Talk:MVP Baseball series
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
MVP Baseball series 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. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
It's not fair, is it? It's sad to see that this year's MVP Baseball is the last. I love MVP 2005.
Anyway, anyone else think it's kind of not fair for 2K to get exclusive rights to Major League Baseball? Or for EA to have the NFL monopolized? Let me know.
(All SMiles, May 14, 2005)
[edit] Merge MVP Baseball 2005
There is quite a lot of overlap between these two articles. They should be merged. Thoughts?
-Franklin Bynum 03:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
- I say do it, They are one in the same really. --Bopher1 09:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Merge, the two articles are ver similar ---000
- don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it. don't do it.
- NO Krawhitham 08:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
No and here are my reasons: 1) While the existing MVP '05 page references criticism of focus on the red sox, that team did break the curse of the bambino (and only after 86 years, a serendipitious reference to the '86 team, but i digress) and did so in spectacular stadium, sealing the deal in yankee stadium, no less. they deserve their props, and because the game designers were smart enough to weave that in they created something unique.
2) with MLB electing to grant exclusive rights to one company, they have altered the MVP line, and the '06 college game is something else, and if anything the MVP thread should be split into pro + college versions.
3) i think that MLB's decision also could be used to call into question their anti-trust status, that it was an abuse of monopoly power and it hurts the US economy by eliminating competion in the market, uniquely impacting US jobs/companies because these are high-tech, high-skilled jobs that cannot be easily outsourced--can you really outsource the nuances of a baseball game to to programmers in Inida or the Ukraine? ≈Marcus pmi 01:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- None of those reasons are relevant to this discussion at all. Franklin Bynum 01:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose- It deserves its own page. We are trying to spread knowledge not reduce it. Julz the wizkid
- We are not reducing any of the information, just putting it all in the proper place. Franklin Bynum 01:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose- It would be like putting all the Harry Potter books into one page instead of a separate page for each. Most books and movies have their own page; they're not lumped into the director/author's page. Why should a video game be any different? --Redthing The Great 00:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- As a note, I've removed the merge tag. Most people seem to be against it (plus it's very old, and probably should've been removed a while ago). RobJ1981 16:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mvp06ncaabaseball.jpg
Image:Mvp06ncaabaseball.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
