Talk:Babe Ruth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Babe Ruth is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 11, 2014.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Baseball / Hall of Fame / Braves / Red Sox / Dodgers / Yankees (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Hall of Fame task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Atlanta Braves (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Boston Red Sox (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Los Angeles Dodgers (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject New York Yankees (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Maryland / Baltimore  (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Baltimore Task Force.
 
WikiProject Biography / Sports and Games (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Core  This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the sports and games work group (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Radio (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
 
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.

Baby Ruth candy bar controversy[edit]

There is conflict of information regarding the number of years expired between the death of Ruth Cleveland and the introduction of the candy bar Baby Ruth. This article claims it was 15 years, however upon checking with both "Ruth Cleveland" and "Baby Ruth" sections, both provide information that it was actually 17 years. "Ruth Cleveland" death: 1904 "Babe Ruth" candy bar introduction: 1921 1921 - 1904 = 17

Steph6n (talk) 04:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC) Steve

Just noticed this myself. It should be 17 years, not 15 years, and I hope that an editor with access to this locked article will correct it. Perhaps even more significant is the fact that the candy bar was named "Baby Ruth" 30 years after Ruth Cleveland was born; i.e., it had been a long time since she had been a baby, casting even more doubt on the likelihood that the candy bar was named in her honor. 173.141.126.156 (talk) 03:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The Ruth Cleveland tale was their "official" explanation, but it was also influence by a family name of someone within the Curtiss organization. I thought that had been fully covered, years ago. Maybe someone took it out. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:58, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
There is further info in the Baby Ruth article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:00, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Nicknames[edit]

Should we source the several nicknames in the article lede? Some are well know (Sultan of Swat, the Bambino) but others are more obscure and probably only popularly used during Ruth's playing days.Wkharrisjr (talk) 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I propose that more nicknames be included, most especially those made famous by The Sandlot: "Colossus of Clout," and "King of Crash" should be included, even if they were not used during Ruth's playing days. Contemporary children grow up using these names to refer to Ruth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.18.2 (talk) 18:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I have to disagree -- there are so many -- seems like everybody who writes or ever wrote a piece on Ruth feels obliged to come up with a new nickname; the more you add, the more will be added, and pretty soon we'll have nothing but. A few of the best-known are sufficient, IMHO. DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 19:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Ruth was know to his fellow players simply as "the Big Fellow." Writer Tom Meany, in his 1948 book, Babe Ruth: Big Moments of the Big Fellow, recounts as incident: one spring in the late 30s, after Ruth had retired, a rumor swept the Yankee clubhouse that Ruth had died. Reportedly, a young player commented, "The big fellow dead? I suppose we'll have to chip in for flowers." 108.15.108.109 (talk) 03:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Not enough info about his pitching[edit]

There's at least one area that describes what Ruth did statsitically and I was wondering if i could add some of his pitching statistics. He has some good pitching numbers here then 71.105.87.54 (talk) 06:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC) Trey was here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.13.207 (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC) babe ruth was wary stupid at the time

i disagree

and why is there nothing about his shared No-Hitter, he was only responsible for a single batter, a walk, and then got ejected for arguing balls and strikes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.38.130.195 (talk) 09:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Ococeanguy, 1 August 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please change his birthplace from "Pigtown" to "Ridgely's Delight". 216 Emory St. is the birthplace and museum, but it is in the Ridgely's Delight area of Baltimore, not nearby Pigtown. The Ridgely's Delight wikipedia page correctly identifies itself as the birthplace of Babe Ruth.


Thanks

Per your request for a source: http://www.usatoday.com/mchat/20010418004/tscript.htm http://www.livebaltimore.com/neighborhoods/list/downtown/ http://www.ridgelysdelight.org/neighborhood.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ococeanguy (talkcontribs) 21:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

One more from the Baltimore Sun: http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/real-estate/bal-re.insider17feb17,0,6948301.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ococeanguy (talkcontribs) 22:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC) Ococeanguy (talk) 03:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --ANowlin: talk 03:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The Elephant in the Room: Ruth's Features Suggest Some African Lineage[edit]

Was Babe Ruth part African-American? His full lips, wide nose, and olive complexion are familiar hallmarks of mixed African lineage. Throughout the 19th and 20th century, it was not uncommon for exceptionally fair skinned blacks to "pass" (i.e., claim to be of pure European ancestry) as East Europeans, Italians, or Hispanics. There is documentation that some white businessmen aided such individuals in passing if the person of mixed race possessed an extraordinary athletic ability or other talent. As a result, many blacks played major league baseball by claiming to be Cuban prior to Jackie Robinson’s entrance. Hence, there is a plausible argument that Ruth was a gifted mulatto who concealed part of his ethnicity.

Further, there are substantiated accounts of Ruth frequenting black women in Harlem during his years with the Yankees. Even though an affinity for black women is not an indicator of ethnicity, it is worth noting in light of other facts.

While it is unlikely that we will answer the question of Ruth's genetic pedigree, any description of his race deserves an asterisk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremaineross (talkcontribs) 09:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, naturally! Every great athlete has to be at least partially black, right?? I mean, white people are so stiff and uncoordinated... anybody can see it. And if you look real close, you can see that Wayne Gretzky is clearly an African-Canadian. Also, leaving aside sports, it's obvious to anyone with a proper knowledge of history and physiognomy that Shakespeare and Beethoven had a lot of African blood in them. Hotep! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.33.85.143 (talk) 13:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
He was of German extraction. He looked similar to his father. Read one of the biographies of Ruth and you'll get more info on this and you'll learn why there's no need for an "asterisk". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

@ Baseball Bugs: Do you believe that his biographies tell the whole story? Also, please look at his photos again. Have you ever seen a German with those features? I don't think the question of his racial makeup can be easily answered by any biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.43.216 (talk) 21:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have see Germans that look kind of like that. Not all "white" people are snow-white. And the modern biographies don't shy away from discussing some of the stuff he was called by his acquaintances that implied he was black. But if there was even a clue that actually he had "Negro" blood somewhere in his background, he would never have been allowed to play professional baseball. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Since Swat is a place in Pakistan, he is more likely to be Asian in origin, but of course that's just a nickname. Most people of mixed race origin are proud of their origin. It's no good saying "he covered it up because he was ashamed" the whole family had to cover it up. Without any other evidence apart from his physical features, you just have to assume he was white. Maybe he had black ancestry four or five generations back, but that doesn't make someone black.

"The Sultan of Swat". Right. Or "The Bambino" suggesting he was Italian. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
And both "Babe" and "Ruth" suggest possible female gender. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
"Babe" was a common nickname for men in those days. In addition to a number of ballplayers, some of whom preceded Ruth on the scene, there was Oliver "Babe" Hardy and Jerry "Babe" Horwitz, better know to the public as "Curly Howard". Typically it was applied either ironically, to large men, or to young men (as in Ruth's case). His real name, of course, was George Herman Ruth, and he was George to his pals. "Babe" was a newspaper nickname - as with "Curly". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

@ Baseball Bugs "But if there was even a clue that actually he had "Negro" blood somewhere in his background, he would never have been allowed to play professional baseball." Baseball Bugs, it happpened. However, don't take my word for it, look it up if you're interested. There is plenty of information available regarding the topic of mixed race baseball players "passing" as whites and hispanics.

@ Wolfowitz I agree. He could have been mixed with a number of ethnic groups. However, blacks have long made up a large part of the Baltimore area (i.e., his place of birth) and there has been "mixing" between white men and black/bi-racial women for a long time.

Also, race is simply a social invention (i.e., biologically there is only one race: the human race). Still, when we describe race, what we're essentially describing are the person's features (e.g., skin tone, nose/lips, hair type). We may try to justify it by associating a person of a certain race with a specific culture but that argument fails. Irrespective of cultural manifestations, we always refer back to features. For example, no matter how Eminem speaks, dresses, or behaves, (i.e., regardless of his culture) he will probably never convince you that he's actually an African-American. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.41.202 (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

And if you had only heard but never seen Charlie Pride, you might have thought he was white. :) What you need to do is read some bios of Ruth and see what they have to say about his racial background and his seemingly African-based features. A good recent one that should still be in print is The Big Bam by Leigh Montville. FYI, "Bam" was a nickname often used by his teammates, a play on "Bambino" along with his monstrous slugging ability. A lot of black Americans liked Ruth, not just because of his generally being a popular, larger-than-life character, but also because of the rumors (or wishful thinking) about him having some "black blood", and also because he was a man with no apparent racial prejudices who often played in white-vs.-black exhibition games (for which he sometimes was criticized). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Will do Bugs. However, right now I'm working on the Complete Sherlock Holmes Volume I. Needless to say, it's going to be a while before I can get to it. Thanks for the conversation; it's been fun.--TR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.43.216 (talk) 03:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I think this whole line of inquiry is a monumental waste of time, and has no real bearing on the topic. IMHO. Mark Sublette (talk) 07:40, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 07:40, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Maybe you're unaware that his colleagues in the reform school dubbed him "N*gg*r Lips". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Here is an article from Sports Illustrated on the topic: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1022447/index.htm#ixzz1IlTbCPGm Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune has also discussed this. DFS (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Interesting perspective. Ruth was held in high esteem by kids of all races, and had no particular racist attitudes (contrasting with Cobb and many others of that era). The rumors about possible black ancestry I'm sure didn't hurt his esteem with the black kids. And if it turned out that Ruth indeed had some black in his family tree (though I very much doubt it), it would be the ultimate joke on the baseball segregationists. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done -- Three years later now, we can put the elephant to rest. Thankfully, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Babe Ruth Early Years Edit needed[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} Please change- "Ruth was born at 216 Emory Street in Pigtown, a rough neighborhood of Baltimore, Maryland"

in the Early Years section to -

"Ruth was born at 216 Emory Street in Ridgely's Delight, a rough neighborhood of Baltimore, Maryland"

216 Emory Street is located East of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in Ridgely's Delight. This can be verified by viewing the Pigtown, Maryland page and seeing that it states Pigtown's eastern border is MLK Blvd and Ridgely's Delight's western border is MLK Blvd. Therefor, if 216 Emory Street (which is verified to be Babe Ruth's birthplace) is East of the MLK, it would be located in Ridgely's Delight.

199.173.225.33 (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
Before any change can be made, the claim of which neighborhood 216 Emory Street is actually in (Pigtown or Ridgely's Delight) must be supported by a provided/referenced source. Personally, it should be remembered MLK Blvd is a modern invention and did not exist at the time these neighborhoods' names/designations came into being.

Shearonink (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Here is Ridgely's Delight's historical paperwork submitted on 9/3/1979 and approved on 2/6/1980 to the National Register of Historic Places managed by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.(www.nps.gov) In this document you will find that the street borders are Pratt St to the North, Freemont Ave (now MLK Blvd) to the West, Russell St to the East, and Conway St to the South. The only exception is a single block in the North-East corner that is entirely occupied by a modern power station. This district is the namesake of a prominent property owner from the turn of the 19th century named Charles Ridgely. The layout of the streets today are similar to the the layout from a map of the city from 1823. So, if the Ridgeley's Delight district has been named and is in a similar physical state since the turn of the 19th century and Babe Ruth's birthplace (216 Emory Street) is located within this district, it should demonstrate proficiently that Babe Ruth (born after the turn of the 19th century) was born in what was and is still considered Ridgely's Delight. All supporting claims for this are located in the federally reviewed and accepted bibliographical references section in the district's approved request to be considered a nationally recognized historic district. http://www.ridgelysdelight.org/rd1.PDF

p.s. You are correct in the MLK Blvd is a modern invention but in most cases it simply replaced an existing street. As in this case where MLK Blvd has replaced the area of Freemont Street which has now been made into a smaller, one-way alley style street. Though the name of the divisional landmark street has changed, The area of MLK Blvd is the historical marker of the western edge of Ridgely's Delight's historical district. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.240.218 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Title Addition/Modification request: "The (Great) Bambino"[edit]

I mean, seriously... Who wouldn't recognize this? Simply requesting (Great) added into the title at the beginning of the page in the introductory sentence. He was often referred to as ″The Great Bambino‘’, even later in this article. Gemquist (talk) 00:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

More often just "The Bambino". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 13:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Career batting statistics error[edit]

There is an error in the Career batting statistics section. "2nd on all-time slugging % with 0.690" should be 1st or "1st on all-time slugging % with 0.690"

ref: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/ruthba01.shtml http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/slugging_perc_career.shtml

or just about anywhere else you'd like to research it at. lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.81.34 (talk) 07:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Birth Date[edit]

Has there been any controversy about this? If not controversy, then maybe a slight debate. Since I have an account, I decided to look up Ruth on ancestry.com. While on his WWII registration he does list his birthday as Feb 6, 1895, but for WWI, he listed it as Feb 7, 1894. He also puts the 1894 birth on a passport application. The 1900 Census favors the 1895 birth, but in 1930, his age is listed as 36, or 1894. richjenkins 22:02, 10 Feb 2011 (UTC)

At least one of the biography books I've seen says that Ruth thought he was a year older than he was, until discovering the true birthdate, late in his career. Anyway, there's no controversy about it. But it might be worth pointing out in the article, if it isn't already. I could look for a source when I have time, which I don't at the moment. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Good enough for me. I've seen enough examples of that (from his era) so I don't doubt that's true. richjenkins 19:00, 31 Mar 2011 (UTC)

Inflation calculation correction[edit]

In the section detailing Ruth's purchase by New York and his salary demands increased to 20,000, which would be 250,000 today and not the 220,000 reported in the article!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.24.148.8 (talk) 23:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistencies in his ranking in the 1999 ESPN Sports Century: Top 50 Athletes of the 20th Century[edit]

In the wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SportsCentury he is listed as second behind Jordan yet in this article "Babe Ruth" he is said to have come third behind Ali and Jordan

217.42.60.174 (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistencies in his ranking in the 1999 ESPN Sports Century: Top 50 Athletes of the 20th Century[edit]

In the wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SportsCentury he is listed as second behind Jordan yet in this article "Babe Ruth" he is said to have come third behind Ali and Jordan

217.42.60.174 (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Contractions in article[edit]

In the section titled Boston Braves (1935), there are contractions that need to be changed. In the 3rd paragraph, change the "couldn't afford the rent on Braves Field" to "could not afford the rent".

In the last paragraph of the same section, "but Fuchs persuaded him to stay on because the Braves hadn't played in every National League park yet." should be changed to "because the Braves had not played".

Thanks. 75.241.146.96 (talk) 13:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done -- John of Reading (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Winning Percentage Boston Braves[edit]

The mention of the New York Mets is just a jb at Mets fans and not relevant to the article, why mention a team with a better record in that context? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.178.86.60 (talk) 20:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

It might have been for the purpose of putting it in a more modern perspective. But since there's already a link to List of worst Major League Baseball season records, giving special mention to the Mets doesn't seem warranted. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 May 2012[edit]

Add this sentence to the end of paragraph 2: In 1927, Ruth hit more home runs than the combined players of each individual team in the league. Can be verified on www.baseballreference.com This statement shows how much better a home run hitter Ruth was compared to the other ball players of his era.

Jkology (talk) 03:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

That's true,[1] although a couple of National League teams out-homered Ruth that year. In 1920, though,[2] Ruth out-homered every team except for one - the Phillies. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

spelling wrong r not a capital on this line Ernie Shore came in to replace ruth and didn't give up a single hit in the .Joecable (talk) 01:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Huh? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 May 2012[edit]

I find "(the site of St. Mary's was occupied by Cardinal Gibbons School)".

Try inserting "later" just before "occupied", and try inserting "the" just before "Cardinal". (It's come to my attention that the Cardinal Gibbons School has since closed.)

128.63.16.82 (talk) 19:32, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.. I'm sorry, but I have to do this. Mdann52 (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 May 2012[edit]

For the 1917 game where Ernie Shore went on to retire 26 batters in a row after the inherited baserunner was out stealing, I find: "Ernie Shore came in to replace ruth". Please use capital R for Ruth. (However, the paragraph also can be shortened by editing out the duplications referring to this game; shall I propose such a rewrite myself after the capital R is taken care of? The next paragraph may also be affected.)

128.63.16.82 (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done (both the capitialization and the rewrite)--JayJasper (talk) 19:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 May 2012[edit]

I find this (in Ruth's declining career from 1929 onward):

(He had often pitched in exhibitions in the intervening years).

Please put the period INSIDE the parentheses, because that is indeed a complete sentence.


Recommended additional external link[edit]

Please add a new external link: www.baberuthcentral.com.

It's the most comprehensive set of information, stories and photos of Babe Ruth on the internet and is very relevant to this page.

Transition sentence is missing[edit]

There seems to be a missing transition sentence linking the two paragraphs below --


"Ruth narrowly missed winning the Triple Crown in 1924. He hit .378 for his only American League batting title, led the major leagues with 46 home runs, and batted in 121 runs to finish second to Goose Goslin's 129. Ruth's on-base percentage was .513, the fourth of five years in which his OBP exceeded .500. However, the Yankees finished second, two games behind the Washington Senators, who went on to win their only World Series while based in D.C. During that same year, Ruth served in the New York National Guard 104th Field Artillery.[44][45]

"During spring training in 1925 Ruth's ailment was dubbed "the bellyache heard round the world," when one writer wrote that Ruth's illness was caused by bingeing on hot dogs and soda pop before a game.[46] Venereal disease and alcohol poisoning (caused by tainted liquor, a major health problem during the Prohibition) have also been speculated to be the causes of his illness.[47] However, the exact nature of his ailment has never been confirmed and remains a mystery. Playing just 98 games, Ruth had what would be his worst season as a Yankee as he finished the season with a .290 average and 25 home runs. The Yankees team finished next to last in the American League with a 69–85 mark, their last season with a losing record until 1965."

A possible transition sentence could be -- "Before the start of the 1925 season, Ruth was afflicted with a mysterious ailment."

Also, the word "bingeing" is awkward because of the strange spelling. It could be reworded to state: "Ruth's illness was caused by eating too many hot dogs and drinking too much soda pop."

Rob Vanya 02:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Rob Vanya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rnealvan (talkcontribs)

babe ruth candy bar contraversy[edit]

guys, c'mon. 3 paragraphs on a candy bar in an encyclopedia article about, arguably, the greatest baseball player of all time. Wow. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 02:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Valid point, given that the 2nd paragraph is essentially a repeat of the first, and the 3rd could be shortened considerably. I'll be happy to do that, if no one objects. DoctorJoeE talk to me! 04:40, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Grammar[edit]

"...whom she had been living with..."?? Criminy.

I used to fix things like that when I found them on Wikipedia pages. But it seems that editing is no longer allowed.

I have no interest in jumping through hoops to be allowed to edit pages, so from now on I'll just let errors slide, no matter how egregious. Too bad. The community loses out, but don't blame me. I didn't make the rules.

Edit request on 16 February 2013[edit]

In the Personal Life section, Please Change: "In 1928 Ruth married actress and model Claire Merritt Hodgson and adopted her daughter, Julia. Julia Ruth Stevens, who currently resides in Arizona, threw out the ceremonial first pitch before the final game in the original Yankee Stadium on September 21, 2008".

To: "Ruth met and befriended actress and model Claire Merritt Hodgson in 1922. They dated after Ruth's separation from Helen and became very close; however, as a Catholic, Ruth was not able to get a divorce. After Helen's passing in January of 1929, he then married Claire in April of that year (the day before 1929's opening day at Yankee Stadium) and adopted Claire's daughter, Julia. Julia Ruth Stevens, who currently resides in Arizona, threw out the ceremonial first pitch before the final game in the original Yankee Stadium on September 21, 2008."[1] BabeRuthCentral (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ Stevens, Brent. "Babe Ruth Central". 
Question: I'm not sure who runs this site. Can we consider it a reliable source? Is this "Brent Stevens" a descendant of Ruth? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I have to agree with Muboshgu here; not sure if this site is reliable or not. Vacation9 12:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I'd also agree to keep it out but because I think it over detailed. Secret and I are currently renovating the article and we haven't done that section yet. So there will likely be changes. I suspect the sentence on his daughter and the first pitch may be moved to the bit about Yankee Stadium closing in Legacy, but we'll see.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Asheville, NC and not Ashville, NC[edit]

There is no such place as Ashville, NC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.24.17 (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

Someone please add Ruth1935.jpg to the Boston Braves section. Atlswag69 (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm somewhat dubious about the fair use rationale. I would think it very likely that Ruth's image in a Braves uniform appears in some Braves publication from 1935, which was almost certainly published without a copyright notice.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

First professional - and only minor league - home run is missing[edit]

As a member of the Providence Greys, Babe Ruth pitched and batted during a road game on 5 September 1914 Hanlan's Point Stadium in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He hit his very first home run as a professional baseball player that day (and pitched a shutout 9-0). This first home run is a historically significant event and is quite surprising that it is missing.

Sources: Minor League Baseball: http://www.milb.com/milb/history/tdih.jsp?tdih=0905 Newspaper clipping of the day: http://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/571330 Historical Plaques/Markers in Toronto: http://torontoplaques.com/Pages_ABC/Babe_Ruth_at_Hanlans_Point.html Wiki entry for Hanlan's Point which notes this historical event: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlan%27s_Point_Stadium

The wiki page for the Providence Greys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_Grays_%28minor_league%29 should note that Ruth hit his first home run with the Greys.

Fennerator (talk) 00:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Last Public appearance picture[edit]

Can this photo be used instead of the current one? https://secure.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/4999513923/# Wikieditor101 (talk) 17:58, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Regretfully, I don't think so. Fair use requires low resolution, see WP:NFCC.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:01, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

But on Flickr, on that page, it says it can be used under this licenese https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/Wikieditor101 (talk) 23:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

If you can establish that "Cliff" is the copyright holder and has the right to license the image, I'm with you all the way. But I'm a bit skeptical.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

links to articles in other languages are completely missing[edit]

see topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.26.16.100 (talk) 15:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Beats me. I'll ask around. Maybe they are working on it.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Striking out[edit]

According to this article, Ruth struck out once (in 1934). Well, there were another 1,329 times that are not mentioned. Five times he had the season record for striking out. I can not decide on a good place to add these facts, but they ought to be mentioned somewhere. Strikeouts come with the territory when talking about great home run hitters; there's no need to hide that fact. Chris the speller yack 17:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

This source, used in the article, mentions Ruth at retirement held the MLB career record but no longer ranks in the top 100. How's that?--Wehwalt (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Broadway play[edit]

Hi guys. You're doing a good job with this article so far, so rather than edit it myself, I'll simply point out that Bronx Bombers (play) contains a portrayal of Ruth. Could be beneficial to this article, or it could be too insignificant given its already substantial scope. [3][4] – Muboshgu (talk) 17:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: I think it should definitely be mentioned in a sentence or two (at least) somewhere. Maybe in the 'Legacy' section? -Newyorkadam (talk) 17:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Probably not more than a sentence. Maybe in the Radio/TV section? We could rename it to include depictions of Ruth of which there are probably others that people want to put in. Or will.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Moving ahead[edit]

I'd like to have this article at peer review by March 1, which keeps a conservative amount of time before July 11.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I can definitely have my section (1930-1934) done by then. -Newyorkadam (talk) 01:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam

Occupation of George Ruth, Sr.[edit]

Regarding this edit: truth be told, I wasn't particularly excited by the citation, either, which is why I didn't include it at first when I made the changes, hoping that another source could be located. But since it is sourced to a published book, I don't think it can be discounted entirely. I hadn't been able to locate other sources so far discussing the exact occupation of Ruth, Sr.

I rewrote the text because the initial text was difficult to parse as it lacked parallelism: George Ruth, Sr., had a series of jobs, including as a lightning rod salesman and on Baltimore's streetcars...—it is easier to follow if both items in the list are jobs ("on Baltimore's streetcars" not being a job). As I understand it, a gripman is the person who manages when the cablecar moves forward, by manipulating the grip that attaches to a moving cable. In the interest of avoiding jargon, I had chosen to use the word "operator"—the gripman doesn't drive the cablecar in the same sense as a bus driver, but otherwise fills a similar role. If anyone can locate additional sources, that would be very helpful in improving the prose. isaacl (talk) 20:31, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Certainly, and your edits were excellent. I think this may help, it is from Creamer, a source cited in the text already, at page 25: "His son George (that is, the father of the Babe) had worked with him (that is, the paternal grandfather, John Ruth) for a while in the lightning rod business, and then George became successively a horse driver, an agent (agent for what is not known), a salesman (what he sold is obscured too by time), a gripman on the streetcars and ultimately a bartender. In the 1890s George worked as a counterman in the family grocery and saloon on Frederick Avenue and he was still living there with his family when he married Kate Schamberger and became a father." So we can possibly eliminate the encyclopedia.com and just rely on Creamer. I don't know if we want to say "gripman" though, it may puzzle the reader.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I looked at Montville, also a source. He's not much help. At page 9 "There are few stories of a father. He was a lightning-rod salesman and then the owner of a series of taverns." Wagenheim just speaks vaguely of him running saloons.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Sure, using Creamer is fine. Do you have a suggestion of an occupation description other than "gripman"? isaacl (talk) 03:20, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Hm. I didn't like "operate" but I'd be OK with "helped operate".--Wehwalt (talk) 03:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
A noun would be best, to parallel "salesman" and "counterman". I don't really like "helping operate": this phrase makes it sound like there were multiple gripmen on one street car, which I don't believe was the case. Personally I prefer "operator" (and Merriam-Webster does define "gripman" as a "cable car operator"). isaacl (talk) 03:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Well, was the gripman the only person involved in the operation of the streetcar, or was there someone else? Leaving aside a conductor dealing with the passengers' fares. When I was in San Francisco recently, there seemed to be two people involved in running the cable cars.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
According to the Wikipedia article, there is a gripman and a conductor, who takes fares, manages the passengers getting on and off, and controls the rear brakes when going downhill. As far as I know, there's only one grip, so only one gripman is needed. isaacl (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I doubt it would have been different back in the day. "Operator" is fine then.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

No alt text on images?[edit]

It's kinda strange this article passed FAC without alt text even being added to all of the images. How was this missed? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 16:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

It is not a FA requirement.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

AL pennant[edit]

Per this edit effectively reverting mine I think it unnecessary to constantly mention that the pennant was that of the American League. Ruth played his entire competitive career there as I will not call the Braves competitive in 1935. It is not necessary to have to mention it when there is no ambiguity, as they were never competing in any other league. Saying they advanced to the postseason is going to look odd to the reader because at the time the World Series was it. I don't mind reminding the reader now and then that they played in the American League but doing it constantly it's going to look odd to the informed baseball fan.Wehwalt (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I think the forest is being missed for the trees: the bigger issue for the non-baseball fan is knowing what "pennant" refers to. Although the term is linked in its first uses in the context of AL pennant and International League pennant, perhaps one of the first uses could also use the term "league championship" and indicate that the term pennant is synonymous? With this context, it would be evident that the only pennant that could be won is the league of which Ruth's team was a member, and uses of "pennant" would not need to be qualified (at least not every time). Then it would be a matter of making sure the league membership of the team is stated as appropriate (for example, mentioning it each time Ruth changed teams). isaacl (talk) 07:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
that's fine I would have no objection to that--Wehwalt (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

1914 season[edit]

Regarding this edit: my apologies; the previous text said that Ruth received no more opportunities to pitch against American League (AL) teams., which I mistaknely interpreted as referring to the remainder of the season. Thanks very much for making the correction! isaacl (talk) 12:35, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, not before he was sent down to the minors, after he returned he did get the one start. Thank you for your edits and your forthrightness.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:15, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I have limited internet access through the TFA, which I am worried about. This is a fresh FA, and they did look at the prose in the FAC process. This is going to be a high profile TFA, especially if there is a Google doodle or something for Ruth. Caution is the watchword, I suspect.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
If you're worried about having enough watchers to deal with vandalism, I'm sure a word on the WikiProject baseball discussion page will garner enough volunteers to help out. I will look out for problems as well. If you're worried about inaccuracies or grammatical issues slipping in, well, it can happen with the best of intentions with the most scrutinized articles. I am confident they will be resolved in a timely manner. isaacl (talk) 00:43, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I just deleted a much more ill tempered response dealing with lack of help I received from the baseball project despite an appeal from myself during the peer-review and the automatic notifications that go there whenever an article is nominated for peer-review or FAC at this point absent gross errors I think it best just to let the article run as it stands.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Niggerlips[edit]

I have effectively reverted an edit that says that Ruth's nickname as a boy, Niggerlips, was racist. I will heartily agree that it is by the standards of 2014 whether it was by the standards of Baltimore in the first decade of the 20th century would require a source. I am not aware that the people who are playing with the prose of this article 5 days before it is to appear on the main page are working from the sources. Without that it's just I like this word better even though that choice hasn't been through the intensive review process of peer review and FAC. I also see sourced information that the boys at St. Mary's were subjected to corporal punishment being removed for no reason stated I don't know, political correctness? FAC is a community process that carries with it consensus where the FA criteria are applicable, and one of those things is prose. I do not say this article cannot be improved I do say that trying to copyedit it without the sources in front of you is just playing with words and you have no idea if you are tracking the language of the sources in a way that could expose us to too-close paraphrasing, or alternatively if it's becoming a game of telephone that has wandered far from the actual meaning of the source. I also note uncomfortably that a quotation was messed with and although it was later reverted God only knows what the people who read this article in the interim thought of us. I really question the utility of the copyedit without using the sources five days before the TFA what is it accomplishing? If you feel the prose is substandard you should really communicate with the TFA coordinator and ask him not to run the article either that or get serious and get the sources. And in my view this is not the time not five days before the TFA when there's no time for intelligent discussions the article was available for review for months and there is also plenty of time after the TFA--Wehwalt (talk) 01:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Why was the photograph of Babe Ruth's headstone deleted?[edit]

I noticed that the photograph of Babe Ruth's headstone was deleted from the Section "Cancer and death." There was absolutely no legitimate reason for this photograph to be nuked from the article. Was this an act of vandalism or a careless error by an over-zealous editor?

I have had many excellent photographs deleted from articles, and I have also had many true facts reverted because they weren't sourced. I have come to the conclusion that it's a waste of my time and effort to make any contributions to Wikipedia. A lot of editors don't know what they're doing when they make destructive and illogical modifications to articles.

Wikipedia seems to be paranoid about having statements sourced for clarity and truthfulness. To paraphrase an old joke, "Consider the source!"

Anthony22 (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

What is the evidence that the sculpture is not copyrighted?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

It is true that there is a sculpture on Babe Ruth's headstone. This sculpture might or might not be copyrighted. It is also true that photographs of Babe Ruth's headstone have appeared in hundreds if not thousands of publications. I don't think that those publications received copyright permission to display the photo of Ruth's gravesite.

Are you trying to tell me that I need permission from Ruth's family or the copyright holder to upload an image of Babe Ruth's headstone into the Wikipedia article on Babe Ruth? This is a rather silly requirement.

Also, if you will take a walk over to FDR's gravesite, you will see the following image:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDR#mediaviewer/File:Franklin_and_Eleanor_Roosevelt_Statues.JPG

The statues of Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt are certainly copyrighted. Why do they appear in his article without permission?

I have been perusing Wikipedia articles for a number of years, and I am aware of the fact that Wikipedia is paranoid aboout copyright issues and sourced material. This is why it is a waste of my time and effort to contribute to Wikipedia. 99% of our knowledge is hearsay, and we can't possibly source everything that we say.

If I were to say that George Washington was the first President of the United States, a Wikipedia editor would revert the statement because it wasn't sourced.

Wikipedia is the source of the problem.

Anthony22 (talk) 01:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The article recently underwent an intensive review, see WP:FAC as it will be Today's Featured Article on July 11, the centennial of Ruth's first major league appearance. I do not recall if it was removed in preparation for the FAC process, or during it. But it would have received an objection for the reason you state, that I felt I could not adequately address. It is possible that it was not copyrighted, or that the copyright expired or was not reviewed. You might want to ask for help at WP:MCQ.
I suspect to an extent you are right, some of the copyright matters are perhaps too strict. But as I understand it, newspapers enjoy a privilege for news gathering that we lack when photographing such things. But the Wikipedia system is what it is, I try to play fairly and by the rules, and that image is a derivative work of the likely-copyrighted sculpture. As for the other articles, well, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

If you continue looking through the article, you will see a photograph of Babe Ruth's memorial plaque at Yankee Stadium. You will also see a photo of a memorial plaque in Baltimore's Memorial Stadium. Both of these images have copyright sculpture. If the photo of Babe Ruth's headstone was deleted for copyright violation, those two additional photos should also be deleted for the same reason. I don't understand why my photograph was deleted while the other two photos remain in the article.

Anthony22 (talk) 11:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Because we can see the entire surface and there is no copyright notice on either and besides I checked the copyright registry on those two and there was no entry (there was an entry that could have fitted but it was not renewed). I was not certain when the sculpture on the grave was made and uncertain it would bear Ruth's name and we can't see all of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Funny. I always figured that memorials were meant to be seen, to call attention to a person's achievements. A restricted memorial is a riduculous concept. WHPratt (talk) 13:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't have any personal objection to the image. However, there is a need to show that it is public domain. The copyright records are available online, and probably some research can find out the sculptor and when it was created. Given the many things I had to do to prepare the article for FAC, I did not feel strongly enough about the image to want to do the research. Others apparently do feel strongly. I've said what can be done and how to do it, and I suggested MCQ as a first step.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
There are thousands of pictures of buildings for which the same argument could be made. Copyright deletionists are acting out personal control issues IMO. Tom Reedy (talk) 17:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Reform school?[edit]

The school BR went to at age seven is called a reform school in this article. But the school, as linked, is not described as a reform school, and is described as having grades (not ages) 6-12. What gives?Kdammers (talk) 02:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Cardinal Gibbons School (Baltimore, Maryland) § Saint Mary.27s Industrial School for Boys .281866.E2.80.931950.29 contains information about Saint Mary's. isaacl (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
We could probably use a stand-alone article on St. Mary's. But the research would be a pain.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I thought it interesting, and it reads fine. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I remember reading, in one of the harsher Ruth biographies, a comment from a former schoolmate of Ruth's. He felt that Babe was too nostalgic about St. Mary's. "All I know is there were guys with guns on the walls." Or similar words to that effect. I'll see if I can find the book. WHPratt (talk) 19:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Ruth was probably the equivalent of the high-school quarterback in his last years there. Life is different for such a jock than for the average kid.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
I found the reference.

Sobol, Ken, Babe Ruth & the American Dream, New York: Ballantine Books, 1974.
The author describes St. Mary’s as “a medium security prison for children.” (P. 37.)

  • But one anonymous alumnus of St. Mary's, talking to Tom Meany in the 1920s, just shook his head in wonderment over the image St. Mary’s had gotten since his and Ruth's time. "You know," he said, "either Babe’s gone soft or I’ve gone nuts. But I hafta laugh when I hear that place mentioned as the 'home.' All I know I is that there was guys with guns on the walls." (P. 38.)

WHPratt (talk) 23:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Probably mildly exaggerated. I doubt the good friars were armed, though I would not care to go up against Matthias with a baseball bat. Point taken though.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

links to Lou Gehrig Appreciation Day[edit]

Please remove the two links to Lou Gehrig Appreciation Day (piped to "Lou Gehrig Day"), because they only link to Lou Gehrig. That article doesn't even have a section on Lou Gehrig Appreciation Day. 86.41.45.42 (talk) 12:13, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Done--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

How many seasons?[edit]

I am not an expert on this subject, but the math just doesn't add up to me: "... played 22 seasons in Major League Baseball (MLB) from 1914 to 1935." Can someone please explain how that wouldn't be (1935 - 1914 =) 21 seasons? Terry Thorgaard (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Count them again, (1914, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35) add up to 22 seasons.142.162.197.3 (talk) 21:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

How he died[edit]

They should add how he died CLOEKEITH (talk) 01:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

He had cancer. This is very clear in the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Name[edit]

He was born as Georg Hermann Ehrhardt Ruth - this should be noted! -- 91.66.10.248 (talk) 15:35, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

This piece from The New York Times quotes Ruth as saying that the Ehrhardt thing simply isn't true: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0206.html EricEnfermero HOWDY! 16:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)