User talk:Delaywaves

Hi, I already add the reference to the change I made. Part of the article says "Due to discrepancies in historical stats, some numbers may differ according to the source. Elias is the official statistician of Major League Baseball and credits Foxx with 1,924RBIs" http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120620&content_id=33633628&vkey=news_nyy&c_id=nyy

You wrote to me: "Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to the page List of Major League Baseball players with 1,000 runs batted in appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Delaywaves • talk 00:08, 21 June 2012" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.7.201.2 (talk)

Hi delaywaves, I've been studying baseball articles on Wikipedia and the impact of baseball report on the quality of the images on Wikipedia. I would like to interview you for my study. Do you think I could give you a call at some point?

Can you email me at nagaraj AT mit DOT edu, or leave a reply on my talk page? Thanks!

http://abhishek.mit.edu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalek2point3 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dalek2point3 (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Delaywaves, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! You might consider adding something (anything) to your WP:User page. It will get the red out of your name in edit summaries. This confers some subtle benefits, as you will find out. If I can be of assistance, please let me know. Best to you and happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nifty photo from 1961. The source,[1] lists the various pols surrounding JFK. But they overlooked someone important, who would figure significantly in the 1961 season. Can you spot him? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it Jack Ruby in the fifth row? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing him. I'm talking about Commissioner Ford Frick, who's straight up from Mike Mansfield and slightly obscured by him. Frick would screw the most fascinating thing about the season by deciding that Roger Maris needed to hit 61 within 154 games (instead of 162) or else Maris would get an "asterisk" next to the new record. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, a terrific addition to that article! Isn't it something how those houses look just the same today as when the TV cameras used to pick up Callison's and Allen's HRs bouncing off them. Thanks for posting. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, man — the Brush staircase is too cool, and a great photo, too, with the leaves and some of the concrete gone. Nice work, and thanks for steering me to it... I never would have found it myself. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 10 — I moved the 1955 photo to the right because it made a big swath of empty space on widescreen monitors when it was on the left. Regards — HarringtonSmith (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Duke Snider color.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I like very much, most of the photos you've been adding, the few that are taken from TV/film are not really suitable. Just thought I'd mention this before someone else does. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "not suitable" I mean they are too blurry. I found that if I shrink them down to postage-stamp size, they look less blurry - but that kind of defeats the purpose. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're free, and I guess they can stay in the articles, but someone might complain less nicely. Just a friendly caution. :) There is a risk that someone will bluntly state that they have to go due to quality. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ones I noticed in particular are these:

• 
• 
• 

Even at postage stamp size, they're rather indistinct. Because of the need for free content, there is a lot of tolerance for amateur snapshots and such. But it's possible someone's going to come along and say these are not suitable even as free content. If you want to invite trouble, you could take these to the baseball project page and get some opinions. In contrast, the LoC stuff is great, priceless. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not going to get into any trouble over these items. The worst that can happen is that someone will nominate for deletion on the grounds of poor quality. Then you can make a case for them, if you care to. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Delaywaves, I must agree with Baseball Bugs about the usability of those fuzzy shots. There are a few dozen great Shibe shots in The Bain Collection at the LOC and they're all public domain — though they're teens and '20s and therefore all A's and no Phils. You might want to take a look. if you haven't already. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 00:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. This is a terrific set of 4x5 negs taken after Shibe was abandoned. I think they'd make a terrific gallery of their own: "Gallery: The Final Years". Being large format, they're super quality. Best of all, they're all PD under HABS. I'll help with/take care of the uploading, if you like the idea of the separate gallery. What do you think, Bugs? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think some of the Bain pics are already in use. Some of the exterior shots in your second link are really good, detailed closeups of the architecture. Mr. Shibe and Mr. Mack really put some thought into the initial design, and maybe the article needs more on that, at least implicitly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:40, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, those abandoned photos are great! I've never uploaded licensed photos from other sites like that, do you just submit whatever license they had on the website to Wikipedia? (If that makes any sense.) And yes, those Bain photos are already in use. About to try my new signature for the first time... Delaywaves ^talk 01:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are many (but not all) collections at the Library of Congress that are public domain, and there are templates you enter in the "Permission" block at Commons and the system supplies the verbiage. Would you like me to upload the nine photos? I'd be glad to help. I only ask that we put the nine in their own gallery. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go right ahead with these new photos. When you say, "their own gallery," would that mean that on the Shibe Park page, there would be another gallery after the first one that just contains these? I guess that sounds fine. Would you mind telling me just how you uploaded these, once you do? I'd always like some more editing advice. Delaywaves ^talk 02:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A separate gallery for architectural features, yes? Does the article say what the architectural style actually is? To me it looks a bit like Italianate, but I am no expert on such matters. Another point: Note the twisted steel beams visible in some of the photos. They must have been taken after the fire that caused a lot of damage to the interior of the park, I think it was August of 1971 but I'm not sure. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:40, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was in the neighborhood. French Renaissance architecture style.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure they really are public domain, or they'll get shot down quickly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon: of course they're public domain. What do you take me for? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball Bugs, were you accusing me of subterfuge, or was it ineptitude? You might want to brush up on the basic facts of HABS — I did supply a link to the HABS photos, did you bother to read it? — before suggesting that another editor would try to upload under false pretenses. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm just paranoid about the deletionists on wikipedia, who will look for any excuse to delete something. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delaywaves, I'm glad you like the 1973 photos — and I'm sure you see why they really need their own gallery. As for the title I slapped on the first gallery, it's just a place holder; feel free to put a better one on. I searched high and low for a PD image of the Eagles playing at Shibe to use in that section, but only came up with the same couple you always see, and they're both copyrighted and don't show much of the park anyway. There were photos taken inside the place — not by the HABS project — and frankly, they're really depressing: there are small trees growing on the field, and the second floor stands dangle down crazily from the fire damage. There's none of the grandeur and dignity of the exterior shots. Anyway, glad you like and feel free to rework the Gallery 1 title. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Also, I didn't upload the aerial shot because it's a photograph of a photocopy; the contrast is way through the roof, and the quality is really poor. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 14:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: well, we're together about that, the deletionists I mean. One of the many things critically wrong with this noble, but fatally flawed, exercise. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delaywaves: Yes, all those terrific Memorial Stadium photos are public domain because they're all part of the HABS project. (Note: like most HABS images, they need cropping at the edges, which you must do before uploading them.) If you need a primer in uploading HABS (or any LOC) images, just ask. BTW, I saw a no-hitter in Memorial Stadium when my son and I went to say good-bye to the place in August of its final summer, '91 or whenever it was; Wilson Alvarez of the ChiSox threw it against the O's. Only no-hitter I ever saw in person. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Delaywaves: If we all answer on the same page, and always at the very bottom, not tucked up higher where it's easy to overlook, it makes for the most cohesive conversation. I nominate this page, which is on my watchlist. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:06, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as Delay is OK with it. FYI, I added a little bit of text to the two galleries. I also changed gallery 1 to chronological order. If you think it looks poor, feel free to revise. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Harrington: Yep, that sounds fine. Here's the first memorial stadium photo, does it look OK? There aren't too many more on the site that I think are very useful, but there are a few. I wish I was alive to see games at all these old ballparks, even boring ones like Memorial Stadium. Cool story about Alvarez, Harrington, I have tickets to a Yankee game in about a week that could coincide with Jeter's 3000th hit. That would be amazing. Delaywaves ^talk 20:16, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the "main" page for the Memorial Stadium collection? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:48, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harrington: How did you know that the Shibe photos were taken in '73? Did it say somewhere on the site, or was it just inferring? I had to guess about the Memorial Stadium one, I just said circa 2000. Delaywaves ^talk 20:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: It looks great! The photo is great and your upload is impeccable. There's two other buttons to "press" next to the one with the old bellows camera, one button is the paperwork that makes the bldg significant and the other is details of the shoot. They most often (though not always) give the date, and sometimes the photog's name, which is nice to add in the "Author" field along with the HABS when you know it. Nice work. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I removed the two lines you added to the two galleries. The first one was self-evident, and the second is a topic that should be covered as a first paragraph under "History", not down in a gallery. BTW, I'm a bit skeptical of that website you cited. I think you were closer with your first guess that it was Italian revival, not French Prov as they said. Somewhere on that site they said that the Ballantine scoreboard at Shibe came from Yankee Stadium and I'm pretty sure it was Ebbets. If we're going to do a proper upgrade to the "History" section, one of us needs to get access to the Kuklick book on Shibe. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harrington:Thanks, and I'm pretty sure the scoreboard was from Yankee Stadium. I think I've seen photos of it in each park and I've read about it in a few places. Delaywaves ^talk 20:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain it was from Yankee Stadium. I have the Kuklick book. I'll see what I can find. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and/or Harrington: Do you guys know which street faced that big plaque/text/sign on the Memorial Stadium exterior? Was it 33rd street? On my last photo in the gallery, I just put "from street," but it would be good to say which one. Delaywaves ^talk 20:48, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The big memorial plaque faced south, which was 33rd Street, I think. Yes, 33rd. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the Kuklick book, p.28: French Renaissance. As to the scoreboard, in 1956, replacing one built in 1941, nothing said about where the board came from, p.130. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence Ritter's Lost Ballparks, p.185, states that the 1956 scoreboard came from Yankee Stadium. Here's a look at the board at Connie Mack:[3] Here's the old scoreboard at Yankee Stadium as it was in 1956:[4] And here's the Yankee Stadium replacement board under construction [5] no date given but obviously after 1956. The games on the scoreboard suggest early April, 1958.[6] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page[7] has a series of photos of the various Yankee Stadium scoreboards, chronologically but no years indicated. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Within this interesting collection of Ebbets Field photos[8] is a shot of their scoreboard, which I feel safe in saying is not the one that was sent to Philadelphia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a new section because the old one was getting ungainly. Bugs, I stand corrected on the architectural style, if Bruce K says it's French. Also stand corrected on Yankee Stadium being the source of the Ballantine board. It's good to be wrong twice in a row — keeps one humble. Delay, I checked LOC for actual dates and in this case there were none. Also, the general HABS code for these shots is MD-1111, but each image also has a suffix number like MD-1111-1. It keeps the WP Deletion Goons at little more at bay if you include that suffix number in the HABS template entry — lets 'em go right to the very shot when they check, and they do check.

How do you fellas feel about adding a first paragraph to the "History" section, mentioning the desolate nature of the block in 1906, the contracting of the design/construction company, the architectural style, the hoopla of the opening and the dazzling reviews the joint got, given its quantum-leap status. Nothing too lengthy, just a paragraph, but it seems like an important part of the story to me.

Finally, not to seem too anal, but what do you say we always keep the same indents in our discourse here — Delaywaves can be 0 colons, Bugs 1 colon, and I'll be two, and we'll always post at the very bottom. It'll make the conversation much easier to follow. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Got it, after I put this next photo in the article I'll go back and add those suffix numbers, which I see now on the site. Delaywaves ^talk 22:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I uploaded all the photos I thought were necessary, but if either of you see any that you like, go right ahead. Delaywaves ^talk 02:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also on the site were some photos of Roosevelt Stadium, and I've uploaded one of them so far. The survey number for that was different from the Memorial Stadium ones, does the Roosevelt one look OK? Delaywaves ^talk 03:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again about Roosevelt Stadium, after all the abandonment photos there is this page, which shows some earlier ones from when the stadium was still in use. Can we not upload them, because we can't assume they were taken by the HABS, or are they OK? Delaywaves ^talk 03:45, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay, those HABS photos are just terrific. They have a wonderful melancholy quality to them, in a way that the Shibe photos did not have. I would urge you to remove the captions from them, on two counts: first, most of the captions are self-evident and readers kinda resent when you tell them something that's plain to anyone ("former concession stand"). More importantly, though, I think the explanations actually diminish the ghostly, sad atmosphere of the pictures. Imagine it if it were a TV documentary — you'd rather be alone with the memories in silence than have an announcer's voice tell you what you already knew, that it had been a locker room. It's your call, of course, but if it were mine, I'd pull 'em. Also, I'm concerned some goon or other will flag "Abandonment" as unencyclopedic. Might never happen, but if it does, remember where you heard it first. Anyway, the gallery looks real good! Your next stop at the LOC should be to check out The Bain Collection which has a bunch of baseball images, mostly from 1900-1925, but a lot from NY. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:57, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Delay, all HABS photos are public domain. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: I couldn't resist posting a link to the best Shibe Park photo of all: the middle of the 9th in the last game the A's ever played in the place, September 19, 1954. Talk about an end-of-the world feeling! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Notice also the old Shibe scoreboard, flush with the infamous spite fence (except for the clock). Regarding Memorial Stadium, an abandoned ballpark is an incredibly sad sight, and while the pictures may speak for themselves to us fans, a minimal caption should probably be used for the benefit of those to whom it's less obvious. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:14, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs please use a single colon on all your postings, as outlined above. Then we all three have our own "groove". It really works out better. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, I'm not sure what your experience in publishing is outside of Wikipedia, but professional writers and editors the world over deplore the self-evident caption, which most of the present Memorial Stadium captions are. WP:CAPTION urges not to "detail the obvious." Perhaps Delay wants to retain captions in his gallery, it's his choice, but they really need to be touched up from what they are now. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Harrington: Okay, I removed a few of the photo captions, but I think it looks a bit stupid with only some of them having captions and some of them not. I kept some because there are a few that I think really help, for instance, I don't know if readers would notice the intertwining "RS" in the seat photo. Ditto for the Twin Towers in the last one. If you guys want to add better captions to the ones that I removed, that would be good. Delaywaves ^talk 14:58, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harrington: And as for the Memorial Stadium photos, do whatever you'd like with the captions. Personally, I don't think they really matter but I'm fine with anything you'd like to do. Delaywaves ^talk 15:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Could you chill on the uploads for an hour or so? I just lost an hour's work to an edit conflict. Call me Harry, BTW — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delaywaves: I put in captions to your excellent photos at Roosevelt Stadium, all tight, carefully stacked and filling out their three lines. Hope you like 'em, but if you don't, feel free to whack away. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:34, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: I'm not at all opposed to photo captions — they're the most-read and first-read item on a page, even more than headlines (surprisingly). My point above was that the Memorial Stadium gallery shots were so ghostly and so ethereal and so compelling that they spoke more eloquently on their own than anything we could tack on them. Since Bugs thinks the captions bring something to the page, I'm not going to remove them, but I do think they should go. Also, I trimmed the title off the Roosevelt Stadium gallery — I really think you're asking for hassles from the Wikigoons with a dramatic title like that. I worry about the "dugout of baseball past" in the last RS caption — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: An hour of editing? Oh god, I feel terrible now. Hope it wasn't too hard to redo. This whole edit conflict thing is one of Wikipedia's biggest flaws that I've seen. Your captions on the Roosevelt photos are fantastic. I just added "faintly" for the Twin Towers one because I thought it might not be clear that they were actually visible in that photo. I dunno about the Memorial Stadium captions, maybe we could leave that to Bugs. Delaywaves ^talk 23:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Fuggetaboutit, my own fault for not saving to the clipboard, which is my usual habit. The addition of "faintly" was good, but it forced a fourth-line "widow," so I tweaked it a little to fit it back into three lines. I tried to work in "foreground" and "on horizon," but they were too space-consumptive. The text of this article needs considerable work, but the history table reveals there are several editors with a lot of work invested, plus I have no sources. Don't forget we've also discussed a slight expansion of Shibe Park, but Bugs has the book, and I'm not sure he's on board with the expansion. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...serious editing/expanding is something I've never tried before; photos are really my thing. But I would be open to learning or giving it a shot. Delaywaves ^talk 02:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: The paragraph I'm suggesting is easy-do: 1) Shibe wanted new park because Columbia Park was too small/inconvenient/whatever. 2) Insider info revealed to him that smallpox hospital, which had kept Swampoodle neighborhood desolate, was going to close, hence removing stigma. 3) Shibe buys land, hires Steele & Sons to design. By the time the park is done, smallpox hosp is gone. 4) Park, in French revival style, is showplace: first concrete-n-steel ballpark that redefines the standards of ballpark design and construction. 4a) Other notable architectural items. 5) Contemporary articles/voices hailing the place as quantum leap (a common phrase of 1909!) and city asset, etc. 6) Inaugural game 4/12/09 A's vs. [who?], score. (Baseball-reference.com only goes back to 1919.) Easy-do, but I don't have access to Kuklick's book, which I really need for cites and accuracy. It's been 20 years since I read it. Hey Bugs, are you on board with this?

Delay, I beefed up three captions at Gallery 1. Also: we're friends, both liberals, both Beatlemaniacs, both prefer NY-style pizza (and I'll bet you also are a folder of it as am I), so I must tell you straight: the 1950 WS shot is really too fuzzy to be of value, and the "rooftop bleachers" shot at the new park kinda don't fit in with Shibe pix. Would you consider removing them? What're friends for, right? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: That expansion sounds like a good idea. I was thinking this seemed like kind of an all-pictures-no-words article. About the 1950 WS photo: Is it that bad? Obviously when viewed full size it's a bit fuzzy, but in the context that it's used in the article I think it's okay. We only have one other real "full view" photo of Shibe, and that's the main one, which is low quality itself. (I dunno, you have more experience with deletionists than I do, so if you really think it's necessary, do what you must.) I'll take down the CBP rooftop bleachers photo; I just put that in because they had been mentioned previously in the article, but I suppose it would go better here. (I regret to inform you that I don't really fold my pizza. I suppose I've let my city down...) Delaywaves ^talk 19:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: oooooooh, this no-fold business is troubling. More important than letting your city down, you're letting yourself down by not folding. I might have to re-evaluate this relationship. On the serious side, though, I do really think the 1950 shot is that bad. WP:IG says: "The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject." Big size or small, the shot imparts no information because it has no information — it's too fuzzy. Just MHO, but it could be the chink that triggers a deletionist. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: Okay, the 1950 photo is gone. Baseball Reference does go back to 1909, btw, just not box scores. The first game was an 8-1 win against the Red Sox. Delaywaves ^talk 19:52, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: You did the right thing. What can I put on the pie I'm having sent over to you? Thx for the 1909 info. As soon as we get Bugs's agreement to fact check from Kuklick's book, I'll write the damn thing. I'd really like to avoid buying a second copy of the book. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: I found a used copy of Everything A Season for $5.33 incl. shipping, so I broke down and ordered it. Even if Bugs opts not to participate, with the book in hand, I can punch up the article in general. I'm sure there's other good stuff that'll make the article better (and make it feel less photo-heavy). Also, there's a PD photo of Mayor Hogue throwing out the first ball at Roosevelt Stadium in '46; you think I should upload it and put it in with the text (not the gallery) under the uncaptioned photo and next to the "Music" section? It's real evocative of the '40s. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: Cool, I'll be looking forward to seeing the changes. Sure, upload the Hague one, and putting it in the Music section sounds good to me; maybe also upload it onto Hague's article under the "Boss of Jersey City" section, there's only one photo of him there. Delaywaves ^talk 21:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a sort of unrelated note, I just came across a bunch of great photos taken of Sick's Stadium in Seattle. It says they're from the "Paul Hamaker Collection," which I assume is just a fancy way of saying some guy named Paul Hamaker sent them to the website. They would be a great addition to the Sicks article. Would this be an opportunity to do that OTRS permission thing? I've never tried that, have you? We could contact digitalballparks.com and ask for Paul Hamaker, I suppose... Delaywaves ^talk 21:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Uploaded Hague shot to both spots, though I realize now I put it lower in Hague's article than your suggestion because of chronology. I have no problem if you choose to move it. As for Hamaker, Google didn't cough him up, so I figure you're right, he's just a pack-rat fan like us. You might try calling/e-mailing the website and inquiring about permission, but the two times I tried getting permission to upload from Flickr users were duds. I don't know what OTRS is, but I know the permission thing is difficult and cumbersome. You might choose one or two, then try using them with a non-free fair use rationale. But they'll have to be good quality and tell a story that you can argue in a fair-use rationale. Some of those Hamaker shots were pretty rough and were, umm, non-notable. One that did catch my eye was the Seattle Pilots team photo, which would be easy to argue for fair use at the Pilots article I think. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: This is an example of the OTRS thing. I have absolutely no idea how to do it, but I think it involves getting permission from the author to use their work in a very specific manner. I'll contact the site about the photos, not just of Sick's Stadium, but of various others, like Arlington and K.C. Municipal Stadium. (Check those out on the site, there are some pretty cool ones.) They also credit some DVD of rare sports videos for some of the photos, like the ones they have of Shibe. I guess there's no possibility of using those, though, unless it was fair use. Delaywaves ^talk 22:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I emailed the site and asked for the contact of the Hamaker guy, a guy named Johnston who submitted a bunch of Arlington Stadium photos, and also whoever submitted the photos they have of Milwaukee County Stadium; I think they were taken by the site owners. I forgot KC Municipal, but that can wait. Delaywaves ^talk 23:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry/Bugs (if you're still reading this): Pretty minor, but according to Green Cathedrals by Phililp Lowry, "Many books have incorrectly stated that the old Yankee Stadium electric scoreboard was installed in front of the right-center wall here in 1957. Although the two scoreboards looked alike, the Yankee Stadium scoreboard was much larger, and it was not replaced by the tower scoreboard until 1959, two years after the electric scoreboard was installed here." Not too important, but I thought I might as well settle it. Delaywaves ^talk 20:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Check out the three new photos at 1913 World Series — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Time for a fresh page — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice photos! I like the Chief Bender one, looks almost like he's just staring down the batter...or maybe that's just his pitching motion. I came across a site that has a lot of Shibe photos, I got them by just searching "stadium," which is the search that that URL links to. Unfortunately, only one is pre-1923, this one, which I'll upload later. (Circa 1920 is treated as pre-1923, in what I've seen) Delaywaves ^talk 20:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Kuklick book, p.53, the expansion occurred in 1925. So anything showing the double-deck 3-quarters around is from 1925 or later. Also, check the vintage of the cars to get an approximate time frame. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on those 20 Temple U photos:

1. Unrelated.
2. Unrelated.
3. Unrelated.
4. 1939 - Apr 8 - Lights. First night game was played May 16.
5. 1952 - Apr 8 - Touching up the scoreboard.
6. Cute kitty.
7. 1940 - Mar 30 - If true, it's pre-season. Note spite fence and clock just protruding above it. Also note renovated box seats and high corners in left and right foul ground.
8. "Unknown" - Spite fence in place, high corners in place, old scoreboard still there. So it has to be sometime between/including 1940 and 1955. The few visible cars look like late-40s/early-50s.
9. 1956 - Oct 26 - Poorly rendered photo. And why they would be playing ball in late October is hard to tell. But if true, notice they still had the old scoreboard at that point.
10. 1970 - Sep 27 - If true, it's just before the final series at the ballpark.
11. 1972 - Note the effects of the 1971 fire.
12. "Ca. 1920" - Actually 1925 or later, as noted above.
13. 1929 - Sep 15 - Near the end of a pennant season. Poorly reproduced - But note Baker Bowl in background.
14. 1973 - Again note the effects of the 1971 fire. Also note how huge the newer scoreboard was.
15. 1931 - Nifty photo, labeled, possibly connected with World Series. Note bleachers on the buildings, no spite-fence yet, east and west stand box seats not renovated yet, very small scoreboard.
16. 1953 - "The ballpark with two names."
17. 1939 - May 9 - Lights again. Note not-yet-renovated box seats, and square corner in center with slight "terrace" upslope.
18. 1944 - Oct 27 - Presumably a campaign stop for FDR just before the election. Left field foul line 334 marker visible in background.
19. 1952 - Apr 8 - Same date as other 1952 photo. Some good interior details.
20. 1964 - August - Little did they know the Phillies were just weeks away from catastroph.

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a general question: If you have two pieces of information from the same source, say, the same book, do you cite it twice in two different places? Delaywaves ^talk 21:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC) Nevermind, I see now that the page recognizes 2 citations from the same source and puts the little "a" "b". Delaywaves ^talk 21:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Most important: Do not upload any shots from that Temple Univ site that are from the Philadelphia Bulletin archive! Temple guards those photos jealously and you need a goddamn great rationale argument to post them here under fair-use. I'm familiar with that collection and there's nothing but trouble there. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well, thanks for warning me in time. But doesn't copyright expire if a photo is pre-1923? Or does that circa-1920 thing change everything? Delaywaves ^talk 21:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's less a matter of copyright expiration, I think it was when the copyright laws were overhauled comprehensively. Just be sure that your "circa 1920" photo is definitively dated as pre-1923 somewhere, like, at some other website. Do a Google Images search and see if anyone else has it, then use that site as the source in your Commons upload form. The reason, by the way, that Temple patrols the use of those images is that they sell 'em, like Culver Photos or Getty Images or any other commercial stock photography/stock archive dealer. Why don't you pursue other, non-Shibe uploads for a week or two; once I get that book, I'll beef up the text, and with more text, there'll be more places to put in photos other than in galleries. They'll be more discreet, more topical and less likely to draw the attention of a deletion goon. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okey dokey. I added a couple minor facts about the Shibe scoreboard earlier, and right now I'll take down the assertion that it came from Yankee Stadium and replace it with a "contrary to popular belief..." Delaywaves ^talk 21:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it up till I get the book. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh...why? This is coming from a pretty legit book, too. Delaywaves ^talk 21:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that does look like a good book. I only suggested leaving it up to make it easy on you. The more I look at this article, the more disorganized I realize it is, and the more work it needs. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry/Bugs: I have two general questions for you guys: 1. If there's an article that had previously only had a fair use image but now has a much better free one, should the free one replace the fair use one? this is the article in question. Second question: What would you guys suppose the copyright is for this image? Or would it be a good fair use candidate? Delaywaves ^talk 23:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. If a free pic is better than a fair use pic, lose the fair use pic.

2. Can't determine copyright from the photo. You would need to write to them. One item says "ordering information". That would suggest someone owns it.

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A's beat Red Sox 8-1.[9] Get on board with Retrosheet - it's the source for Baseball Reference, Baseball Almanac, etc., game logs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

8–1 is what I put in the article. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Mostly I wanted y'all to be aware of Retrosheet, which is a great resource. They're still working on obtaining box scores and play-by-plays for the early years. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know Retrosheet well; I visit all the time! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 06:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the picture book called Summer in the City: New York Baseball 1947-1957, on p.186 there's a picture of Yankee Stadium on Oct 2, 1957, Game 1 of the World Series. At that point, the older scoreboard is still in place. If the sources are correct about the new Phillies board being installed in 1956, obviously they are not the same board. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Yep, I think we can consider that a closed issue now. Bugs/Harry: The "Green Cathedrals" book I'm reading has many photos of old, old ballparks. If I find a photo from, say, 1890, that would definitely be public domain and I would be free to photocopy/scan it, right? Delaywaves ^talk 00:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In theory. Although the deletionists might argue that you have to prove it was first published prior to 1923. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've uploaded photos without proof that it was published pre-1923 and never encountered any problems. I'll give 'em a shot. Delaywaves ^talk 01:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience, if the photo looks old, especially 19th century, it probably won't get challenged. But there's no guarantee. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buried in the footnotes of the Kuklick book, p.217 referencing p.130, the author says "there is no confirmation to the story that the scoreboard was the old Yankee Stadium one." It indicates that the Connie Mack Stadium scoreboard is discussed in the Philadelphia bulletin for May 16, 1956, if someone can find that somewhere. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know I read somewhere that that board came from Ebbets. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the Ebbets board.[10][11] Same board visible during demolition.[12] This shot appears to be a World Series game, and since it says "Yanks here Sunday" it's no later than 1955.[13] Check out that centerfield distance: 376 feet. Can you say "bandbox"? This site labels photos from 1951 and 1957.[14] They look to me like the same board. Somewhat earlier versions of the board lacked the Schaefer sign. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Just to thicken the soup, bear in mind that there can be more than one copyright involved. The photo itself may or may not be copyrighted, and then the scanner can also claim a copyright on his scan, particularly if he photoshopped it or colorized it or even just cropped it. I'm not sure how often it happens, but websites who make a big deal of "owning" a photo might be doing so because they feel they own the scan. When they block downloading or add watermarks, steer clear of it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another nifty website is called "baseball fever", and here someone has done a micro-study of the Yankee and Connie Mack boards, fairly well demolishing the idea that they're the same board.[15] Of course, given what we now know about the years, it's impossible anyway. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's their discussion of Shibe, which I have not read yet.[16] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: The side-by-side photo comparison at baseball-fever.com seals it for me. So many differences — two different boards. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 14:53, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also question the statement that the Yankee board was the larger of the two. In fact, to me it looks like the Connie Mack board was the larger of the two. Since that comment is probably "original research" on our part, I think it's best to omit it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Not original research, Green Cathedrals stated it very clearly. Although I guess that one fact isn't the most important one. Delaywaves ^talk 15:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would leave it out, as it's not terribly relevant. There is much stronger information that indicates they're not the same board, hence their relative size doesn't matter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Clark Field Austin.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: You gotta be sure to choose some option in that "Licensing" box, or they'll be all over you like....— HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At least I finally figured out where Clark Field actually was, which was hard to do thanks to misleading info on the UT website. It also turns out there have actually been three Clark Fields, the one with the double-decker outfield being the most famous. As far as crazy outfields are concerned, one that was nearly as bad was Sulphur Dell, or "Suffer Hell" as it was known to those who had to play there. But at least it didn't have cliffs, just terraces. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guys: If you don't post at the bottom you risk your contribution being missed. Seven new photos at 1914 World Series; wish the Fenway shots were a little — a lot — better. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 06:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs/Harry: A fair use question: A photo I've found appears on a few websites and all websites credit it to "Metro Nashville Archives / Green Hills." However, that photo isn't available directly from the archives online. Could I use it as fair use anyway, just from a different site? It's the third photo on this page. 15:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

As the Sulphur Dell page lacks any photos, you might be able to get away with it with a proper fair-use argument. Be aware that the original, which appears on that Sulphur Dell website, is much larger. So a small version of it is obviously called for. In fact, the large version on the Sulphur Dell Website (1600 x 1200 or so) is apparently no longer downloadable. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:42, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, the image is up. Should I put the info about Metro Nashville Archives somewhere in the fair use tag? Or is what I have now OK? Delaywaves ^talk 15:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't guarantee anything where photos are concerned on wikipedia, but if it were me I would add that fact somewhere in the description. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made quite a few text changes/additions, and rearranged a couple of photos. Mostly I tried to bring in more information about structure and dimensions. I'm sure it could use more work. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Your reoganization read my mind — same stuff I wanted to do. I suggest removing the team names from two of the section titles, since there was an overlap period and neither section really mentions the exploits of the teams in the sections: "Athletics at Shibe Park" might become "Design, construction, expansion" (I'll expand the top of that when my Kuklick book arrives) and "Phillies at Shibe Park / Connie Mack Stadium" might become "Co-tenants and name change." I'd also like to add a brief section on the boxing matches and FDR's 1944 visit, after "Football" and before "Soccer." I might even risk a fair-use argument and try to get that FDR photo from Temple into it (despite my own advice to Delay not to tangle with that Temple archive). With the added length of your additions plus the ones I plan, we might have enough body text to redistribute the first photo gallery throughout the article and be less of a target of the deletionist goons. Also, the article is in critical need of better citations, which I'll also be glad to take care of once my book arrives. Nice job! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) I used the existing section headings as a guide. I'm not altogether happy with them, although there seem to be two distinctive eras, namely the glory years of the A's and the monopoly enjoyed by the Phillies after the A's split town. You could almost call them the "Shibe era" and the "Mack era" as the stadium names roughly coincide. But whatever. About FDR, the question is whether that was a "notable" visit, or just a routine campaign stop just a week or two before the election of 1944. For fair use, you would have to demonstrate notability, or the deletionists will be all over it. If it comes to that, a possible compromise would be to simply link to the photo. Since Temple presumably owns the copyright, I don't see why that would be a problem. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:23, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One thing worth mentioning about the name change, discussed in the Kuklick book, is that it wasn't just deference to the memory of Ben Shibe that made Connie Mack reluctant to have the stadium named for himself. The indication is that some Shibe family members still owned stock in the A's, and Mack didn't want to cause himself any additional problems. Apparently, once the Shibes were out of the picture altogether, the name change was finalized. It's funny that they put the Connie Mack sign up but "Shibe Park" was still visible in the stone carving.[17] Later they covered the stone carving with Connie Mack's name.[18] At that point the park was Connie Mack Stadium, and Connie Mack Stadium, for those who missed it the first time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:27, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: My recollection of history is that FDR (who was sick and looked like hell) played the above-the-fray C-in-C until Dewey made a late-October charge which spurred FDR to make fewer than half a dozen appearances; Shibe was one of 'em. That's notable enough for me, at least as notable as some of the ones we have in there. When the text is in, I'll give it a try; it would be a good addition. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That picture appears (uncredited) in the Westcott book. However, that book was published by Temple University Press, so they apparently didn't feel the need to credit themselves. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Awesome addition, I agree with Harry that the more text, the easier it'll be to spread out the photos and keep the delitionists away. I have a pretty good book on various ballparks, and maybe tomorrow I'll make sure there's nothing else about Shibe that's worth adding. Delaywaves ^talk 02:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which book? There have been several, and while many of them have copied from each other, they also have their own unique twist on things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Delay: Do either of you use a regular-width monitor? Mine is a widescreen, and I'm trying to determine how much text space we have when we have photos left and right; left-and-right looks fine on my widescreen, but might be too tight on a regular one. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs:Green Cathedrals, by Philip J. Lowry. Seems to me like a book that has some of those unique twists, he has many facts but a few personal anecdotes as well. On the entry for Braves Field, now Nickerson Field, he mentions how in the '80s he went into the original grandstand, which still stands, and found an abandoned, overturned ticket booth with a 1930s Boston Braves schedule tacked to the wall. How unbelievable would that be? Delaywaves ^talk 02:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That it does. It's mostly facts, but also some "original research". One thing we need to do is to get some dates pinned down. The article says the spite fence went up in 1933. But the pictures I saw yesterday indicated 1935. So I don't know which is right. My work on the article was to try to make a chronological list of changes, but some of it I had to fudge on because I'm uncertain of exact dates. For one thing, I know the pavilions were orignally open, and by 1913 they had a roof.[19]. One of the baseball fever pages has a document that I overlooked before, that answers some of the structural questions.[20] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the baseball fever page with the spite fence being built, labeled 1935:[21] ←Baseball Bugs One thing is that the fence supposedly being 50 feet high and then later reported as 32 feet is out of whack. The wall is 12 feet high, and looks it compared with the men. The 3 additional sections look like they make a total height between bricks and fence of no more than about 35 feet. Proportionally speaking, from photos from later years, that squares pretty well with the clock being 75 feet to the top, as the top of the clock is in the neighborhood of twice as high as the top of the spite fence. ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: I have a normal Mac laptop, so I assume that's "regular". The text looks fine to me, no big white spaces or gaps.

I'm still on a 4-to-3 ratio screen, though maybe not for long, as I think it's dying a slow death. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: I'd like to move the opening day 1909 shot from the gallery up right under the tower/cupola shot. Let me do it right now, then you check and see how it looks on your monitor. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go right ahead. Delaywaves ^talk 03:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Howzit look to you guys? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine. Delaywaves ^talk 03:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The overflow crowd in left field? Looks good to me. I think the wide-angle shot from 1910 should come out of that gallery and into the text somewhere. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:29, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I agree about the wide-angle. My goal is to move 'em all out of gallery 1. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To have Gallery 2 become simply The Gallery, right? You could move the plaque into the legacy section, and move the wide angle into the famous games section. Frankly, you could lose the other 2 or 3, as they don't really add a lot of new info. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Bugs and Delay: Check out article! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's currently wide enough that it forces me to scroll, so maybe it should be shrunk a bit. In any case, you could remove the duplicate entry in the gallery, which reduces gallery 1 (on my PC, anyway) to a single row of photos. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: How's it now? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:11, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: We're gonna need a source/cite on the Dick Allen claim in "Home Runs" — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:51, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Delay: Do either of you mind if I delete the preposterous commented-out section about the apocryphal origin of "moonshot"? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:30, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Or I could do it, as I'm tweaking the facts a bit. About Dick Allen, I think it's cited in the article about him. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gone. Obscure and incorrect. Maybe Selma called it a moon shot, maybe not, but the original "Moon shots" were homers hit by Wally Moon in the abomination (for baseball) known as the L.A. Coliseum. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:53, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Bugs: how does the panorama look now? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it now fits on my screen without a slidebar, so obviously it's perfect. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think I'm done fiddling with the text for now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:51, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: I "hid" the last several photos from Gallery 1 until I do my own fiddling with the text, which I'll do the next couple days when my book arrives. I certainly want to retain the 1910 closer view of the 20th St rooftops, and also the 1914 exterior shot of 21st and Lehigh. But it's best not to figure out where to shoehorn without first finishing the text. Delay, you've been quiet — you okay with the turn this project has taken? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yes I am okay with it! It looks great, I added one minor fact from my book and I think that's all I have for now. Now I'll scan my book for info about other parks. I may upload another photo I took on my trip to Shibe's site last month. (Not to any page, just to Commons.) Delaywaves ^talk 02:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see that photo. :) Also, I wonder if there's any photographic evidence to back up the statement about home plate getting moved back for awhile to make the outfield deeper? I don't think there was any mention of it in the Kuklick book. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a shot of a groundsman "resetting" home plate with a spirit level at the Evening Bulletin archive at Temple U, but it's dated April 3, 1963. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Delay: I opened a hidden section for my own use gathering notes and cites before "bringing them public" in the "History" section; it's the easiest way for me and doesn't leave half-done stuff flapping in the breeze for visiting readers. Just in case you saw it and thought what the hell is this? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Permission from an image creator (or rights holder) that allows its upload to Commons comes with a release of rights to the level permitted by Commons, the email for which has to be archived by OTRS as it is in the case of the Drake Hogestyn photo. It's often easier, in those circumstances, to go with no-rights-reserved rather than CC-GFDL because the latter requires changing the license at the point of original publication.

We haven't allowed with-permission images for a little over six years now. Daniel Case (talk) 17:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In effect, we'd be asking the owner to let us upload his photo and then make it public domain. Right? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, although that's backwards. The release has to come first. I usually ask people if they assent to the language of {{PD-release}}, then make sure the forwarded email has that language plus their acknowledgement thereof. Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, Harry: Starting a new section because that other conversation I was having sort of messed everything up. I uploaded a photo yesterday of the Washington Park wall in Brooklyn, although right after uploading it I read a pretty good page explaining that it's probably not original...oh well... Are you guys planning any more major additions/expansions to Shibe? Has your book come yet, Harry? Delaywaves ^talk 21:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, Harry: Whoa, just found an awesome web site, it has aerial views of NYC dating back to 1924. They're from a .gov site, but only Federal Government stuff is public domain, right? Would this stuff be copyrighted? Delaywaves ^talk 21:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: I dunno if you've ever found your way to this page, but scroll down to the United States section — it's a pretty comprehensive list of all the fed gov stuff that's PD, and the templates you need to mark 'em. That gis.nyc.gov has a copyright notice right on its opening page. Still fiddling on Shibe in a hidden work area. My book came this morning, plus I found some other good sources. I'll leave a note here when it's all done and up. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled across the style of roof used on the original ballpark. It's called a Mansard roof, and is typical of French Renaissance architecture, especially of the branch called Second Empire (architecture). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I uploaded couple more of those photos I mentioned awhile ago of my trip to Shibe's site; I really don't think they're anything too special. They're the last three here. Delaywaves ^talk 04:33, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They look fine to me. :) I wonder how many of the folks in those flats know anything about the history across the street from them. I could imagine someone might gripe that there are too many "similar" photos in the gallery. Juxtaposing current photos with older ones is the way to go, I think - if such can be found. I like seeing "remnants" of the past that still exist. An your side trip by the Baker Bowl site, you may have noticed that the tall, triangular building in the background of many of the Baker Bowl shots is still there. And you were the one[22] who pointed out that the triplet little buildings behind deep left center field at Hilltop Park in New York still stand. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: I put up a chunk of text at Shibe. There's still a lot to go: additions to "memorable games" and "home runs", the Mack statue item reinserted in a more appropriate place, discussion of Carpenter's reluctance, but no options, to buying the place post-A's, decline of the neighborhood/parking probs, etc. Lotsa stuff. Also many cites to find. I'll be back in a while to do more. Hope you both like. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Either of you have any sources about the "City Series" of exhibition games played for years between the A's and the Phils? Of the 101 games, the A's won 53. Would make a nice entry in "Memorable games" section if we could find out more about it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is at least a token article on City Series (Philadelphia), which has a number of references that might lead to something good. It says they played pre and post-season series, which might account for that alleged Oct 26 photo at the Temple site. You might at some point want to get the baseball project folks involved in the discussion, especially if you've got Featured Article status in mind eventually. I can think of a number of experts, especially User:Killervogel5. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, check this photo out. (Doesn't necessarily have to contribute to the article, I just thought it was interesting.) I never realized how Shibe's rooftop bleachers were so organized - I always thought it was just a bunch of people sitting around, but there's a serious grandstand up there. Delaywaves ^talk 23:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, what's the deal with Getty Images? If a photo says the license is "rights-managed," and the restrictions only say "no commercial or wireless uses without permission," it's still copyrighted, right? Delaywaves ^talk 23:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Getty Images is a stock photo house. Their permission costs you money. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 00:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, which means we can't use it, as it's unlikely they would re-license it as public domain. That's why they have their watermark plastered over the middle of it. Those bleachers are something. Check this out,[23] from the Temple collection, and you'll see those same bleachers. I have no clue, but I wonder if they were given permission to build them for the World Series, just as they built bleachers in the streets for the Cubs Series of 1929, 1932 and 1935. Connie Mack wouldn't likely have cared, since the revenue from the post-season goes primarily to the Commissioner's office. But he certainly would have cared during the regular season. That's what happened with the Cubs. When folks gathered on their rooftops and watched the Cubs games for free, nothing was said. But when they started building bleachers out there, the Cubs management cried foul. Unlike Mack, the Cubs negotiated with the neighbors (and probably brought in some city building inspectors while they were at it), and established a cut for the Cubs. One other point about that picture you linked to: Note the alleyway behind the rowhouses. As per a story in the Jenkinson book, told by an eyewitness who was on the rooftop, Babe Ruth cracked one that went over everyone's head and into that alleyway. That boy George could hit! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Yep, that was me who pointed out those Hilltop buildings, although I wouldn'tve noticed if it weren't for a comment I saw somewhere on Flickr. I've tried a couple times to see the old Hilltop Park plate site, but the garden in which it's located is being renovated. I forgot to look for that triangular Baker Bowl building, although I had a feeling it might've still been there. I have the same love for old things that still exist; have you heard about the John T. Brush stairway? A pretty classic example. Delaywaves ^talk 01:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You posted those Brush Stairway photos too, didn't you? I'm surprised the city hasn't condemned it as being unsafe. But being the neighborhood it's in, maybe nobody has any clout or nobody cares. Another remnant, so to speak, which I think you brought up also, is that old mansion that was visible in old pics of the Polo Grounds and which still looks out over Coogan's Bluff. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I've asked Killervogel5 to take a look at the Shibe Park article when he gets a chance. He's on a Phillies project team, so I would think this article would be of interest. If you all have notions of getting it to Featured status, they might be able to provide some good advice. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To get to the building across from the Baker Bowl site, the coordinates as shown in Google Maps are: 39.994389,-75.154931. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, it was originally built by Ford. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Cool. Just out of curiosity: did you personally take all those cool old photos of Colt Stadium, the Comiskey organist, Yogi Berra, Nolan Ryan, etc.? They're pretty great. Delaywaves ^talk 02:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, way back when. Some with my li'l ol' Instamatic. Not much of a camera, but all I had at the time. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: A quick request: could we not ask others to look in on the Shibe Park article till we get it worked out between the three of us first? I know I have a lot to go on it yet, and having someone tinkering while I'm still tinkering just makes it harder, if only from the standpoint of losing work to edit conflicts. Thanks. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 10:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I only talked to KV5, and he hasn't done anything about it yet anyway. I just wanted a quick assessment of whether we're headed in the right direction with the article. I think so, but we'll see what the Phils Phan has to say. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Here's KV5's response: "That's... awesome. I'm speechless. Good work! — KV5 • Talk • 11:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)"[reply]

Delay and Bugs: There are two new photos at Shibe you might enjoy. Better hurry, though, 'cause they're fair-use-argued and may not be around long. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: Oh wow, that photo of the corner tower still standing is just amazing – could you imagine if they'd kept just that part as a little museum? About the boxing ticket stub: How do you know exactly if there was no copyright notice? Do you search some big copyright database, or do you just look on the photo for a copyright symbol? Because I bet there are a lot of un-copyrighted photos all across the internet just waiting to be uploaded. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Not to be a war-story-teller here, but I took the train to NY that last morning in 1976 when the tower was all that remained; it was visible from the North Broad Street Station. I did my business in the city, and when I returned to Philly that afternoon... it was gone. I was horrified that day, but have since become glad I saw it. True story. As regards the copyright status of tickets, I've never seen one with a copyright mark on it — it's just a ticket, after all. I debated between two templates when uploading: the one I ultimately chose, {PD-US-no notice}, and the one {PD-ineligible}, "for works too trivial to be copyrighted." We'll see if I chose wisely. I would have preferred a photo over the ticket, but the four non-free boxing photos I found had pitch black backgrounds and therefore no Shibe context, so they would never survive a fair-use argument. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: No, that's a great story! I assume you went to some games at Shibe, then? Good to know about the tickets - do you assume that's true for stuff like posters, then? Or would those be made by companies, and thus have their copyrights renewed? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 20:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: One more question (sorry to keep asking them): Is there some page on Wikipedia that gives a list of all the little templates for un-renewed copyrights, like the Baseball Digest ones, or the Bowman Gum ones? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 20:44, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: No, it's not true for posters. Posters and album covers and other items have their own listings in the drop-down menu under "Licensing"; one that I use there a lot is "promotional material" — publicity photos, press kit stuff — I use it in my movie articles. Most of the images here are taken from the internet and argued for fair-use as promotional photos. As for Shibe, yes I went to maybe twenty games there, starting in 1961, my first year as a fan (the same year the Phillies set a 23-straight-losses record that still stands!) The best was in 1965, when my Dad took me early on a Sunday morning and we staked out the corner just north of Lehigh on 21st St with a ball and a pen. The players had their own parking spots in the puny little lot there, and they arrived one by one. I got signatures from everyone except Richie Allen, as he was called then; a guard told me he always had someone drive him and he sneaked in through a secret door. To be honest, the poor ol' places was pretty long-in-the-tooth by the time I was showing up there. I couldn't find a page of unrenewed copyrights, but I'll bet there is one. I remember reading that Time magazine has about a 15-year stretch where it's PD non-renewed, but damned if I can remember where. They certainly don't make it easy, do they? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: I see. Do you still have any of those autographs? You oughta post them somewhere, if not Wikipedia. I'll ask at the help desk about a page like that. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: Tell me when you want me to stop asking questions; this is one of the last: how do you know what you said about the Mack statue photo? The tag said it was published with a copyright notice, and then it wasn't renewed. How do you know that? Because on the site, there is a copyright notice. (Sorry if I sound accusatory, I'm just trying to get a better understanding.) Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fellas: I'm chagrined to tell you that Shibe Park has fewer than 30 watchers. I'm crestfallen. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At least that makes for fewer edit warriors. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay, if you get a chance to get to upper Manhattan sometime, it would be nifty to get a shot or two of those 3 buildings across from the Hilltop Park site. That would allow a comparison, as with the flats across the street from the Shibe Park site. A nice bit of old-and-new continuity. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Definitely. I've been wanting to go to the Brush stairway again, partly because I wanted to see if there are a few little loose pieces of metal or concrete that I could take home as a souvenir. Hilltop is pretty close to that. Delaywaves ^talk 15:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe that's where the already-missing parts have ended up. :) I find it interesting that the Yanks and the Giants played in, respectively, among the highest and the lowest points in Manhattan, yet were just a few blocks away from each other. And ironic that their fortunes at the time were opposite of their elevations. That would change with time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I was able to locate the stairway entrance on Google Maps. I'm not sure we need to advertise it to the world, though. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Yep, I've seen it on Street View. So you mean we should cut out the 158th street info? I was thinking of it as a way to sort of raise awareness about it, but if you think it'll make people vandalize it, then do what you want. Delaywaves ^talk 16:12, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it can be deduced from other websites anyway. It's also barricaded. Despite being made of steel and concrete, the years have taken their toll, and anyone even walking on it does so at their own risk. I would actually be more concerned about that than anything. One thing, though: It only seems to connect Edgecombe with Harlem River Drive (which I gather is the "Speedway"). Is or was there another part of it going down the cliff to the Polo Grounds itself? Or was there maybe a ramp up the cliff? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answered my own question.[24] Looks like there was, in fact, a ramp leading from Harlem River Drive to the ballpark proper. Which would explain the reference that the Brush Stairway "led to a ticket office". That ticket office would have been at the top of that ramp. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Responding a bit late, and this isn't very important, but only the top of the staircase is barricaded. If you just walk around the road that stretches down the bluff, and then walk back towards the staircase, it's all wide open. I walked up to the plaque. Look, here it is on street view. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 13:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the article on Griffith Stadium was pretty short, so I expanded it somewhat. Look OK? You guys can change whatever you'd like. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 01:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you had been adding new info and photos. Griffith Stadium is perhaps the "anti-Yankee Stadium", in that while there are photos galore of the House that Ruth Built at various stages, you really have to go looking for pictures of Griffith, simply because the team sucked most of the time and didn't get much publicity. Ironically, the only time they were any good was when the Yankees were in the first decade or so of their glory, with the Senators sneaking pennants in there in 1924-25 and 1933. The two came together in the 1950s in Damn Yankees, and even then Griffith didn't get no respect, as most of the scenes were filmed at Wrigley Field (Los Angeles version). That website called "baseball fever" has a number of older photos of Griffith here and there which help reveal its evolution. After the fire destroyed the main seating, they put up some quick temporary seating so they could hold their Opening Day, then worked quickly to have it finished by mid-season. The outfield seating remained wooden bleachers, and the walls were fairly low. In the mid-1920s they built that monstrous concrete bleacher across left field, and sometime after that they remodeled the right field area, building a "spite fence" of their own across right and center, including that bizarre 90-degree inward-pointing angle. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, there are a lot of oddly forgotten-about ballparks like Griffith. I think K.C. Municipal Stadium is the prime example, I've almost never heard it brought up anywhere, and there are barely any photos of it. You've really turned me onto Baseball Fever, I spent hours the other night just looking through the pre-renovated Yankee Stadium thread - there are some amazing photos there! Were you suggesting that we upload some Baseball Fever photos for Griffith, or were you just saying that they can be interesting to look at? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 01:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They provide useful info, but I think the copyrights would need some serious investigation. I suspect that Baseball Fever doesn't give a hoot about copyrights. And you're right, it can be addicting! I actually remember KC's stadium pretty well, as it was in use during the 60s when I first got interested in the game. It was hardly ever on TV, of course. But it got a fair amount of coverage due to the antics of Charlie Finley. The Kansas City A's were really screwed, though. They were as bad in KC as they had been in Philly - and worse, in a way, because Arnold Johsnon was basically running a major league level farm team for the Yankees. That came to an end when Finley bought the team, and maybe it's not a coincidence that the old Yankees were done within a few years. The A's were just starting to get good when Finley moved them to Oakland. That was really unfortunate, as the A's couldn't hardly draw flies in Oakland even when they were winning. I imagine they would have had much better support in KC. One thing Finley did was that he kept messing with the fences. He moved them in or out seemingly almost every year. That factor at least made the place memorable in terms of the A's, but other than that, overall it was probably far more famous as the home of the Kansas City Monarchs of the Negro Leagues; the Kansas City Blues of the American Association; and the Kansas City Chiefs of the AFL/NFL. Before I forget it, the KC scoreboard was definitely second-hand: They got it from Braves Field when Boston University started to reconfigure the place to suit their needs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Looks like a pretty nice place in the photos I've seen. That scoreboard fact is actually the one fact that I contributed to the page. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was essentially rebuilt for 1955, so it was basically "new". It was also built into kind of a "bowl" on the side of a hill, as the street level at the foul line was quite noticeable. Before the Blues built the inner fence, they had a huge "terrace" there. The equivalence of the scoreboards is plain to see, as they had kind of a unique approach to the team names: They had a white background, and in fact I think they were illuminated from behind, for night games. The one thing that worked against the ballpark was that even with the double deck it was still kind of small. I think it only sat about 30,000. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one of the standard aerial photos of the ballpark.[25] The interesting thing about it is that shows an "intermediate" stage of the ballpark's development. The big bleacher is there, and the third base side is double-decked. However, the first base pavilion is still single-decked, and the tall right field fence cuts across that right field area instead of being flush with the lower, outer wall. That image came from this Baseball Fever page,[26] except I had located it on Google Images. On that same page, note the many images of Yankee Stadium... and also a shot of the Polo Grounds, in which that ramp up to the Speedway, along with the ticket booths near the top of the ramp, are very obvious. The shot of Yankee Stadium is interesting too, in that it's clear the Stadium was specifically designed to be multi-purpose. Its primary layout is baseball. But it has a (non-standard) running track, in case they wanted to have a track meet there. And notice how the bleachers are "squared off" to accommodate football fans. Oh, and there's also a picture of Fenway, showing "Duffy's Cliff" running all the way along the wall clear out to the point in center where the bleachers obscure it. That was another "terrace" whose purpose was to make up the difference between field level and street level. There's a story that the famous Fisk HR in 1975, the shot with Fisk trying to "wave" the ball fair, was aided by the cameraman seeing a rat, which distracted him from following the flight of the ball. The base of the scoreboard is below street level, i.e. it's where rats like to hang out. There's just no Duffy's Cliff anymore. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Andrew Clem's take:[27] He hasn't quite got it all figured out, but it's still nifty. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I've heard that rat story before, wouldn't it be something if it were true? Check out that boxing ring photo of the Polo Grounds. Look at where the Chesterfield sign normally was in center field - what the hell is that? Looks like some kind of temple. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 04:02, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or something out of Professional Wrestling. Even then they made a big deal out of these one-on-one matches. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The old section was sort of lagging behind all the others. Harry: Everything about Shibe looks great, except I noticed when mentioning Lou Gehrig's 4-homer game, it says Earle Combs caught his potential fifth one. Combs was on Gehrig's team, so that's impossible. I looked it up, and the consensus seems to be that Al Simmons caught it, although I can't find any real proof. Should we change it? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 12:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief, that's a horrible error, and it's my fault. I'll fix it unless someone's already done it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:45, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: Great "catch" (get it?) guys. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 15:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of Vin Scully's call of a pop foul in the 1980 World Series: "Boone... dropped it... Rose caught it!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know, to this day, Boone is pissed about that. He says it was Rose's ball all the way, and when it looked like Rose was lollygagging, Boone says he lunged for it. Everyone remembers the screw-up as his, but he maintains it was Rose's. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Judge for yourself, at the 1:20 mark.[28] This is from the World Series film, so it has commentary by Vin Scully but not the actual live call. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: Tough call. I remember that night, watching that live. It was, uh, otherwordly. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: Fellas, I'm about done the major work on Shibe Park I think. I have that usual photo you see of the 1948 Eagles championship game in the snow, but I gotta find the source on the net (I forget where I got it) and figure out how to argue the rationale for it. I'd love to find a Negro Leagues photo for that section, but they're few and far between on the net and there's been nothing nearly appropriate. Bugs, I'd like to touch up the Spite Fence section a little because it reads as if it were strictly Mack's battle and Kuklick says it was as much Jack Shibe's doing as Mack's, if not more. I can think of a dozen little things to go in, but I think the big stuff's there. Any upgrades you guys make are gratefully welcomed. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Getting the spite fence details right would be excellent. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not especially a fan of Rose, but to me he looked like he was watching to make sure he didn't run into the dugout or into Boone himself. But he was right there, so obviously he was in position to have made the play even if Boone hadn't moved from behind home plate. I always thought the funniest thing was Rose's habit of bouncing the ball like a basketball on the hard artificial turf, keeping in mind the ball was live, and if it had gotten away from him, the runners could have advanced. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to interrupt the Pete Rose commentary, I just figured I should let you guys know that I'm leaving tomorrow for about 19 days, and I won't be able to edit while I'm away. If you guys wanna keep the discussion on this page, or move it somewhere else, that'd be fine. I'd like to resume our trio when I get back, maybe on a different article, it's a nice little system we've got here. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 18:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a nice trip! Send pictures! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! If you guys are looking for anything to do, on the Griffith Stadium article, the photo of the uneven grandstand roof works much better on the right, but I had to put it on the left because there wasn't enough space. If you guys could find some text to put anywhere in the article so we could space out the images more, that would be great. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great trip, Delay! Don't take any wooden nickels! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:25, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I uploaded this great shot to the Commons. The all-stars are scrambling for FDR's first pitch as a souvenir. The LOC caption reads: "Scramble for Roosevelt pitch. Washington D.C., July 7. Risking millions of dollars of arms and limbs players from both All-Star teams stage a mad scramble to the first ball pitched by President Roosevelt to start the 1937 game today. Joe Moore, N.Y. Giants outfielder, caught the much coveted souvenir, 7/7/37" Is there any room in Griffith Stadium for it? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I'd look for a place for it. I had wondered about that little erector-set-like tower on the grandstand roof, as there were no lights at Griffith until 1941. I went google-image searching, and this one[29] from 1949 indicates a small set of either lights or speakers, I'm not sure which. But the big tower in the background was not in the 1937 picture, which stands to reason. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Put it wherever you think. I'm brain-dead. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:39, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done that and some more. I also expanded the Boundary Field article. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I added more Presidents. Goddamn Eisenhower kept us from running the table; can't find one of him anywhere. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw one in Google Images that was mis-identified as Truman. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:36, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would also be good to find one of Truman throwing it right-handed. I think he preferred his left hand and that him alternating hands was somewhat of a myth. But I'm fairly certain he threw it right handed at least once. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good eyes on the mislabeled Eisenhower shot. I'm not sure I have the energy to go through a fair-use argument for it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You found it, then? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't really "mis-labeled", it was just the peculiarities of Google Images. That was on this page,[30] which has lots of good images. However, I doubt the Ike photo is at Griffith, since it features the Yankees and Dodgers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah-so, if it's the Yanks and Dodgers, it's the World Series. Those I saw at the LOC — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On closer examination on that page, it identifies it as 1955 World Series. There's also a Coolidge picture from the 1924 World Series, which is nifty since it was the only Series the old Senators ever won. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One point of interest, not within the scope of the Griffith article though, is the degree to which the various Presidents actually liked the game vs. used it for PR. I vaguely recall reading that FDR, for example, was not really a fan of baseball as such, though he obviously recognized its value to the American public. Truman, on the other hand, followed the game closely. And I'm thinking it was one of the first ladies, maybe Mrs. Coolidge, who was an avid fan. Nixon was a sports fan, of course. Taft was a big fan in more ways than one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:13, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This blog[31] includes one of Ike that appears to be at a Senators home opener. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely conclusive, but this one (labeled 1948) looks like he had thrown it right-handed.[32] Maybe he was trying to appeal to the right-wing vote in the coming election. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs: I added a new baseball section to Shibe. It needs the eye — and expertise — of a better baseball man than I. Would you please do the honors? I want to cite some expert saying the '29 ('30? '31?) A's was one of the greatest teams of all time. Any thoughts? Only caveat: we gotta keep it as short as poss. Thanks, Bugs. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs and Delay: Fellas, I'm 'bout done with Shibe (though I'm sure I'll be finding little fixes for awhile). Your comments and improvements are gratefully welcomed. Speaking of welcome, Welcome home, Delay! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 01:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs/Harry: I'm baaack! awesome improvements to Shibe and Griffith - didn't use a computer at all for the past couple weeks so it's gonna take some getting used to. Glad to be back. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 01:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome home, Delay! You got photos for us? (where'dya go?) — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:09, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went to northern New Mexico and southern Colorado. I might post some photos tomorrow if I see any that have some potential. Good night for now. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 05:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry/Bugs: I found a video online from the Prelinger Archives that has footage of Griffith Stadium, including an FDR first pitch where he has to stand with the help of an aide. (This is mentioned in the article.) It's fairly fuzzy if it's blown up all the way, but it would look fine if it's used as a thumbnail in the article. We do already have an FDR photo there, although it doesn't actually show him. Whadda you guys think? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 16:27, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: I say go for it, as long as it's not too fuzzy. If any of us runs into a still shot that includes FDR himself, it would be a good add to that gallery. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 17:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I added it to the gallery, tell me what you think. I was thinking it could also go instead in the Presidential Destination section, because that's where it mentions how he needed the aide's help. Thoughts? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 21:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: The caption, and the Destination section above it, give the wrong impression about FDR's paralysis status. His polio occurred in the 1920s, and he entered the White House in 1933 already in a wheelchair (though it was seldom photographed). The line about him being "sickly" in 1941 is also wrong; he was paralyzed, but robust — his health didn't decline until mid-1944, when it declined precipitously. I also think the photo is too fuzzy. A good rule of thumb might be, if it can't survive an upsizing, then it's probably too fuzzy to use as a thumbnail. Just MHO, though. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry: Okay, I removed the photo, you can change whatever you want about the sickness wording. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:23, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you say this photo survived the upsizing? It's a different still from that site that also could be used as a thumbnail, but isn't great when enlarged. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:42, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay: Wow, I found the source of the bad info about FDR — it's the Brad Snyder book. I'm sure his work on Griffith is good, but his FDR info is bad. I softened it some, but I really don't feel like chasing far and wide for better cites. As for the photos, I feel like I bullied you on that last one, and I don't want to do that. Just look at a potential photo, compare its clarity with others in the article, and with others around Wikipedia, and if it's comparable, then, as they say, "Be Bold." If it's substandard, then the critics will be all over it right quick! (I just had my beloved CBS#The_radio_years eviscerated by deletionists while you were away. Big brouhaha, very discouraging. I'm considering retirement from this place. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:15, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delay and Bugs: Are you guys enamored of the edit made by IP user 24.151.58.181 about the scoreboard? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A great addition to that article. It also confirmed my hazy memory that, when I was a kid, night games started at 8:05. Wow. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 06:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I joined some Yahoo group about the Polo Grounds just to see what pictures were posted. There are a lot of really cool ones that are great to look at, even if they can't be posted, and I guess a few cool ones like this. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 16:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also a great add to the Jake Ruppert article. It makes that a nice-lookin' page now. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 15:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I liked the way it made the article look. I've found a way to download those super-high quality TIFF images from the LOC, so I've been updating a lot of ones like the Ruppert photo that I had uploaded a while ago. Kudos for still adding to Shibe, I'm amazed there's so much info out there. I've tried looking for some more stuff about Griffith and Sportsman's, but there isn't much. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 18:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir — it means a lot coming from you. I was pleased to find the USPS stamp for Shibe, to see it all shiny and new again there at the end after all those paragraphs of decay and decrepitude... Wish we could find a shot of one of the Negro World Series played there in the '30s, but I'm not holding my breath. Isn't it sad that all those baseball achievements seem to have gone unrecorded on film... — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but it's also frustrating how many videos/photos do exist, but are locked away in the Hall of Fame or some archive somewhere, unavailable to average folks like us. Oh well...did you see that panorama I uploaded of the '24 Negro League series? Another one of those super-high quality shots, where you can zoom in to see every player's face. Luckily, each player's name is on the photo so identification is no problem. I've uploaded 2 or 3 derivatives from it so far. The LOC has some great stuff. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, are you familiar with this place, Shorpy.com? There are tens of thousands of high-quality images, many from the Detroit Pub Company, which is well represented at the LOC. Shorpy's images are higher qual than the LOC, but have a watermark and are not PD. Use the LOC for uploading here, but use Shorpy for getting the pictures you want to keep. If you wanna see some great 1940s 4x5 Kodachromes, try here. Not much baseball stuff at Shorpy, but for general 20th century photos, you can spend days there and not even make a dent — except in your available drive storage space. If you haven't seen it, hope you like. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 19:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! It's exactly like you said: super-high quality and very cool shots. Even if they can't be uploaded, they're fun to look at. Sort of like those Baseball Fever threads. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They can't be uploaded here but they can be downloaded for your own collection. Be sure to go to the largest version available to do your "Save picture as" or else you'll get a thumbnail or a smaller preview. Glad you like the joint. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The terrific stamp image at the end of Shibe Park has been marked for deletion by a deletionist. You can help save it by adding a Keep comment at the deletion list linked here. Bugs could help, too, (though I don't feel I can ask him because I think he's a little annoyed at me), and I know he has many friends who could also post Keep comments. Enough Keeps would avert the deletion. I'd hate to see this image get yanked because, although strictly speaking it is not discussed as a stamp in the text, it does bring a lot to the article. Thanks for your help, Delay. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not annoyed at anybody. I've just been busy with non-wikipedia stuff. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be happy to help, but... what should I say? I looked at the image and I'm fairly confused about what the argument is. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 12:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He says the stamp could be described in prose. I think we need to avoid trying to rebut his two arguments ('cause I don't think we can win that way) and just say that it is a unique view that is not shown in any extant photo and that it enhances the reader's experience and that it is discussed in the text. My hope is that if we get a bunch of Keeps it will overwhelm his argument. Thanks. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I wrote a little something at the deletion place. Your strategy sounds like a good one. Hope Bugs'll help. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've been cited for canvassing, so we can't talk about it anymore. Thanks again. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 20:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a different note, I'm thinking about updating all those '70s LOC photos of Shibe with the super-High-Res TIFF images. I looked at one already, and there are some great details that aren't visible in the low-res. I thought I'd check with you before I start, just in case you had done any retouching or something that you didn't want undone. I'll crop out the borders the same way you did. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 21:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just check the file size limits at Commons. I think they frown on superhuge file sizes, but I'm not sure. Would they go up as tiffs or jpgs? I don't want to limit the number of people who can see 'em, which tiffs might do. I don't know enough about the advan/disadvan of doing it to say. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They'd go up as jpgs, and I've uploaded bigger files than these that are easily viewable. Sound OK? May not start till tomorrow at this hour, or maybe one or two. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 02:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's the first one. Check out the sign on the door just to the right of the main entrance of the cupola. Why do you suppose the revival was moved? Maybe the state of the stadium, or maybe some other reason.Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded the first two, will finish the rest tomorrow. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 02:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you weren't whistling Dixie — they look great! A great add! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see the sign you're talking about, moving the revival. Kuklick says that a revival tent was being set up when the two young brothers started the fire, so I'm guessing that sign dates back to the days immediately following the fire two years previously. Interestingly, the revival moved to the Philadelphia Arena, another venue in decline by 1971. In its glory days, it had the TV studios of WFIL-TV in its basement and was the point of origination for American Bandstand, the legendary daily rock-n-roll show from about '57 till about '62. By 1971, though, WFIL was gone and even the Roller Derby had decamped for The Spectrum. There couldn't have been a more analogous place to move the revival. Guess their tent burned up in the fire at Shibe. Again, great add! Harry. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look just to the left of the door with the revival sign, down at sidewalk level. "They" cut the cornerstone out of the building. Wonder where that's at these days! (There's a great shot from Oct 1970, day after the last game, of black neighborhood men leaning on that original cornerstone. If I can find it again, I'll link it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guess you saw what happened to the stamp. This fellow Fastily wrote that he really doesn't care what the vote tally is, he evaluates the arguments and he decides who wins. Also, I put up your great 1954 price list at Shibe. Do you like the caption? Did you give up on uploading the higher-def 1973 Shibe shots? I see there's a couple yet to go. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 17:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shame about the stamp. Well, we have quite a few other great images there, even if they don't show the same view that one did. The price list looks great; I tweaked the caption a tiny bit - I think "dogs" might be a little too casual. I'll get on the rest of those 1973 photos right now; I kinda got distracted by uploading some other stuff, but I'll finish 'em. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I re=tweaked that caption, cuz there was a widow. Nothing out of the spirit of your tweak. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I finished the 1973 ones. This is pretty unrelated, but check out this supposed Shibe photo from the Temple archives. The triangular building in CF gives away the stadium's true identity... Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:14, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, look at the sharp eyes on Delaywaves! Okay, hawkeye, here's one for you: Kuklick (or somebody) wrote that there were busts of Mack and Shibe over the entrances to the grandstand (Shibe on Lehigh and Mack on 21st), and I can't find 'em in any picture. Okay, now look closely at the super-rez photo of the grandstand entrance and, above the door, it looks as if whatever had been there in the scrollwork has been busted off! Like maybe with a sledgehammer! There might even be crumbled pieces of sement still on the ledge. Whadda you think? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I just saw where it says "B.F. Shibe" under the cartouche! So someone did knock it off, with a sledgehammer, mustabeen! Wow. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 22:40, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. That sure answers that. I didn't notice that when I looked either. Y'know, Baseball Fever's thread on Shibe has quite a few good photos of the entrance. (There are only 14 pages, so it won't take a week to look through like some of the others.) Maybe one of those has the busts in them? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How 'bout this one on page 13? Awfully hard to see, but in the space above the entrance there seems to be a small dark patch that doesn't appear in the 1973 ones. I was picturing the busts as concrete, but maybe they were some sort of metal. I'll keep looking. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:46, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I stood right in front of the 21st St. grandstand entrance for hours three or four times to get autographs, and I can't for the life of me remember Mack's face up there; I clearly remember the stone plaque "Entrance to the Grand Stand", but not any face or bust. The thing I read describes those heads as "terra cotta" — which probably means pigmented cement. Imagine what it took to get up there and smash those things! A ladder and a sledge — can you say "anger management?" — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:05, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I'd been imagining some guy that wanted to keep the busts so he sort of lightly chiseled them off and put 'em in his garage. But of course, it must have been some vandal - when I visited the site this year, the neighborhood wasn't the greatest, and it seems to have been worse back then. Did you ever get any autographs out there? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 23:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked closely at the 21st St entrance in the first shot of the series, and it looks like the Mack head might've been busted off, too. What an odd thing — because it wasn't easy to do. Thanks again for those high-rez uploads, I'd be some sorry detective without 'em. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:22, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I got several balls' worth, all mid-60s Phils except Allen: Bunning, Callison, Wine, Amaro (Sr), Hoak, Groat, Gonzalez — all of 'em except Allen. He had his own private, secret, door and dropped off right at it by a driver. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! The best I've ever gotten was David Eckstein...last year. Do you still have them? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 23:47, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a funny story, though: my mom's favorite player (mine too) was Johnny Callison, and when I came home with a ball of sigs that had his on it, she decided that it needed to be protected from decay — chemically. So she got out a bottle of clear nail polish to varnish the thing and went straight to Callison's signature to start on. She dipped the brush, drew it across the signature, and the whole thing smeared into a blue Van Gogh Starry Night! And ironically, the ball today is somewhere between ecru and khaki in color, except that swath where the nail polish is — it's brown. Hahahaha! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 00:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Classic! You'd better spread the word about that ball's history to all your relatives; why would someone keep a baseball with a brown smear on it unless they knew the full story? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 00:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my son Colin knows it well. It's in one of those ball cubes now, in his custody. His best autograph is Ashburn, which he got when we prepared a spreadsheet comparison of Ashburn's record vs. the Hall of Fame membership during the "Why the Hall Not?" campaign. Ashburn beat somebody in every category and beat half-a-dozen members in every category but home runs. His mother knew Ashburn's son and gave him the spreadsheet, the son passed it along to Ashburn, who said "Even I didn't know I was this good" and he sent a signed ball along to Colin. Now that's a backstory! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 00:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BINGO!! Download the massive tiff version of this photo zoom in, and you'll see a clear view of the Mack face/bust over the 21st street Grand Stand Entrance. You'll have to teach me what I don't know about these tiff versions, 'cause I can't get the super hi-rez results that you do! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what a find! And it had been right under our noses the whole time. Funny, that one doesn't seem to be as super-high res as the others. Once I zoom in on Mack's head it gets a bit fuzzy, whereas it would've been sharp on those '73 ones. You're probably doing everything right, it's just the photo. I'll update the Commons image with the TIFF now. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 20:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In a separate story, I got a Flickr user to change the license of this photo to Creative Commons, which I uploaded here. I think it's a pretty good shot, where do you want it to go in the article? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 20:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I put it in the "1938–1954" section, but you can feel free to move it as you please. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 21:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one with a massive, 23-meg tiff. This one's on Lehigh Ave and just might give us a view of the Ben Shibe face over the Lehigh door. Here's what I'd like to accomplish with these: a before-and-after pairing of the heads intact vs. the '73 shots, side-by-side (like the two Whiz Kids cards) with the headline Souvenir or vandalism victim?. Then explain in the caption that they gazed benignly over the corner 60 years until they vanished in the 70s, blah-blah. I'm not sure there's a good enough shot of Mack on 21st either before or after, but we do have a good Shibe-after shot if we can just find a good Shibe-before. They'd be small in the article, so they don't have to be great, just good. Another contender for a "Souvenir or victim" diptych would be that cornerstone, which appears clearly (actually, its absence is clear) in the first '73 shot. Wish we could use that photo I sent you from Temple, with the neighborhood men hanging about on the corner. Did you get that shot in your e-mail? The cigar stand on Lehigh is interesting in the photo linked above.

What an odd photo that Flickr shot is. Can't figure out what's going on there. Wish we knew which team it is. Also — I never saw that Warning sign on the fence in any other shot. You think it's some war-related admonition? (it is 1943, after all). It's intriguing, but I have no idea where to put it. We're getting close to full-up. Good work persuading that Flickr guy to consent. Wonder where he got it from? Let me browse the article for a spot to put it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's definitely a bust in that photo, but I think that one is just too fuzzy to use in the article. I like the plan, though - If we can find one of Ben Shibe to use that would be good, or maybe just the one of Mack with the corresponding '73 photo. I have no clue what's happening in that photo - all he seems to know is that it's a Sunday afternoon game. Getting Flickr users to change their photo licenses is really easy - everyone there is much nicer than on Wikipedia! I did the same for that 1960 photo. He asked to see my contributions on Wikipedia and was impressed, but I made a point of telling him that a guy named HarringtonSmith did a hell of a lot more for Shibe than I did. I'll update the Mack-bust-zoomed-out-photo now. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 22:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may have noticed this one already, but the TIFF version of this image shows a fuzzy but definite view of both busts at once. Even if Mack was the A's part-owner, it's hard to believe they put a bust of him on the side of the stadium. Can you imagine if George Steinbrenner's head stared down at you every time you entered Yankee Stadium? Wouldn't be a pleasant experience. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 01:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mack and Shibe must have been somewhat local celebs — check out the souvenir program cover up near the top of the article, where Shibe and Mack have top billing, their own pictures at the very top. So I guess it's not surprising that their heads are up there over the doors. Then again, it could be sycophants in the A's publicity department and at Steele & Sons that worked 'em in. Who knows. I'd love to know where those heads are now — I've come to agree with your souvenir-hunter theory, not an enraged sledge-wielding madman. Incidentally, I'm sure you've seen the metal plate they put up in '53 to cover the stone Shibe Park with Connie Mack Stadium — I saw that plate for sale in a card shop in the early '90s. Guess how much? $50,000! Dunno if they ever got it. I'm slowly giving up hope on that before-and-after diptych idea; I just don't think we're gonna find a Shibe-before shot, and the Mack ones are always fuzzy and in the shade. Also, I haven't seen a good "before" cornerstone shot. Ah, well.

Now, the tougher conversation. I have two issues with the new 1943 photo. First is placement: it's out of chronological order in that spot. We go from 1929, to '38, to '50, to '54, to '55, to '57 to '60, and each lines up well with its spot in the text. Sticking '43 in between '50 and '54 messes that flow up. I could live with it if the images didn't line up so well with the text. We have to find a better spot. Other problem is the caption: it's an unusual photo showing something very unusual going on. Publishing rules of thumb say that you must solve a photographic anomaly in the caption — you cannot show both teams and all umpires clumped together at second and the whole rest of the field completely devoid of people, and not say what's happening in the picture. If we could find out what that Warning sign on the LCF wall is all about, we could address that in the caption and sidestep the issue of the clumped people. But we just can't run such an unusual photo with a self-evident caption like that. I'm sure we can fix this — I'm gonna check Kuklick when I log off and see if I can find anything out about wartime signs in the park. Don't be angry with me, I just want this article to be as good as it can be. Harry — HarringtonSmith (talk) 04:59, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the chronological thing - I just wanted to get it in the article quickly because the Flickr user that took it seemed to really want to see it there. I feel like I've seen that warning sign before - if it was up for a while, there must be some zoomed-in photos of it where we can read what it says. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 12:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's no rush to fix it, as long as we do fix it. Let me cobble together a "place keeper" caption till we come up with the keeper caption; I had no luck with Kuklick. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 12:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had an idea to post the photo on the Baseball Fever thread about Shibe and ask if anyone knows what the sign said, but for some reason my account can't post on threads. It's a shame, because I've seen plenty of people there ask for photos of certain ballpark features, and immediately get them. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 13:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had trouble accessing threads at Baseball Fever yesterday. They might be having tech problems. I put that caption in. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the chronological problem: how about I remove that 1938 photo of Connie Mack and put the 1943 photo in its place? That would fix the chronological issue, and we have another photo of Mack only one section before. Sound OK? Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 19:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, do not replace the 1938 Mack photo; it's important to the flow of the narrative right there, more so than the 1943 photo. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you see the busts of Shibe and Mack in those photos? I can't see them. Could you upload an altered version under a different name, with the busts arrowed or circled? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you downloading the TIFF versions? They're only visible in those, and fairly faintly. Look at this 1973 photo. You see the smashed off part above the "Entrance to Grand Stand" sign? Look at the same spot in those 1913 ones, and you'll see them on each side. Delaywaves ^{talk • contribs} 20:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see it now. How weird. Maybe vandalism, maybe they just decided they didn't like seeing their own mugs up there. I've never heard or read anything about it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding that 1943 photo, can you ask the source if he has a higher-resolution version? It would be interesting to find out what that "Warning" notice is about. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?}