Jump to content

Talk:Cubs Win Flag

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleCubs Win Flag was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 28, 2008Good article nomineeListed
September 11, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 28, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Chicago Cubs have a tradition of raising a Cubs Win flag (pictured) on the flagpole atop the scoreboard at Wrigley Field after every Cubs home victory?
Current status: Delisted good article

Images

[edit]

I would like to find images like those below, but I can only find http://www.flickr.com/photos/falsecognate/2439409291/ --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:07, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. http://www.flickr.com/photos/trainboy03/2744578019/
  2. http://www.flickr.com/photos/trainboy03/2380124137/
That's another case of a fan snapping a photo just after the W flag was raised and before the other flags were lowered. The first pic we discussed on your talk page. The second pic is from August 5, 2006. [1] It was a 3:05 start, and the game ran 2 hours and 43 minutes, so it would have ended about 5:48. The clock reads 5:55. We know from other photos that they can get all the flag stuff done in as little time as 11 minutes, but apparently not as short as 7 minutes. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But the game wouldn't have actually started at 3:05. They get stuff done pretty darn fast up there.Petero9 (talk) 01:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It could have started a few minutes after 3:05. I'm just saying that the earliest it could have ended, with that game time, was 5:48 - hence the weaselly, "would have ended about 5:48". :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the flags in general, I have a postcard from the early 60s that shows 4 flags on the left and 4 on the right, representing the 8 NL clubs prior to the 1962 expansion. After that they went to 5 on the left and 5 on the right. The would have gone to 6 on each side when they split into divisions in 1969, and when the NL went to 3 divisions in 1994 they would have begun the 3 columns of flags. The open question is, when did they start using flags? That's unclear at present, but I think Bill Veeck was involved in the project, so it could have been as early as the bleacher expansion of 1937. More research needed. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flags and lights

[edit]

Notice the two lights on the top of the scoreboard in that one photo. The thing is, we only have photos of the W flag. They do lose occasionally. I wonder if anyone has a picture of the L flag - not only for illustrative purposes, but to see if they fly it on the other side of the scoreboard, i.e. whether it corresponds to the light below it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I answered my own question. I went to a game in 2007 in which the Cubs lost, and I happened to get a photo. It's not good enough to display here, but the L is definitely on the other side of the masthead - thus, it's visually connected with the light below it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, the blue-on-white "W" flag flies over the blue light, and the white-on-blue "L" flag flies over the white light. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The masthead itself and the team flags were in place as early as 1938, as per photos in William Hartel's A Day at the Park. The 1938 labeling appears to be correct, as the ivy has just barely started to climb the wall. Even by the the 1938 World Series (as per films I've seen) the ivy was only partway up the walls. That was also before the scoreboard clock was added. The Chinese elms on the "stairsteps" behind the bleachers, as well as the trees in the "wells", are also visible. So the masthead was in place by 1938, and I'm pretty sure flying the flag started then also, as Bill Veeck had an amusing anecdote about it in his autobiography, Veeck as in Wreck. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:31, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timing

[edit]

If the win/loss flags go up after the game and the pennants are up before the game what time of day do the team pennants replace the previous day's game's win/loss indicator flag.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good one. I don't know precisely. You'd probably have to call the Cubs office to find out. All I know is that by the time the gates open, the U.S. flag and the standings flags are all in place from the previous day's NL activities, and the W/L flag is stashed away. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, U.S. flag protocol calls for the flag to be raised at sunrise. So I would guess that's when they do it, or whenever the work crew arrives, whichever comes later. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The book A Day at the Park has an early-morning photo that shows the scoreboard, and there are no flags at all flying there. So either the photographer caught it "in between", or they take down the "W" flag once it gets dark. Hence the blue and white lights - which, according to the book, also began to be used in 1938. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do they raise the win flag for night games?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure they do. Of course, it would be illuminated by the ballpark lights at that point. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Cubs Win flag/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

This is my first GA review so apologies if I cock it up in any way. On first glance it appears that the majority of any issues are quite minor, these I will fix myself and i will only bring up more major issues here. Basement12 (T.C) 17:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    I'll take your word o what you'v said about the lead either being fully cited or not at all, I certainly don't think it's wrong to include citations in the lead and since this is only a GA review I won't be too picky.
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    Hard to do on an article about a "Win" flag, but mention of the equivalent lose flag (particulaly the image) does this i think.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    You've done very well to get such a wide range of images, particularly the image of the flag in the process of going up
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Pass GA

[edit]

I have no problems passing this as a Good Article, you've clearly put a lot of effort in to finding images and references and have found out a bit more about the origins of the tradition as I requested. My only ongoing sugestion for further improvement would be that whilst the use of retailers websites to show alternative names is legitimate i'm sure it would be preferable to find some uses of these names in the media. Well done! Basement12 (T.C) 11:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
  • I've made a few changes, please let me know if you think any of them are incorrect in any way. I have a question regarding the other common names listed, why these two in particular? To someone relatively unfamiliar with the flag like myself they seem to have been arbitrarily picked from the possibilities with no explaination. Basement12 (T.C)

Detail

[edit]

Apologies for the delay in my review, I thought it best to pause during the time that the aricle appeared as a main page DYK.

  • This section seems mostly fine, I reordered it slightly to give the details on colur etc first my one slight issue is that the middle paragraph is completely unreferenced, I assume it is covered by one of the notes already given elsewhere?
  • It would be nice to know whe the flag is taken down again in preparation for the next game but judging from the talk page this is information that is not currently available? Its not crucial in any case.

History

[edit]
  • The paragraph on the colour change launches into a list of retired numbers, this makes sense in the context of the colour change but that context should be established first. At the moment it seems to lose track of what its talking about before saying why its relevant.
  • "The media guides also mention blue and white colored lights on the top of the scoreboard, which also appear in a photo here. The lights complement the flags by helping night time passersby learn the result of that day's Cubs game at a glance." — This should be replaced with something simpler removing further mention of the media guide and the reference to the photo in the text , make sure the relevant photo is next to the paragraph and the lights mentioned in its caption.
  • "Since 1998, the flags have become ever more popular with demand reaching a level where they are sold at Wrigley field." — This seems out of place in its currentlocation, it should probably be placed with the other info on the flags bing sold i the "Detail" section. Basement12 (T.C) 13:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]
  • Regarding capitalisation – If you are capitalising the w in "Win" should the f of "flag" not also be capitalised, both in the article title and the text? Not every occurence of "win/lose flag" is capitalised. Also does the w in "White flag day" need to be capitalised?
  • Images – the licensing all seems fine but i'd suggest including mention of the flag in the caption for the Navy Seal images. Basement12 (T.C) 14:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it possible to add more why the tradition started, was it simply to notify people walking by the stadium? Also who started it? I could fully understand if this info has been lost in the mists of time though.
    • I have added text that the lights were added for the Chicago 'L' passengers who were riding by. The flags serve the same purpose.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Great. Might be interesting enough to add to the relevant Chicago L article as well (is it the Red line? I have a vague recollection of hearing Cubs v Sox refered to as the red line series).

Final thoughts - The article is generally well written, I found it intersting and it explained most of the things I wanted to know about the flag, and there are no major issues. Fixing the few things i've suggested here and resolving the couple of questions posed on the talk page about when the flag comes down should be fairly trivial tasks i'd hope. I will therefore give you a few days to make the necessary changes and then make my decision on whether it passes or fails. I will leave the review open, rather than putting it on hold during this time, as I wish to keep the invite for others to comment since i'm a GA review rookie. Thanks Basement12 (T.C) 17:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Random quick hits from the_ed17

[edit]

Hello, I'll help you out a bit Basement, seeing as it is your first. =) If you have any other questions, feel free to ask!

Cheers! —the_ed17— 18:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Road trip

[edit]

At the end of a homestand, does the win/loss flag continue to fly until the road trip is over?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I talked to a very patient guy at Cubs media relations at Wrigley Field. He said the W/L flags are only displayed for home games (except for that 10,000th win situation) and that he's not sure precisely when the flag is taken down, but it's sometime overnight, as it's always gone by the time he gets to work at 8:30 or so in the morning. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 18:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original colors of lights

[edit]

It's true that Veeck said the lights were green and red. It's also true that Veeck was known to embellish or fill in the blanks or even make stuff up from time to time. One of his major stories had to do with his plan to buy the Phillies and populate them with black players, a couple of years before Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey broke the color line. Modern research indicates that he may have seriously exaggerated or even made up that story. Also, research indicates that the story of his days with the minor league Milwaukee Brewers, in which he claimed to have installed a rolling home run screen, may have been exaggerated or invented. And there was his continual insistance that no one knew how old Satchel Paige was, long after Paige acknowledged his real age in his own autobiography. That's not to say Veeck didn't do a lot of the stuff he talked about in the book, just maybe not all of it. He was certainly an innovator, and hired the first black player in the American League, Larry Doby. But that's the risk in relying too much on autobiographies for information. And it's possible he remembered the colors of the lights incorrectly. Hartell's book on Wrigley Field acknowledges the Veeck statement but says that contemporary newspapers reported the lights were blue and white - just like today. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"L" flag

[edit]

Not something we Cubs fans like to see, but it seemed fair to include an example of it, since it's discussed in the article. I'll let the layout gurus decide on possibly better placement. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:31, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Cubs Win Flag. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

[edit]

This older GA promotion needs significant work. There are chunks of uncited text, and the article is heavily dependant upon a source (shortporch.com) that is a sales site that likely doesn't meet the modern standards for reliable sources. Much of the article is sourced to various product sales sites. I just don't see how this meets the modern GA criteria, which have been heavily tightened since 2008 when this was promoted. Hog Farm Talk 16:29, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. If someone wants to bring it up to modern standards: Cubs probably have more books written about them their history than almost any sports franchise: so there’s bound to be good resources if you go digging SecretName101 (talk) 02:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cubs_Win_Flag&oldid=1245160973"