, own a jeter shirt and what not, but I have to say, I've never heard of a "Holy Trinity of Shortstops," and that should probably be removed from the beginning of the article. Any other opinions?
Jma2133 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I've also done some clean-up; the trivia regarding when Jeter was picked in the amateur draft was incorporated into the early life section, and i think that the sports illustrated poll marking him as the most overrated player should be removed. He got 9% of the vote, when one goes to the link, two points ahead of Carlos Beltran who got 7% and a plethora of other players who received vote percentages in the single digits. Also, the very same website shows he was voted top shortstop in a players poll on year earlier. the poll has dubious results - but I won't just remove that trivia - does anyone else agree?
Jma2133 20:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think Miguel Tejada should be on the list as well... Many people (myself included) thought he was one of the best since hes been playing.
A lot of people don't like Derek Jeter, but to continue the idea of open-sourcing we must try to be as unbias as possible otherwise we violate the whole meaning of what wikipedia means and all what we do. We just must discuss and come to a conlusion trying to be as unbias as possible regardless if you dont like him or any other person. If we just stick to the facts and tell it from an objective point of view. Even though it might annoy a lot of fans that Jeter was voted overrated, its a fact that people voted and that should be put in the article to keep the bias out. He batted .087 in the 2001 world series before he hit the game winning home run over the right field wall. Its a fact. But people have called Jeter clutch and some people think he isn't, its to speculative so keep it that way in the article or just take it off. He lifetime batting avg. in the postseason is .307 and he is the all time leader in hits in the postseason (mlb.com). Through ten seasons he has more hits than Pete Rose did at that time. Four 200 hit seasons, every year he gets votes for mvp. The point is he is one of the greatest players to play the game, and that is an unbias because any one and I mean anyone who watches and follows baseball knows this regardless of what you think of the man.
Please revert the change made by 66.192.84.194 More specifically, the xchange from:
"During a July 1, 2004 extra-inning game versus the Boston Red Sox, Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands while chasing a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon. His forward momentum forced him to keep running and jump into the stands, rather than potentially injuring his knees by stopping short of the two foot high fence on the left field line. He bruised his cheek and required stitches in his chin, but managed to hold onto the ball, ending a 12th inning threat by the Red Sox. The Yankees went on to win the game and Jeter played the next day against the New York Mets."
to
"During a July 1, 2004 extra-inning game versus the Boston Red Sox, Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands after catching a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon. He bruised his cheek and required stitches in his chin, but managed to hold onto the ball, ending a 12th inning threat by the Red Sox. The Yankees went on to win the game and Jeter played the next day against the New York Mets."
Saying: "Jeter leapt head first into the Yankee Stadium stands after catching a pop-up hit near the foul line by Trot Nixon."
makes no sense. It implies he leapt into the stands AFTER catching the ball.
I-baLL 19:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
On October 3,
2006, Jeter became the 6th player in
Major Leagues history to go 5 for 5 in a playoff game leading the Yankees to an 8-4 Game 1 victory over the
Detroit Tigers. Hitting two doubles and a homerun, scoring three.
Is Derek Jeter a first ballot HOF?
I don't think so because, although he is a solid player and clutch, he doesn't have the stats to get him in first ballot. If he finishes with a .315 BA and 3,000 hits on the other hand, it could be a different story. Still thinks he needs a batting title or league MVP. One WS MVP won't do it.
he has 2000 + hits already and 4 WS rings, hes in there today if he retires
no hall yet, maybe later, but if he was on the royals all his life, nobody would know much about him, just another David DeJesus. He's a lucky guy to have his career turn out this great