Talk:List of current Major League Baseball stadiums

message: In reference to the recent revert about the yet-to-be-built Mets stadium, there are also new ones coming in D.C., Minnesota and for the Yankees, at least. The obvious solution is to create another section on future arenas. Someone who actually knows how to do that could feel free to jump in here and do that. It should be limited to stadium plans that are concrete (ha!) and not just pie-in-the-sky. Wahkeenah 12:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Future ballparks

message: i think it should be made into like the National Football League stadiums article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.157.188.124 (talk) 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: like NFL article

message: Why has Chavez Ravine been listed as a "former stadium"? Even though it is past for the Angels, it is still current for the Dodgers. Or if it is to stay as former because of its role for the Angels, then shouldn't Shea Stadium be listed as a former stadium for the Yankees? —  Michael J  06:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When both teams were using the stadium, it was called "Dodger Stadium" when the Dodgers played there and "Chavez Ravine" when the Angels did. It seems quite possible that the information could have been included without the person including it realizing they were one in the same.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TaxmanVK (talk • contribs) 03:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Chavez Ravine?

message: I'm kinda lost here but I tried adding my new site topratedballparks.com and it was removed.  It's for sure relevant to a article about ballparks.  Can someone help me out here.  ThanksCk russell (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: question

message: Can someone define the different terms used in the "Style" column, and place those definitions on the page? I know what they mean, but they are not exactly obvious to someone who doesn't know much about baseball stadiums.
Kuyabribri (talk) 22:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point; I know nothing about baseball stadiums and am totally lost. 69.221.170.94 (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We should probably remove the style column. It appears to be original research. Kingturtle (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and removed the column, due to the original research and the fact that many styles are largely subjective to the individual person's opinion. Jervill (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Style

message: I'd like to see a source on this funding information.  The cardinals pulled funds from st. louis city, st. louis county, and the state of missouri.  That's a pretty established fact.  DaronDierkes (talk) 07:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: government funding for the St. Louis Cardinals

message: It's kind of silly to list the elevation above sea level for each park, when (as the data shows) there is only one stadium for which it is really noteworthy (Coors Field).  I propose that we drop that, along with the "government funding" column (do people really care  about that?), and instead add columns showing the left- and right-field distances.  We can't just list the center-field distances; that's a tease. 24.11.127.26 (talk) 06:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Elevation

message: Really disappointed to see that this information has been buried in the archives of the history. I found it valuable, useful and very relevant. Even more disappointed to see that this was done, apparently, without discussion. 
The reason given for the removal was that it was "political". One could argue that the removal of the information was political. The debate on whether to finance one of these facilitates is a political issue. Once the checks are written, it becomes a matter of fact.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TaxmanVK (talk • contribs) 03:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cost and Public Financing

message: Will someone please assist in verifying the seating capacities of these stadiums?  In looking through the list of changes, it appears that someone is changing the capacities to random numbers.  Thank you.  18:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seating Capacity 

message: Marlins Park may be many things, but one thing it is not is 'retro' anything. Unless one is not clear of the definition of the term retro. It is of a modern design and the MLB reference makes that statement.DOMICH (talk) 02:27, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Marlins Park design type

message: What's the purpose of listing "other tenants" of former ballparks? We don't include this information for the current ballparks and it doesn't seem germane to the topic of "MLB stadiums". All it does is clutter the table and force every other column to be thinner (and thus less easy to read).
Also ... currently the listing under "Former ballparks / stadiums" omits most of the parks used (solely) in the Federal League or the 19th century, with the exception of ballparks located in Boston and New York City. Major League Baseball has ruled that the FL (1914-1915) and the 19th century AA, NL, PL and UA were all "major leagues" and as such their stadiums should be included, either as part of the main "former" list or as part of a separate list. 
The advantage of having a separate list with a dividing line of 1900/1901 (start of AL as a major league, stabilization of NL with eight franchises that all continue to today) are that (I would imagine) most visitors to this page are much more interested in the 20th century former homes of current franchises than they are in the rather obscure grounds where major league baseball was played for three years in Worcester, Mass., or Louisville, Ky., or Troy, N.Y., or the largely forgotten FL history of cities like Baltimore or Indianapolis. The drawback is that you'll get some double-listings for the NL teams with ballparks that span the turn of the century.
Alternatively we could have separate "former" listings for each of the major leagues (AA, AL, FL, NL, PL, UA), which would also make the lists more manageable, and make it easier to show a franchise-by-franchise progression, and would fix the problem of NL teams that existed both before and after 1900. Here, however, you get double listings of ballparks that have been used in more than one league, such as Exposition Park (NL-FL), Milwaukee County Stadium (NL-AL-NL), Shibe Park (AL-NL), Sportsmans Park (AL-NL), etc.
I suppose my preference would be to have just two lists: ballparks currently in MLB use, and ballparks formerly in MLB use. What saith consensus? ``` t b w i l l i e 
` $1.25 ` 02:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Willie, if you believe there are sites under "Former Ballparks" that are missing, go ahead and add them. WP:BOLD. (And I agree, the "other uses" is an odd column. How about telling what is currently on the site?)     → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 08:21, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There are definitely sites missing, it's just a matter of determining whether they should go in the main listing (which currently only has ex-AL and ex-NL parks, plus a few others from Boston and New York), or if there should be a different listing for the former leagues, none of which has been in operation in living memory. I'd like to have the discussion here first before being too bold and getting reverted. ``` t b w i l l i e ` $1.25 ` 16:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion is that there should be one list of former ballparks. However, the only tenants that should be listed are Major League Baseball teams, not other sports like football or soccer. With a single list, the Polo Grounds (for example) could indicate in one listing that it was once home to the Giants, Yankees and Mets.    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 19:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Other tenants / 19th century and Federal ballparks

message: The use of Template:convert appears to be causing problems -- it says that PNC Park is "399 feet (122 m)" and Kauffman Stadium is "410 feet (120 m)".  Probably we should use a manually-specified rounding, or ask the authors of Template:convert to fix their heuristic.  It's one thing to round inappropriately (410 feet is 124.968 meters) all the time, but doing so inconsistently is very bad.
Cjbprime (talk) 02:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Template:convert causes weird rounding 

message: Would it be of any value to include the "fate" of former ballparks in that table? That already exists for a handful which have been modified into other sports venues (e.g., Braves Field, Jarry Park). It could be just "Demolished 1964", or it could briefly mention what is on the site (e.g., under Metropolitan Stadium it could say, "Now site of the Mall of America". Seeking opinions.    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 03:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fate of former ballparks 

message: I'd like to see this article become List of current Major League Baseball stadiums, similar to List of current National Football League stadiums. What does everybody else think?-- Astros4477 (Talk)  03:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Would that mean removing all former stadiums from this list? If so, I don't know if I'd support that – I think it's good that there's a listing of former stadiums in an easy-to-find article. Delaywaves • talk 02:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but we could make a List of former Major League Baseball stadiums. Something like Chronology of home stadiums for current National Football League teams could also be done but that would require quite a bit of work.-- Astros4477 (Talk)  02:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refocus article 

message: I'm going to spend some time trying to get this to FLC. I'll be making many changes but very few significant ones. If you have any suggestions or don't agree with something I did, we can discuss it here.-- Astros4477 (Talk)  19:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: May I ask why you removed the images of former ballparks? If you're creating a new article for them, I understand, if not, I don't see why the images needed to be removed. Delaywaves • talk 15:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the images because it made that table really sloppy. Some had them, and some didn't. The table is also very large and I think it was hard to follow with the extra spacing.-- Astros4477 (Talk)  16:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll give this a look in the next day or so to give you my thoughts, and help out if you need it. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I imagine the most work will be the sourcing for the former stadiums.-- Astros4477 (Talk)  18:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  FLC preparation 

message: Is it worth mentioning in the table that Baltimore's Memorial Stadium was later used by the minor league Bowie Baysox? Has any other major league stadium subsequently become a minor league stadium?    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 02:59, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Bowie Baysox]] in Baltimore 

message: I created a new page with the former stadiums and moved this page to rename as current parks. Similar to what is already in place for the NFL. Jdavi333 (talk) 21:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the point for this action? It lacks sources and it was perfectly fine to have everything at one place. You should consult at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball before making edits like this. I also feel the need to revert your edit as it is a drastic change and opinions from other users should be heard. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:04, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I was trying to make the baseball article in a similar format to the football article, where the former stadiums are in a separate article. Anyone is welcome to make corrections and changes as they see fit. Jdavi333 (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  All is good as other users don't have a problem with this separation. I won't have any problem with this as long as there's an understanding. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. If people complain or anything we'll deal with it. Jdavi333 (talk) 18:40, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former stadiums 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of current Major League Baseball stadiums. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060310105841/http://www.ballparktour.com/ to http://www.ballparktour.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130523132228/http://vegasscouting.com/ to http://vegasscouting.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since its construction until now, nobody has had any issue with listing the location of SunTrust Park as Cumberland, Georgia. While this is indeed an unincorporated community in Cobb County, GA, it would be incorrect to change the location to Atlanta, because the stadium is outside city limits. If these editors have an issue that Cumberland is unincorporated, the most accurate location would be Cobb County, Georgia. While this might seem weird to some, it would be the purest form of location. I for one am perfectly alright with listing the location as Cumberland, GA, unless this would violate something in the MOS because, as one of the editors so eloquently put it, Cumberland, GA "does not exist". Jdavi333 (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This should be treated the same as T-Mobile Arena. Mailing address does not determine the actual location of the venue. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  That was my initial assumption. I was just trying to get the editors involved who seem to think it has to be Atlanta. Jdavi333 (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cumberland, GA 

message: Am I the only person who has noticed that the Toronto Blue Jays stadium is not in the list??!!?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.218.236 (talk) 14:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted the hide. Regardless of where the Blue Jays play in 2020, Rogers Centre should remain in this list as it is still a current Major League stadium. The team is not moving from the stadium, their lease is not being terminated; they are simply being forced to play home games elsewhere in 2020 for very unusual circumstances. The Blue Jays' temporary home, if it is not already on the list (such as if they play at PNC Park or another MLB park), should be included only after it becomes official. Even then, Rogers Centre should still remain in the list. --JonRidinger (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. If they are not playing in Rogers Centre this season (as has been confirmed by multiple sources), it should be hidden for the duration of the season. The title of the article is "List of Current Major League Baseball stadiums." If they aren't playing there, it is not current. The most recent examples I can think of are the Superdome in 2005 and Soldier Field in 2002, which were both closed for an entire season. Although the NFL stadium page did not exist back then (was only created in 2007), I would not imagine them being listed as "current" stadiums if they were closed for an entire season. The page Chronology of home stadiums for current National Football League teams proves my point. Under the Bears and Saints respectively, there is a break in their stadium occupancy for those seasons they played elsewhere. For the season(s) a stadium is not used, it is not "current" Jdavi333 (talk) 14:56, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  (ec) It should remain on the page, no doubt, but when the Blue Jays name a their temporary 2020 home, it is that stadium that should be placed in the main list of "current MLB stadiums". Rogers Centre should either be lumped in with the "future" ballpark(s) (as it is projected to be an MLB ballpark in 2021, we all hope), or split into its own section, "Returning stadium" or something like that. , who made the change, makes a good point. Regardless of whether they own the property, have offices there, or intend to return to it in the future, the fact is the Blue Jays are not playing any home games there in 2020. The idea of temporarily abandoning a longstanding home is "unusual" but not entirely unheard-of. Consider Yankee Stadium I during the reconstruction in 1974-75, when the Yankees played all their home games at Shea -- would we have listed Yankee Stadium as a "current" MLB ballpark those years? Whatever happens, there should be a Blue Jays entry in the main list at all times. Either leave Rogers Centre up there until the temporary home is designated, or add a temporary "TBA" listing to represent the Blue Jays in the interim. ``` t b w i l l i e ` $1.25 ` 15:10, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with not having no Blue Jays representation, which is why I agreed with returning Rogers Centre for now. I'm not sure if "Future Stadiums" is appropriate; it just wounds funny to me. Maybe a separate section, or just leave it off until the end of the season. Jdavi333 (talk) 15:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why calling it "current" can be problematic. I believe the Rogers Centre should remain no matter where they play in 2020. This is temporary. A note can be placed in the Rogers Centre section of the list to clarify that it's not in use in 2020. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. You can keep Rogers Centre with a note about 2020 or a different coloring. The same should be true for instances where a stadium is being renovated. There's a difference between a team temporarily leaving a facility for extenuating circumstances or renovations and formally ending their tenancy like moving to a new stadium or changing cities. "Current" to me fits Rogers Centre just fine, regardless of where the Blue Jays are forced to play. It's still a stadium with a Major League tenant and the Jays not playing there wasn't planned at all; heck, they were Tweeting pictures of them in building even after news broke about the decision of the Canadian government. --JonRidinger (talk) 16:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that it should stay. It's the Blue Jays' home park, even if they can't play there because of a temporary circumstance. When the A's played the beginning of the 1996 season in Las Vegas, that didn't make the coliseum less of an MLB ballpark, and this doesn't mean Rogers Centre isn't one either. oknazevad (talk) 14:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

text: The A's situation was not for an entire season. Either way, seems like it will be PNC Park, so I will just make a shared not by PNC and Rogers explaining it. Jdavi333 (talk) 14:21, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait until official announcement to make changes. There's no deadline, and the ESPN article you linked to is from it's very title on a speculative piece. oknazevad (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rogers Centre 

message: It would seem to meet the definition, and is referred to as such by many sources online.  (Well, we could argue the definition too, as Multi-purpose stadium is a mess of original research.)  This page lists it as "Modern/Indoor".  Baseball park also explicitly refers to it as an indoor non-multipurpose stadium.  Now, none of this currently has citations, I'm inclined to change it, but thought I'd put it here for commenting first.  162.208.168.92 (talk) 00:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call it a multipurpose stadium as usually understood. It was built specifically for baseball (and specifically to land an MLB team in the Tampa Bay Area) even if it did get used for other purposes before the Rays started playing. And still sees some other uses, which is common for most MLB parks (even pure baseball parks like Wrigley). It also doesn't have the movable seating that true multipurpose stadiums have to allow for other sports' field configurations. And the Trop wouldn't need it because the Buccaneers were never intended as a tenant, unlike true multipurpose stadiums that were built for both baseball and football. So no, I wouldn't call it. oknazevad (talk) 02:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW this USA Today article from 2013 has a quote from someone who works for the architecture firm that says the Trop was designed to be multipurpose. Has the stadium served multiple purposes in its close to 30-year existence? Yes. Yankee Stadium is a current MLS stadium, hosts at least one college football game each year, hosted two NHL games in 2014, and several concerts, even though it was obviously built for baseball. The argument could be made that it is also a multipurpose stadium. Is the word "multipurpose" being taken too literally here? Tampabay721 (talk) 22:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "Although the Rays ownership have done a good job enhancing the fan experience while putting a very good team on the field, Tropicana Field was designed as a multipurpose facility well over 30 years ago," observed Joe Spear, senior principal at Populous, which designed the stadium back when the architecture firm was known as HOK.  So an executive at the firm which designed the stadium is on record as saying it is multipurpose.  To me, that seems like a pretty good argument in favour.  162.208.168.92 (talk) 19:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Tropicana Field a multipurpose stadium? 

message: The future parks table lists the new Las Vegas stadium as the future home of the Las Vegas Athletics.  As to the best of my knowledge there has been no confirmation that the A's will retain that nickname after they move, is it not speculation/crystal balling to refer to them in that way.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The A's president has stated they will be keeping the name, per  here and here. While that stance could change, it's not speculation to list the name as "A's'/"Athletics". BilCat (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vegas 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Major League Baseball which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 13:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress