Talk:Comiskey Park

message: Well, it's obvious that a White Sox fan wrote this one.  Good article, but no one outside of Chicago cares whether "Wrigley Field yayed while Comiskey roared," or whether the Sox used to consistently outdraw the "inept" Cubs (last I checked, neither Chicago baseball franchise had won a World Series since before the automobile era).  This is supposed to be a neutral, fact-based encyclopedic entry, not a platform for yet another jealous, bitter White Sox fan to spout his contempt for the North Siders.  Oh, and just think how well the Sox might be drawing if they'd kept the old park, instead of building the current behemoth that occupies 35th and Shields?  6/26/05
I'm actually a lifelong Cubs fan. I only followed the Sox when they were run by Bill Veeck. I was trying to illustrate some sense of what it was like to see a game at Sox Park with a full house before they built that white elephant across the street from it. Being fully enclosed, the sound reverberated. It's a different sound effect than at Wrigley. I didn't make up that quote. If you think there is too much "point of view" in this writeup, see if you can neutralize it without rendering it too bland. We're talking baseball here, not politics or religion.  Well, maybe religion.  0:)  Now, I'm trying to figure out who you root for. Keep in mind, cars were in wide usage by 1917. :) As a self-styled baseball historian, I always thought it was ironic that they make such a big deal about "Take Me Out to the Ball Game", a song written the same year the Cubs last won the Series. It's an unintentionally subliminal reminder of their 97 years of falling short. The fact that I resented Harry Caray for his years of Cubs-baiting while he was a Cardinals announcer probably adds to it. As for the Sox, I think they've got a reasonable chance of taking the whole thing this year. Which would leave just the Cubs as the last full measure of futility. >:( Wahkeenah 18:34, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: To form a neutral zone between Cubs & Sox fans...let me offer a fact: Comiskey used to sell more kosher hot dogs than any other kind. (All to Billy Crystal?)  Trekphiler 14:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: *From a modern perspective, it seems that the White Sox are always second fiddle to the Cubs, and likewise the Cardinals were second fiddle to the Bears before they moved on to greener pastures. It is surprising, then, to discover that the White Sox were the more popular team in town for pockets of their history. In the early years of Comiskey Park, the White Sox regularly outdrew the Cubs. The throwing of the 1919 World Series seemed to take the starch out of the franchise for decades. But the Sox were a contender during the early 1950s and into the mid 1960s, and once again outdrew the perpetually inept Cubs. 
This  is entirely pov from start to finish
* It was downright painful for old-time fans to watch.
* Some Sox fans believed that the move was unnecessary,
(Gnevin 23:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Npov does mean something isnt true its mean its not of a negivate point of view wp:npov.
From a modern perspective, it seems that the White Sox are always second fiddle to the Cubs
*Says who thats someones point of view
and likewise the Cardinals were second fiddle to the Bears before they moved on to greener pastures.
*Greener how much greener wouldnt fan in the city they left feel they went to darker pastures 
It is surprising, then, to discover that the White Sox were the more popular team in town for pockets of their history.  
*I'm not surprised 
The throwing of the 1919 World Series seemed to take the starch out of the franchise for decades. 
* Or many they just wherent good enought and it had nothing to do with 1919
But the Sox were a contender during the early 1950s and into the mid 1960s, and once again outdrew the perpetually inept Cubs. 
* Inept says who quanity it 
It was downright painful for old-time fans to watch.
* Painful as in actual physicial pain ? Quanify it , maybe some old timer where happy to leave an old stadium
Some Sox fans believed that the move was unnecessary,
* And some sox belive the us didnt land on the moon , but wiki doesnt care about their opinions 
(Gnevin 21:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

text: As a passer-by (not a regular editor of this article), the Wootonius edit looks to have improved the NPOV of the highlighted section, so nice job Wootnius.  One question I had was why the first paragraph in that section about Sox fans feeling like they have gotten short shrift / less respect from the city over the years is even in this article in the first place.  There's no question in my mind the feeling is real -- I know too many Sox fans who feel that way to say the feeling isn't there, so the information certainly belongs somewhere in Wikipedia.  But it seems like it ought to go in an article on the White Sox, or White Sox fans, or even maybe Chicago sports and Chicago sports culture, not the article on Comiskey Park.  Unless the point is that somehow Comiskey Park's last years reinforced that feeling, or was a key factor in getting it torn down, or something like that.  So my humble suggestion would be to remove most of the first paragraph and relocated it to another article.  Either that or provide a clearer tie-in between that feeling of Sox fans and the "Final years" of Comiskey.  Good luck!  Fairsing 22:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its most appropriate place, actually, would be the article about the Cubs-Sox rivalry. Wahkeenah 00:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Npov 

message: The White Sox have never drawn 3 million fans in home attendance, at either the old stadium or at the new stadium (prior to the conclusion of the 2006 season).  It is not clear to me if this was an innocent mistake or if it was someone was trying to deceive people into thinking that the White Sox have been more successful at the gate than they really have been.  Furthermore, an exploration of White Sox support in comparison to Cubs support should be in the article about the franchise, and not in the article about the ballpark.
*Yikes! It was a typo that I made on 4/6/2005. It took over 14 months for somebody to catch it... which goes to show how much these articles are actually read. It was also one of my early efforts, and you're right that it more properly belongs in an article about the Sox, or perhaps in the Cubs-Sox rivalry page (which I don't think existed at that time). As I recall, the point I was trying to make overall was about the extortion committed by the Sunshine Boys (Jerry and Eddie) in getting the taxpayers to build their new palace. Not that the old Sox Park was all that attractive. But it had lots of character(s). However, all or most of that stuff should be in the Cubs-Sox article. Otherwise, it's just sour grapes. d:) Wahkeenah 07:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual error / POV concerns

message: I think the POV concerns have been resolved but I still think a discussion of the story behind the destruction of the original Comiskey and the genesis of New Comiskey is in order- like the fact that then Governor 'Big Jim' Thompson- a law school buddy of the sunshine boys- had the clocks stopped on the floor of the Illinois State House of Representitives in order buy time to get enought votes to fund the Illinois Sports Complex Authority and the subsequent building of the new ballpark. (see Heller, Lords of the Realm, 1994).  Moreover I think that the article should be re-organized with headings as follows: Origins- original construction and additions, White Sox tenure there, additional events and teams, World Series, All Star Games, notable events (to include the Star Spangled Banner- an event that helped to make it the official national anthem, Disco Demolition, no-hitters and perfect games etc.) and demise.--An ex in Texas but the heart's in Tennessee 02:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neutral (relatively speaking) observer here; The "power play" by Thompson did happen. Cited the AP article from a search of the NY Times archive. Elimnates the one-sided POV, at least in my opinion. (Disclaimer: I live in SE Wisconsin, and have attended a White Sox game at the old Comiskey Park.)-jwhouk 10:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Resolved? /  Some additional info

message: :Image:L 5088a673091b5f7cd1b468b63d158702.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 14:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:L 5088a673091b5f7cd1b468b63d158702.jpg

message: :Image:Harry10.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 14:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Harry10.jpg

message: The following appeared in the article itself; it belongs here:
( note:per-DB a.k.a Dale Bennett. where and how is this even verifiable?,I was there and among the top 80,but i don't remember seeing a check off list, i'm just saying,he was there on disco demolition night,wow, does he remember john lusk being there as well and almost buying the farm on the catwalk, certainly that is of note and i can name names on this occurance and several others almost para-normal occurances that very evening at 35 and sheilds, hey just wondering ) 
167.225.107.17 (talk) 14:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifiability question moved out of article 

message: I think there should be a section to show the movies that were made in the park as well as it's history. Some great movies were shot there. 2600:6C46:547F:F537:E1EE:314D:26E7:7352 (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, please consider maybe signing up and adding the section. If not, which films do you have in mind? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:54, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movies made here. 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion