Template talk:Washington Nationals roster navbox

__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-His_number-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z-His_number"],"text":"His number","linkableTitle":"His number"}-->

His number

__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-His_number-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z-His_number"]}}-->

__DTLATESTCOMMENTTHREAD__{"id":"c-Ositadinma-2009-09-08T20:47:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","timestamp":"2009-09-08T20:47:00.000Z"}__-->__DTCOMMENTCOUNT__4__-->__DTAUTHORCOUNT__2__-->

__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-His_number-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z-His_number"],"text":"His number","linkableTitle":"His number"}-->

You guys who keep adding the #37 are missing the point of why I undid it. I know he WILL be assigned #37 in the future. They handed it to him at the press conference. But that's not unusual with pro teams, including teams that hand jerseys to their draft choices even if they don't know whether they will be able to sign them. The point is that the Wikipedia article is supposed to reflect the present circumstances. At the present time, the Washington Nationals do not regard Stephen Strasburg as having jersey #37 assigned to him, although it's plain that in the future that number WILL be his. They've made it clear that he is not going to pitch at all this season until the Arizona Fall League kicks in. I'd support some kind of usage in all these articles indicating that the team plan to give a player a number when the time comes to do so. Your references to WP:Verify are unavailing because the pictures you cite don't substantiate any contention that Strasburg is already assigned #37. The Nationals are usually very quick about updating the roster and the like on their site when they call up a player, trade for a player, or sign a free agent; they post the assigned number within 24 hours. The fact that they have not done so here indicates that in the team's view, the assignment of this number to Strasburg is being left for the future. That's why I keep undoing edits that claim that he is already #37. 1995hoo (talk) 17:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","author":"1995hoo","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z-His_number","replies":["c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T18:33:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T18:51:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","c-Ositadinma-2009-09-08T20:47:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z"]}}-->

In follow-up to the above, I just posted the following on Talk:Stephen Strasburg: "I was thinking about this further while sorting the laundry and I wonder if it would be a reasonable compromise to leave the dash and to drop a footnote explaining that Strasburg was given a #37 jersey at his introductory press conference but that he is not presently listed on the team's roster that way. Note that at the time of the presser, third-base coach Pat Listach was assigned #37 and he continued to wear it until the first game of the Cubs series on August 25. I think that fact clearly indicates that in the eyes of the team, the presentation of the jersey at the press conference didn't constitute assigning Strasburg that number. (The footnote solution doesn't work for the roster template, which is why I raise it here. I'll post a version of this comment on that talk page too.)" That last parenthetical note is the issue for which I'm not sure of an ideal solution. I recognize why putting a dash in the template is not ideal when his future number is known, although the team use the dash on the roster. I'm not wedded to the use of parentheses; I just don't have a better way to do it. 1995hoo (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-08-29T18:33:00.000Z","author":"1995hoo","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T18:33:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

One more. I put this on the other talk page as well: "A further comment (yes, I suppose I'm talking to myself here). I was trying to find any news about Pat Listach's number change. See this entry from the Washington Post Nationals beat writer's blog ([1]). Listach was given the opportunity of waiting until next year to change numbers, meaning he could have kept wearing #37 for the remainder of this year. I believe this is further confirmation that Strasburg isn't yet "officially" #37. The team couldn't very well have had TWO #37s at the same time, could they?" 1995hoo (talk) 18:51, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-08-29T18:51:00.000Z","author":"1995hoo","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-1995hoo-2009-08-29T18:51:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

See - WP:VERIFY Does not have to be listed on Nationals official roster. Was given #37 at press conference and there are mulitple sources to he he is wearing #37. That is why Litash went to number #4. Ositadinma (talk) 20:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-09-08T20:47:00.000Z","author":"Ositadinma","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Ositadinma-2009-09-08T20:47:00.000Z-1995hoo-2009-08-29T17:42:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->