Talk:Yankee Stadium (1923)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rename to "Old Yankee Stadium"?[edit]

Perhaps it's time to rename this article to "Old Yankee Stadium".. at some point between now and April, "Yankee Stadium" should probably be pointed to the new one. --Mike Schiraldi (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the extensive discussion both above and at Talk:New Yankee Stadium. I don't think anyone disagrees in principle, it's mainly a question of timing and exact titles.
(1) We should probably wait at least until the official closing ceremony in November 2008, and perhaps until either (a) demolition begins or (b) the first pitch in the new Stadium next April.
(2) "Old Yankee Stadium" has much to recommend it, for example, it's natural and it's probably the first name a searcher would use in 2009 or 2010. But the consensus so far has been to call it "Yankee Stadium (1923)" on the model of Wembley Stadium (1923). One reason that's been advanced is the confusion of whether people will think of "Old Yankee Stadium" (as some do now) as referring exclusively to the 1923 Stadium before its renovations in 1976. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:10, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It also depends, to some extent, on what the Yankees start calling it. And until the old one is fully closed, which it obviously won't be until at least the November ceremonies and until the offices actually move across the street, then it's still the "current" ballpark. And also, don't get carried away with the crystal balling even then. There's always a possibility that something could happen to the new one - like maybe an earthquake or something. Until the Yankees have fully vacated the old one and it becomes un-operational (like when they remove all the seats or something), it's still just plain "Yankee Stadium". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page should be "Yankee Stadium (1923-2008)" and the new stadium should be "Yankee Stadium (2009-Present)Engelalber (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't follow Mark Teixeira's announcement in January (that he'd sign with the Yankees) too closely, but I seem to recall that the three or four stories I did read still referred to the facility as Yankee Stadium, if only (as the AP did) to note that his press conference might be the last public event there. Certainly if there's no redirect yet for "Old Yankee Stadium" and "Yankee Stadium (1923)", there should be, but it might still be just a slight hairsbreadth too early to re-title the articles. I don't think anyone yet refers to the uncompleted 2009 facility as just "Yankee Stadium", or that very many refer to "Yankee Stadium (2009)", although as everyone above (including me) acknowledges, that will happen over time unless the 2009 facility adopts a different name. —— Shakescene (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is most advised to keep the article situated at the official name of the stadium and not use "Old Yankee Stadium" until and unless the Yankees themselves use it. Keep in mind that the new stadium has often been referred to as "the new Yankee Stadium" (with small "n") and that it is definitely within the possibility of the stadium having a different name upon opening - or, like the New Comiskey Park (check the redirect's target), have a name change afterwards. There's no need to rush the issue - it will be decided when the new stadium is opened. B.Wind (talk) 03:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to this link, Yankees' officials are going to be given the keys to the new stadium and begin operating from there on February 17. My opinion is that this is the date this article should be renamed to "Yankee Stadium (1923)." Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamedog18 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Final game and closing" section[edit]

I disagree with the current positioning of the "Final game and closing" section. I think the end of the article is the natural position of this section. Also, while other events like boxing, football, concerts religious ceremonies etc. have been held at the stadium and it was built as a multipurpose venue, it began as, and ended asm a baseball stadium. Therefore I believe for both as an accurate reflection of its existence and prose reasons the "Final game and closing" section should be at the very end of the article just above the gallery. If there is no objections or a consensus develops to move it back, I will move it back there Wednesday. Hunter2005 (talk) 02:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree & Disagree (I think). Once there's something to say about the closing ceremonies, I think they should be separated from the Final Game and put at the end or very near the end (perhaps before the field dimensions). However, I was confused when looking for the Final Game when it was detached from all the other baseball. It's hard to arrange this article cleanly (e.g. should Field Dimensions be closer to the discussion of asymmetry and its effect on players? should the All-Star Game come after the Final Game?), but my feeling at the moment is that Baseball should have its own section, concluding with the Final Game, and the other activities (athletic and non-athletic) should be a different section or sections. There's all kinds of other details to ponder, and I'm happy to consider other views and thoughts. As for your proposed move, my position is "Wait".—— Shakescene (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


POSTED BY BIGMAC27712: Agreed. The fact that this section is in the middle of the page isn't very smart. And it's followed up by boxing in 1923. WHAT THE HELL!?!?!??!!? Definitely at the end of the page. ----bigmac27712

The lingering death[edit]

The Yankees' re-signing of Mark Teixeira was announced in January 2009. long after the last rites, in the House that Ruth Built, not in the monster that swallowed Macombs Dam Park. Since the Yankees' offices are still at the 1923 Stadium, should we start a life-after-death section to handle any other noteworthy or at least mentionable events that occur there, if only to indicate that activity still persists there? —— Shakescene (talk) 05:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus to move (at this time) —Preceding unsigned comment added by RegentsPark (talk • contribs) 21:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move to Yankee Stadium? (This move seems to be disputed) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think Yankee Stadium should redirect to the New Yankee Stadium, since the New York Yankees will play there this year and the new park is in operation. An more appropiate name for this article could be Yankee Stadium (1923). 24.185.45.183 (talk) 08:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anthony, the disputed move is the one to Old Yankee Stadium. I am only asking that the undiscussed move be reverted, in line with the discussion above about leaving the old stadium at Yankee Stadium until a consensus is reached. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 09:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or Yankee Stadium could be a disambig page. If the old move is disputed, then presumably a move back would be disputable. Best await the result of this discussion. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. If you've read the discussions on this page, they clearly show that the consensus has been to leave the old stadium at Yankee Stadium. One user moved it to Old Yankee Stadium without bothering to discuss it before hand. Obviously, the person who moved it without discussion is going to dispute reveting the non-consensual move! This is not the first time the page has been moved without discussion, but the admins have always reverted the moves on those occasions. I do not see what is so difficult about understanding that. - BillCJ (talk) 10:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just came here belatedly at the request of Bill to revert the move, which Anthony already has done, but while I'm here, I'd like to put my completely unbiased 2 cents in...it would probably be in keeping with neutrality and other precedents to have the articles named Yankee Stadium (1923) and Yankee Stadium (2009). This is a very common naming solution used with ships (for instance, we have SS Celtic (1872) and RMS Celtic (1901). AKRadeckiSpeaketh 14:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Akradecki. Once the team moves to the new stadium, the vernacular will be that most of the media will refer to the new stadium as simply "Yankee Stadium". I think that after opening day, the old stadium should be named Yankee Stadium (1923) and the new Yankee Stadium (2009), or simply Yankee Stadium. --rogerd (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I have created Yankee Stadium (1923) as a redirect to Yankee Stadium. I say that we leave it as it is for now, but later this year (or next year), we should reconsider the issue if most sources start commonly referring to the new stadium as simply "Yankee Stadium". --rogerd (talk) 17:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a disambig page at Yankee Stadium (disambiguation). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that for at least the next ten years this article should remain at Yankee Stadium and the article about the new stadium should be called Yankee Stadium (2009), with a tophat at the top of each article for the other. If the new stadium is named, as Citi Field was, something that is not being discussed, this whole discussion is moot. Since there are two primary usages, I do not see that only a disambiguation link be at the top of each page. 199.125.109.88 (talk) 15:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think Yankee Stadium should be the disambig page and the other 2 "Yankee Stadium (year opened)". Either that, or keep this article as about the original since the new one hasn't even opened (yet alone be anywhere near as notable as the original). TJ Spyke 19:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • We should probably wait at least until the first public event occurs at the apparently-relocated team offices or on the field of New Yankee Stadium to see what the press and the team call the two facilities. That, however, does not by itself tell us how average Wikipedia users (split between New Yorkers and outsiders, as also between sports fans and non-fans) will identify and distinguish between the two sites. My fairly strong feeling is that for the next couple of years (should the Yankees indeed call the 2009 facility "Yankee Stadium"), the most common names used by the ordinary person will be "Old Yankee Stadium" (ignoring the 1970's renovation) and "New Yankee Stadium". But as recently as last month the press was referring to Mark Teixeira's announcement as possibly the last public event at Yankee Stadium. It might be a good idea to wait until the first semi-official reference to "Old Yankee Stadium" before making the move. —— Shakescene (talk) 23:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The best parallel I can think of is Wembley Stadium and Wembley Stadium (1923). Regardless of nostalgia, the old one will be history soon, and the entire focus will be on the new stadium. Deal with Yankee the same as with Wembley. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly oppose any movement to move the article to Old Yankee Stadium. This seems like like it isn't a very NPOV way of naming the 2 different Yankee Stadiums. Old and new? Is that the best we can come up with? Furthermore, naming it like "Old Yankee Stadium" seems to indicate that the word "old" was somehow used in the naming of the previous Yankee Stadium... which it was not! Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Opening Day band[edit]

I wrote the small subsection about Opening Day (April 1923) from Robert A. Slayton's biography† of baseball nut, NY Governor & US Presidential candidate Al Smith, who threw out the Stadium's first ball.

Slayton says that at 3 p.m., John Philip Sousa struck up the band of the "Seventh Regiment" in the Star-Spangled Banner. But when I asked an editor knowledgeable about both New York and military history (User Talk:CORNELIUSSEON), he said The New York Times didn't report the 7th Regiment's presence. (1923 is when the Times starts charging for its archive, so I can't easily check for myself.)

Does anyone here have other sources about Opening Day that might help resolve this question?

† Empire Statesman: The Rise and Redemption of Al Smith, The Free Press (Simon & Schuster), New York, 2005, ISBN 0-684-86302-2, pp. 229-30

—— Shakescene (talk) 00:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no question Sousa was there opening day, as various photos show him with the pre-game ceremonies in deep center field; and Yankee Stadium: Fifty Years of Drama, by Joseph Durso (1972, Houghton-Mifflin), says on p.36, "... the Seventh Regiment Band serenaded what the press acclaimed as 'the greatest crowd that ever saw a baseball game.'" On p.41 it says, "... the Seventh Regiment Band kept up the beat while Governor Alfred E. Smith and his wife made their way to the front box reserved for [Commissioner]] Landis..." Then on p.42, "...John Philip Sousa, in band-master's finery, took baton in hand and stepped to the head of the company. With Sousa and the band leading the way, the teams and the political lions paraded to the center-field flagpole..." It also reports Sousa leading the band (presumably there was just one band there) in the Anthem while the flag was being raised, and Smith throwing out the first ball. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Speedy close See #Move? above. This is way too soon to bring this up again. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yankee Stadium → Yankee Stadium (1923), and New Yankee Stadium → Yankee Stadium, — Both the old and new stadiums share the same official name. This is to provide disambiguation for the old stadium — BillCJ (talk) 01:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Weak support - I made the nomination of behalf of other users, as this issue has not gone away despite several move discussions. However, this is the first one to use the names suggested above. Ithe Yankees make other alternatives known, then the names should be updated without prejudice. - BillCJ (talk) 04:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion of proposed move[edit]

Any additional comments:

It is way too soon to propose a move, however feel free to discuss your position here. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support proposed move & renaming[edit]

Oppose proposed move & renaming[edit]

  • Qualified opposition — I'd like to see more evidence that "Yankee Stadium" is now being used more for the new stadium than for the old. Also I think that "Yankee Stadium (1923)" [like, yes, "Wembley Stadium (1923)"], is non-intuitive, and that "Old Yankee Stadium" (when the time comes) should be the new name of this page unless people use a different shorthand. It's not the term, naturally, that was used while the stadium was both up and operating, but then neither was "Yankee Stadium (1923)". —— Shakescene (talk) 05:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • And that's why we need to review and take a "vote". In fact, the matter can continue to be discussed. Just because someone brought the hammer down on the move proposal for now, doesn't mean we have to stop working on it. As far as being "intuitive", what most folks would enter is "Yankee Stadium", which would be the new one, and then at the top you would have "for the old Yankee Stadium..." Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Exactly. I have no intention of stopping discussion. It is clear that at some point the new stadium is going to be called "Yankee Stadium" or "something". However, life is too short to keep moving article names back and forth every two weeks. Or even making anyone worried that they could be moved that often. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 06:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly oppose naming anything "Old" and "New", which does not seem to be a very POV way of naming things. If anything, you would want to say "Previous", in place of "Old", but that makes even less sense for naming an article. Furthermore, using "Old" or "New" in the article title may incorrectly imply that those words were used in the naming of either facility. If you are gonna go with a way of disambiguating the two Yankee Stadiums, it needs to be by year. The standard at Wikipedia for disambiguating multiple pages with the same name is to put a differentiating title or property in parentheses. That should be how we eventually move both Yankee Stadium articles. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

split sections[edit]

This article is quite lengthy. Maybe features and/or history should be seperate articles.--Levineps (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Work needed[edit]

I hesitate to mention this, because I myself already have long-overdue 2008 election returns and Fortune 500 companies to update (as well as whatever should be my quota of the stalled project of fixing hundreds of possibly-misdirected pre-2009 links to "Yankee Stadium"), but there's a lot of dull, routine work that still needs to be done on this article, chiefly better sourcing where verification isn't obvious (e.g. specific game scores) † and changing present [is & has] and present-perfect [has been & has had] tenses to something further in the past [was, had, had been or had had]. The proper tenses of the verbs in some sentences won't be certain until the 1923 stadium is either demolished or else kept going for some purpose, but in either case, the currently-displayed tenses seem wrong. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

† There are only 30 footnotes, which seems a little sparse for an article of this length and density.

The present/past tense issue is easily solved. More difficult is the footnotes question. I haven't looked at the article lately. Are there very many [citation needed] tags? Do there need to be more? Maybe that would be the area to focus on. Changing "is" to "was" is tedious but requires no research. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 06:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let me put it this way, Bugs: there are so many unsourced sentences and paragraphs in history alone that I wouldn't know where to begin tagging (between the bases, maybe?) Eight and a half decades from the pre-1923 conception to the end have only five (5) footnotes, while the actual closing and projected demolition are well-documented with 8 (eight) footnotes. Most of the history is rather well-written and interesting, but it's anyone's guess where any one item or set of items came from. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe start with 5 or 10 items that you consider to be the most questionable, or maybe just the first 5 or 10 you run into, to make it easier; and we'll see what we can do. Luckily, Yankee Stadium has had plenty written about it, so there is no shortage of source material. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, the first two paragraphs and almost all of the third paragraph in Yankee Stadium (1923)#Planning and construction have no sources. I'm utterly unqualified to source it myself, since my knowledge and interest in baseball, let alone the Yanks, are in fact quite limited, and my own time and effort would probably be better spent on the backlog of things I do know something about or need to do (like updating election stats and the Fortune 500 in NYC, or maybe "What links here" for "Yankee Stadium"). I got sucked into Wikipedia because I happened to have copies of the 1929 and 1943 World Almanacs, which allowed me to fill out New York City mayoral elections by borough, which got me into a major reworking of The Bronx (because I was dissatisfied with what I found when I wanted to learn about it), which naturally led me to Yankee Stadium. (I'd already made my own chart of World Series matchups, which led me by a separate path to the World Series and MLB articles, but that doesn't mean I know much about the actual athletic history; I only own a couple of popularized books about the National Pastime, by Goodwin and Shaughnessy, and they're definitely not about the Yankees!) —— Shakescene (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That one section covers a lot of ground (in more ways than one) and some of it is referenced in other articles. Some of the details I recognize from books on Yankee Stadium, so that could be a source. However, it would still be useful to have [citation needed] tags on items that you specifically question, so we know what to look for. For example, the Yankees playing at the Polo Grounds is already well covered elsewhere, so it doesn't need a footnote. The famous quote about "Queens or some other out-of-the-way place..." appears in many sources, but maybe that needs a specific source for this article. It's quoted probably due to the unintended irony of it. Not only did they not go to Queens, they built practically next door, or just across the river, thus rubbing the Giants' nose in it every day for the next 35 years before the Giants threw in the towel and moved to the Left Coast. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not challenging or questioning anything. I'm certain that (given the number of expert eyes that have seen it, and the obvious erudition that went into composing it) there are multiple good, solid, reliable sources for almost every point. If there are individual items that need double-checking for more than formalistic reasons, I just don't know enough to spot them for tagging. And I hate seeing citation tags speckled through uncontroversial lines.
It just looks a bit strange for such a fundamentally-sound article (especially since I spent a couple of days just checking whether John Philip Sousa conducted the 7th Regiment Band on Opening Day, for my own microscopic fourth-hand contribution.)
Is this — and I'm not asking this sarcastically — an article where we dispense with strict protocol (and for the time being any hypothetical hopes for Featured or Good Article status) in favor of common sense and sparing the reader from tedium, by just listing the half-dozen-odd standard works from which (let me postulate) all the currently-unsourced items before, say, 1960 come? That's not a fanciful suggestion, because that's basically what I and my predecessors did with New York City mayoral elections: it was pointless to source each of 31 general and dozen primary elections separately, as opposed to several specific events which are sourced. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I for one am not keen on half of an article being taken up by footnotes, as seems to be the trend. It adds to the believability of an article, I suppose, but sometimes they really get carried away with it. I do think it would be useful to list some source books (if that's not already done) and then see if there's anything that's really doubtful. Sousa was definitely there on opening day in 1923, they even have him pictured in at least one of the books. You can spend a lot of time on tedium like that, or you can ask for sourcing on anything that seems questionable. Then you can take your chances with GA status and see what an expert thinks. Certainly the now-abandoned Stadium would be a prime candidate for an FA one of these times. That's not especially what I focus on. But if that's the goal, then other eyes could evaluate it and brutally tell us where it falls short. For one thing, ironically, they're liable to say it's too long. Well, that's what happens with an 85-year-old structure dripping with history. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 04:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(very trivial aside) It wasn't whether Sousa was there, but (as you might remember since you did the checking) which band he conducted. Since Robert Slayton's biography of Al Smith, citing a couple of newspapers and the same standard sources that this page does, said it was the 7th Regiment Band, I accepted that like all the other details I mentioned, but when (for Wikilinking purposes) I asked an expert † whether it was the same as the "Silk Stocking Regiment", an élite New York militia unit that had fought in the Civil War, he surprised me by saying The New York Times account of Opening Day mentioned Sousa but not the 7th Reg't Band. † (User:CORNELIUSSEON) but the more important point is that I did attribute my half-dozen lines about Opening Day, even though to a third- or fourth-hand source where some more-direct baseball work that I don't have would have been better. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, this is, like, deja vu. Wow, this is, like, deja vu. Yes, I recall looking up some stuff about this, maybe a year ago. Trouble is, I don't recall the details. I'll have to look. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 05:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So what happened to all the old verbiage from the talk page? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 05:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, there's an archive. Talk:Yankee Stadium (1923)/Archive 1 But I can't find the info. It must be getting to late tonight. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 05:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs, Bugs, you burrowed down so far into the archive for your carrot when it was in fact lying right here in the open air on the ground above, at #Opening Day band (plenty sneaky, ¿huh?) Maybe it is getting "to late" by a hare. Or is this your sneaky way of snatching the Mr. Magoo award from Elmer Fudd? —— Shakescene (talk) 06:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, hush mah mouth. Yep, definitely two late at night. It gets late early out here. And even later now. I'll get back to this sometime tomorrow. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 06:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gate 2[edit]

In the closing and demolition section, it mentions that the former Gate 2 was unaltered. According to this [1] the gate WAS altered. The reference in the article goes to the Save Gate 2 website, while this reference goes to the New Yorker. Which should we use, and what should the article say? If this has been discussed before, I apologize- I must have missed it. Kjscotte34 (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2009/08/10/090810ta_talk_goldberger

Heritage Field[edit]

Now that demolition is complete, should info on Heritage Field be in the Old Yankee Stadium article? Or should a separate article be created? Richiekim (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (April 2011)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yankee Stadium (1923) → Yankee Stadium (1923-2008) – This is a more accurate and clear title. The stadium was the one and only Yankee Stadium from 1923 to 2008, not just 1923. NYyankees51 (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you call it, don't put a blasted en dash in the title... those things are a pain in the ass. Spanneraol (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No kidding. And there's nothing confusing about the (1923) part. It's a bogus issue. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (politely but firmly): We want to make it as easy as possible for users to find and enter the name, so the simplest form possible should be used. I preferred Old Yankee Stadium for that purpose, even if the name was rarely used while the Stadium was in use. Asking people to remember not only the opening but the closing year aggravates rather than lessens the problem. The purpose of article titles is not, believe it or not, formal precision [desirable, of course, though that be] or even elegance [and I agree that Yankee Stadium (1923-2008) is a cleaner title], but to identify and distinguish items in the way that's accessible to the widest range of ordinary readers. The vext and gnarly difficulty of translating hyphens, minus-signs and dashes from printed type to varying computer screens, software and keyboards is an additional argument against what would work rather well in a printed book, where someone looking through pages and columns for Yankee Stadium and Yankee Stadium (1923) would automatically encounter Yankee Stadium (1923-2008) and Yankee Stadium (2009). Cf. Talk:Wembley Stadium (1923), as well as older discussions on this page and in Talk:Yankee Stadium. ¶ By the way, while everyone agreed in 2009 that the premature move of New Yankee Stadium to Yankee Stadium had orphaned hundreds of links elsewhere that might lead to the wrong article (e.g. Ruth, Gehrig and DiMaggio playing in the new stadium), I don't think the monumental task of keeping or renaming those older links has been properly begun, let alone put on the road to completion. [P.S. I've added a date to the subheading so that links don't navigate to the earlier move discussions of 2009.] —— Shakescene (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Agree with Shakescene. Rlendog (talk) 01:22, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • suggestion how about a redirect from Yankee Stadium (1923-2008) to Yankee Stadium (1923) or Yankee Stadium (Built 1923)? SirFozzie (talk) 01:26, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - In terms of searching, it makes not one iota of difference, as Yankee Stadium (1923) is going to be right next to Yankee Stadium (1923-2008), and we don't need two of them. Also, there's perhaps the nearest British equivalent to the Ruth House: Wembley Stadium (1923). Plus, with such a move, every freakin' reference would have to be changed. Time-waster. Busy work. No benefit to the reader. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • And there's a semantical problem: Yankee Stadium survived as an entity until just this past winter. So having its end date as "2008" is not factually correct. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:32, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


¶ Although I agree with the result, the closing seems a little abrupt to me (only a week). Three opponents in seven days do not a WP:Snowball make, nor even a No-Consensus. If the proposer wants to reopen his move request for a couple of weeks in hopes of soliciting comments from other editors, I'd support the reopening. I'd sympathize because last year I was on the losing side of a hasty move of The Bronx to Bronx (since reversed). This move request was not a trivial one, and I'm still open to hearing different reasoning from my own. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage Field[edit]

I've uploaded an image of the almost completed Heritage Field into Wikipedia Commons. The image is also used on the Macombs Dam Park page, so if someone would like to take a look at it and incorporate it into the article, please feel free. As the article currently stands, it may go best in the "Replacement, Closing, and Demolition" section Kjscotte34 (talk) 13:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, only 14 months late. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Army football[edit]

Should Army Black Knights football be mentioned as a tenant in the infobox? They played home games against Navy, Notre Dame, and other opponents over a number of years between Yankee Stadium's opening and its 1970s revamp Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 14:11, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary point: metric conversion[edit]

The article currently says "20,000 cubic yards (26,000 cubic meters) of concrete used in the original structure" but a cubic yard is less than a cubic meter (1cy ~= .76 m^3). Someone's made a mistake somewhere, but I don't have any way to tell where. This section can be removed when it's corrected. Wyvern (talk) 20:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spotting and pointing this out. I used a conversion template to make a conversion to (15,000 cubic meters), but if the error was the other way around — 26,000 cubic meters incorrectly converted to cubic yards — I'd certainly like a correction (or a confirmation if the original source said 20,000 cu. yds). —— Shakescene (talk) 08:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just experimenting to see if the conversion was just done the wrong way around, I see that 20,000 divided (rather than multiplied) by 0.7645 will give just over 26,160, which would round to 26,000. An editor who has the source {Fifty Years of Drama, 1992) says that among other statistics it gives, as I expected, 20,000 cubic yards. [See my talk page and also Conversion of units#Volume.] So this seems to have been just a well-intentioned edit that backflipped, and I feel confident in keeping the corrected conversion at 15,000 cubic meters. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:13, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds fine. Keep in mind this was the original structure. What with extending the 2nd and 3rd decks into the outfield, and rebuilding the bleachers in concrete, plus the extra concrete they added to the upper tier in 1974-75 (minus whatever they chipped away near the field), the final figure was probably rather larger than the original. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:31, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--The House that Ruth Built explanation-- "The house that Ruth built" redirects here, but without satisfactory explanation. I'm a male baby boomer from suburban New York and my cohort shares this belief: The stadium nickname has 3 meanings: 1) The "new" stadium will accommodate the Babe's huge draw; 2) The hitherto boring home run will now be newsworthy (albeit absurdly easy for lefties with the 314 feet right field fence, albeit less absurd than the Ebbets Field 297 feet); and 3) --and most unsaid--the small right field will nicely accommodate right-fielder non-athletes who run slowly but hit well like Babe Ruth. There is no salient story about a great outfielding play by the Babe. He was arguably the first designated hitter (I'm confident I'm not the first person to observe this, but it may be time for widespread recognition.) So, can anyone find a citation that documents this idea that "The House that Ruth Built" included the notion of a cozy right field for a non-athletic, slow-running outfielder/power hitter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danaxtell (talk • contribs) 08:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Yankee Stadium (1923). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Concerts[edit]

Currently the section on concerts asserts, uncited, that "The first concert ever held there was an ensemble R&B show on June 21, 1969". But private correspondence dating from 1925 and 1926 frequently mentions enjoyable concerts being held at Yankee Stadium. These would have been orchestral concerts, probably playing "pops", popular classical music. Tchaikovsky's "Pathétique" Symphony is specifically mentioned in one 1926 letter. Obviously I have no usable citations. Milkunderwood (talk) 06:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the discussion started on my talk page. Reconfigure as needed:

Hi, FYI I've left notice on the Talk page of a problem concerning concerts at the old stadium, and it looks like no one is watching Talk there. Someone else had already posted the no-cites box at the article section on concerts. I didn't think it was a good idea to just delete the section. Milkunderwood (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I can find out anything. I know for sure that Billy Joel had a concert there. Can't say about the others. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's what I'm seeing, using Newspapers.com (pay site):

The first concert ever held there was an ensemble R&B show on June 21, 1969, put together by the Isley Brothers.

Date confirmed by N.Y. Daily News, 6-17-1969.

The first rock concert held at the stadium was on June 22, 1990, by Billy Joel.

Date confirmed by Newsday, 6-25-1990.

It was also the site of two dates of U2's Zoo TV Tour in 1992. During one song, Bono paid tribute to the show's setting with the line "I dreamed I saw Joe DiMaggio/Dancing with Marilyn Monroe".

Dates of 8-29-1992 and 8-30-1992 confirmed by Newsday, 8-14-92.

Pink Floyd also performed two sold-out shows at this venue on their final North American tour in 1994 in support of their album The Division Bell.

Date of 6-10-1994 and 6-11-1994 confirmed by Newsday, 6-10-1994.
I am not seeing claims of any of these being "firsts", but I'm still looking. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

¶ I've never knowingly stopped near either Yankee stadium and know almost nothing of the subject (which has made me uniquely qualified to meddle in this article over the past dozen years), but I found something just by Binging "Yankee Stadium concerts 1926" to find a list of concerts going back to 1966:

https://www.concertarchives.org/venues/yankee-stadium?year=1966

Yankee Stadium had 1 concert in 1966 Date Concert Venue Location Jun 10, 1966 Ray Charles / The Beach Boys / The Byrds / Stevie Wonder / jerry butler / The McCoys / The Marvelettes / The Gentrys / The Cowsills / The Guess Who Yankee Stadium New York, New York, United States

Concerts Per Year:

2022 3 concerts
2017 1 concert
2016 2 concerts
2015 1 concert...
1990 2 concerts
1989 1 concert
1988 1 concert
1966 1 concert

¶ I know that's four decades after what this section's originator was seeking, but it might perhaps be a start, since it's also a quarter-century before what's now on the YS(1923) page.

¶ So maybe some more Binging, Googling and Duck-Duck-Going might yield something earlier.

¶ Helpfully, I hope —— Shakescene (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not finding it in Newspapers.com, but that doesn't necessarily prove anything. Maybe it would be a good time to transfer this discussion to the Stadium talk page? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea, Bugs, especially since Milkunderwood has already started the relavant thread at Talk:Yankee Stadium (1923) —— Shakescene (talk) 21:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did check The New York Times' TimesMachine for the day after that June 10, 1966 concert (apparently a Friday night concert) but their arts pages didn't seem to cover rock & roll that closely then. No mention of this concert, although interesting items about Lilian Gish, Lunt and Fontanne, The Cecil Taylor Unit and the Production Code Administration overruling its own administrator by giving the MPAA seal of approval to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Perhaps others will have better luck. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I also tried checking the TimesMachine for a Tchaikovsky performance in 1926. But the Machine's search function is maddeningly unproductive unless you already know something specific about the event, place or person. The 1926 issues describe several concerts at The Stadium featuring Tchaikovsky's works, but the Stadium seems to be the Lewisohn Stadium (1915-73) rather than the House that Ruth Built. Again others may have better luck. Perhaps User:Milkunderwood can find other hints in that 1925-26 personal correspondence. —— Shakescene (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shakescene, this is my clue -- thank you. What I'm finding in my old family letters is a couple of references to going to Yankee games, but for concerts including the Tchaikovsky it's always simply "the Stadium". So this must be the Lewisohn Stadium instead, and I was just conflating these. I apologize to all for the mixup. (There remains the problem of the entire Concerts section at the Yankee Stadium being uncited, if that can be fixed.) Milkunderwood (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It might make more sense to say that the Stadium hosted a number of concerts over the years, for example... and then list the ones already shown, and include the link. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yankee_Stadium_(1923)&oldid=1204849709"