Talk:Cleveland Stadium

Rock concerts held at the Stadium
Hello,

Can anyone help me find a listing of concerts that were held at the Cleveland Stadium (World Series of Rock?) during the late 1970s and early 1980s?

I attended most in the late 70s and as far as I know there were not any in the early 80s. I have info on the concerts I had attended if you are interested. Also, please sign your posts MM DENE (talk) 08:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

The concerts were every summer from 1974 through 1979. I attended all the concerts in 77 & 78. I was an early teen then and kept a scrapbook with ticket stubs, newspaper articles, my personal notes, etc. My only regret is that I didn't take a camera with me. Too bad we didn't have cell phones back then. The The concerts were always general admission leaving the field open to concert goers. This resulted in the turf having to be repaired before the next Indians' game. These concerts were called "Games" to keep in the tradition of the sporting events held at the Cleveland Stadium. The bands below are listed in order of performance. I only have some show times (if it is still present on the ticket stub). (Tickets were torn in half at redemption and occasional removed some information)

1977 Game 1- June 5 Southside Johnny and the Asbury Jukes(Southside replaced Aerosmith who cancelled several days before), Nazereth, Ted Nugent, Todd Rundgren $9.00 Game 2- June 25 8:30pm - Pink Floyd (Attendence 81,000- A record)   $9.50 Game 3-August 6 12noon - Rick Derringer, J Geils, Bob Seger, Peter Frampton   $9.50

1978 Game 1- July 1- Kansas, Rolling Stones (New record-83,000)  $12.50 Game 2- July 15 4:00pm - Trickster, Journey, Foreignor, Electric Light Orchestra $13.00 Day of Show Game 3- August 26- Eddie Money, Todd Rundgren, Cars, Bob Welch, Fleetwood Mac $12.00

Below is a list of WSoR Concerts that I did not attend so my knowledge is limited, but I can direct you. I know that there are concert dates missing. I am not sure the order of performances, price etc...

1974 First WSoR -June 24 Joe Walsh, (unsure of other acts), September - Crosby, Stills Nash and Young (from The Plain Dealer August 29, 1995 article by Jane Scott)

1975 Unsure of date-Uriah Heep, Blue Oyster Cult, Mahogany Rush, The Faces (featured Rod Stewart and Ronnie Wood)

1979 Game 1- July 28 2:30pm- AC/DC, Aerosmith, Thin Lizzy, Ted Nugent, Journey, (Did not attend but have the promotional poster) (this concert allegedly beat the prior attendence record but cannot verify.) Sources: http://buzzardbook.wordpress.com/ (This is a site maintained by John Gorman who was WMMS program director back then, WMMS and Belkin Production were not only concert promoters but active participants on the day of the show.) Gorman would be a wealth of info on all Cleveland Conerts from that era.)

This a book that may have info, although I haven't read it. Wolff, Carlo, Cleveland Rock and Roll Memories: True and Tall Tales of the Glory Days, Told By Musicians, DJs, Promoters & Fans Who Made the Scene in the '60s, '70s, and '80s, Gray & Company, Publishers (2006), ISBN-13: 978-1-886228-99-3 I hope this is helpful. Peace.MM DENE (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The book "Cleveland Stadium: The Last Chapter" published in 1997 by Cleveland Landmarks Press, Inc., isbn=0936760109, has a chart of rock concerts at page 65 Artists - date-attendance The Beatles-8/14/66-24,646 Joe Walsh, Lynrd Skynard, Beach Boys -6/23/74-32,837 Emerson Lake & Palmer - 8/8/74-34,173 Crosby Stills Nash & Young -8/30/74-81,316 Chicago, The Beach Boys - 5/31/75-26,035 The Rolling Stones -6/14/75 - 78,665 Yes -7/11/75 - 29,394 Faces - 8/23/75 - 61,512 Aerosmith - 6/5/77 -33,049 Pink Floyd -6/25/77 -82,986 Peter Frampton - 8/6/77 -77,674 The Rolling Stones - 7/1/78 -82,238 ELO -7/15/78 -60,214 Fleetwood Mac - 8/26/78 -74,892 Aerosmith -7/28/79 -65,807 Bob Seger - 7/19/80 -47,183 Michael Stanley - 9/29/84 - (in Stadium parking lot, not stadium per se) estimated 70,000 Michael Jackson - 10/19/84 -34,210 Michael Jackson - 10/20/84 -47,186 Bruce Springsteen -8/7/85 -71,808 Pink Floyd -9/16/87 -60,172 Pink Floyd -9/17/87-62,001 U2 - 10/6/87 -50,456 The Who -7/19/89 -61,120 The Rolling Stones -9/27/89 -61,727 Paul McCartney - 7/20/90 -66,197 Genesis - 5/25/92 -49,877 Pink Floyd -5/26/94 -53,311 Pink Floyd -5/27/94 -46,963 The Eagles -7/8/94 - 45,432 The Rolling Stones -8/28/94 -35,265 Concert for the opening of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame & Museum - 9/2/95 - 60,000(estimate) Hanksummers (talk) 18:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)hanksummers

EDIT: The first World Series of Rock featured The Beach Boys with Lynyrd Skynyrd, REO Speedwagon & Joe Walsh - Cleveland Stadium (Cleveland, OH) - June 23, 1974 SOURCE: My ticket stub —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirt America (talk • contribs) 16:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The Browns' move and name
I don't want to make a fuss about the move, especially on this page, since it's supposed to be about the stadium, and not about either team. I hope the current wording is satisfactory. The Baltimore Sun has a good recap of the agreement if you want to learn more. - EurekaLott 05:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, we are quite aware of our history. I hope the current wording is a satisfactory compromise. --Noitall 05:38, September 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm afraid it doesn't work. The desires of the citizens of Baltimore were irrelevant to the decision, not to mention Municipal Stadium. It doesn't belong in this article. - EurekaLott 14:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

As I recall, although I offer no guarantee or warranty on this, the retention of the Browns' history by the new Cleveland franchise was basically a bone tossed to the city by the NFL, to smooth the waters and prevent a lawsuit. The citizens of Baltimore were getting a team, so what they may have wanted or not wanted would seem to be irrelevant, even if it worked out conveniently that way. However, this whole deal also reminds me of when the Senators moved to Minnesota, and the majors tried to pretend that the Twins were an expansion team and the new Senators were a continuation of the old. They were, in the sense that they were losers. And in a sense, that's what's happened to Cleveland also. They have their team, they have their pretense that it's the old Browns, and the team that used to be the real Browns has their Super Bowl ring, so everybody's happy. Or are they? Wahkeenah 02:39, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I can't answer for 40 years ago with the Senators, but the account is inaccurate with regard to the Ravens/Browns. --Noitall 03:07, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * You might well be right, and you're the Baltimorean, so you would be closer to the situation. Unfortunately, I couldn't check out the Sun article posted earlier, because they want me to register, and I don't feel like ending up on yet another mailing list. My argument, in general, as that the city of Cleveland got ripped off by a greedy owner, who moved to Baltimore which had previously been ripped off by another greedy owner. Here in Minneapolis, they lost a pretty good hockey team, the North Stars, some years ago... supposedly because the owner got annoyed that the local paper reported his being charged with sexual harassment.  So he punished the Twin Cities by moving the 'Stars to Dallas, and the NHL then expanded back into the Cities after convincing the city of St. Paul to fork over many millions for a new arena.  Don'cha just love owners? Wahkeenah 03:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, the owner was likely greedy. He is no longer the owner and, to be honest, while the owner he was not really in the spotlight.  The citizens of Balt. felt very guilty about stealing a team, but it was our only way after we had done everything right and Tagliabou opposed us at every turn.  So Balt. wanted the team without the guilt and that is what I think it got since the Browns got a team with same name and everything a short time later.  --Noitall 03:30, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, what you've just said partially supports what I said earlier... except that it seems like it was Baltimore that tossed the bone to Cleveland, more than the NFL. In fact, I do recall now that the NFL was not very happy about it, and technically couldn't do much if anything to stop the Browns from moving, as Al Davis had proven in court that the league had no power to stop a team from moving elsewhere (or back again, in his case). FYI, I find this little edit war kind of amusing, and I'm learning a few new facts, and also wondering what the fuss is about. It could probably be settled if you had a reference to cite, so you could say, "According to such-and-such, the citizens of Baltimore gave up the nickname and history, etc." Wahkeenah 03:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * There should not be an edit war since the issue in dispute is not about accuracy, but about Wiki style, and, at least before, did not want anything about Balt. on the page.--Noitall 03:52, September 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * It's both. As far as I can tell, your persistent insertions of Baltimore-related issues are incorrect and also don't belong here. Can you cite any reference that backs up your story? - EurekaLott 03:58, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The history is extraordinarlily well known to anyone not pushing a POV. I can probably find sources from Gov. Glendening, the Greater Baltimore Committee, etc., but it is not necessary.  I note that there is not one source cited on this article.  You cite every source for every statement made, no matter how well known, and I'll do the research.  --Noitall 04:14, September 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * If you had bothered to read the linked article above (use Bugmenot if you don't want to register), you'd find references to Cleveland politicians, NFL officials, team ownership, and the Maryland Stadium Authority. The charitable opinions of Baltimore's citizenry nowhere entered the equation. Furthermore, this is supposed to be an article about a stadium, not about a team. If you want to write about the move, do it in an appropriate location in the Ravens or Browns articles. Hell, start a new one if you want, but there's no good reason why it belongs on this page. - EurekaLott 04:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No, this is not your article. --Noitall 04:44, September 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * I never claimed it was. If you insist on making baseless assertions in inapplicable articles, expect to find them reverted. - EurekaLott 04:49, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * If your great wish is to be the grand poo bah editor of this page because you want to eliminate accurate and well-known info and want to acknowledge your ignorance, go ahead. --Noitall 04:52, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Hey noitall (if you're still around), the concept that Art Modell left because he couldn't maintain his revenue from loges is giving him quite a break. The fact of the matter is that Art had spent money on players and donations to local hospitals to the point where he was on the verge of bankruptcy anyway. What is missing here is that Art was offered the opportunity to get in on the Gateway project early on, but passed. No one really understands why Art did what he did - he and his son lied their way through the entire episode. You should delete the comment that Art somehow was jilted out of revenue. He allowed it to happen the way it did. Whatever happened behind the scenes or in Art's evil mind is still a secret - and likely always will be. --Formershamu 02:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Not built to attract the Olympics?
I was surprised to learn from the Wikipedia article that the stadium was not built as a bid to attract the Olympics that eventually went to Los Angeles, as this particular factoid is, at the very least, and as the article notes, local lore. I would like to see some citation for this. To me, it doesn't seem realistic that the city of Cleveland would fund the expenditure of the largest ballpark in the country(?) (and the first stadium to be built with public money), and without having signed the Indians to play in it, for high school and college games(!) without some of the debate looking forward to the possibility of a Cleveland Olympics. Hopefully someone will be able to clarify and provide some references. Robert K S 19:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The sentence in the entry, "That misconception may have contributed to some in the media calling the stadium, "The Mistake by the Lake"." is unsourced and ought to be deleted IMHO. Hanksummers (talk) 21:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Mistake on the Lake?
Why do you persist on Calling Cleveland Browns Stadium Mistake on the Lake? It's Degrading and Humiliating. I think because of this Term that is used so often by people outside of the Cleveland Area, (usually people who have never stepped foot in Cleveland or even Northeast, Ohio) that it gives Cleveland a bad Name. Cleveland is beyond that, and the Browns, up until 1995 have almost always had good seasons, Just Because they have never won a Super Bowl, no one one pays attention to all the great players and Teams the Browns have had over the Years. There are only 3 other teams, that have more Hall of Famers than the Browns. I think that you need to take down the "Mistake by the Lake" phrase. Also, I think that you need to check more of your Sources, becuase there are A lot of Inaccuracies and opinions (used as facts) on this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nprimiano (talk • contribs) 02:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC).
 * It is a legit nickname for the stadium. Added citation.  Few more below:
 * http://www.sports-venue.info/MLB/CLE_Municipal_Stadium.html
 * http://projectballpark.org/history/al/cleveland.html
 * http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/ClevelandStadium.html
 * Cheers. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * So much for "". I see little difference between this and a similar, recent discussion at Talk:Cleveland.  More than anything, this just feels like another backdoor attempt on the part of this editor to force his/her view without allowing for or acknowledging consensus.  As for your sources, Evergreen, the one truly reliable reference from CBS Sports uses the qualifier "dubious" immediately preceding the term.  And really,  will do you no good here.   Levdr1 lp  /  talk  04:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I remind you to assume good faith. This edit was spurred by this edit.  I was surprised to see that the MbtL nickname was removed from the article earlier this year as unsourced.  During my research for the Talk:Cleveland discussion, I did notice this was a nickname for the stadium (as I mentioned on that talk page).  So I fixed it.  Also, what threat?  I "threatened" to make a paragraph.  I have provided citation.  If you feel the sources are not the best, please feel free to add better ones. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * For note, I did what we discussed on the Talk:Cleveland page. Can you please explain your objections to the nickname section? EvergreenFir (talk) 05:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I always try to assume good faith, but your recent attempts to "fix" things, both here and on the Cleveland page, don't exactly instill confidence (WP:AGF only extends so far). I do apologize if I read something  that wasn't there -- edit summaries aren't the appropriate place to pose questions on content, if only b/c they require an edit for reply.  And to be fair, we did just go through a lengthy discussion on more or less the same issue at the Cleveland talk page.  Perhaps next time you'll consider discussing the matter first before launching into a perceived workaround.  As for what to actually do with this article, I suggest you consider WP:DUEWEIGHT.  How critical is the term MotL to the reader's understanding of this subject?  Frankly, it feels more like you are trying to force this term in however you can, wherever you can, rather than approach the overall topic in a balanced way.  That said, "Mistake" should probably be somewhere in the body of this article -- I'm just not convinced it deserves its own section.   Levdr1 lp  /  talk  05:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand why you would have thought what you did, but honestly it was because of that edit. The paragraph I added did feel clumsy, but I wasn't sure how else to add them.  As a Clevelander, I was always confused by the multitude of nicknames (and the multiple uses of MotL).  I feel it should be in there somewhere... also a reason why it's called Lakeshore Stadium (that one confused me). EvergreenFir (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

It was never called Lakeshore Stadium. Municipal or Muny, The Stadium, Cleveland Stadium and sometimes Lakefront Stadium but never Lakeshore. As far as Mistake on the Lake, it deserves to be mentioned in the prose somewhere, but again, a whole paragraph is unnecessary. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Lakeshore/Lakefront typo. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Page Title
Are you sure this page should be called Cleveland Stadium? I've lived in Cleveland my whole life, and I have never once heard or seen it called anything other than Cleveland Municipal Stadium or just Municipal Stadium. Cleveland Rock 16:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was born in 1980 and never heard the "Municipal" modifier until I found sources dating back to before I was born. I think by the 1980s the "Municipal" had become superfluous and had fallen out of favor when referring to the Stadium, which we just called "the Stadium" or "Cleveland Stadium". Robert K S 16:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've seen it both ways going clear back to when it was built, pretty much. Wahkeenah 16:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I was born in 1969 and have lived in Cleveland my entire life. I heard it called Cleveland Municipal Stadium by many, including broadcasts by Nev Chandler and by the infamous dark lord Art Modell. --Formershamu 02:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Clevelander born 1978 here, it was always Municipal Stadium or Cleveland Municipal Stadium, I don't recall it hearing it as "Cleveland Stadium" at all. Pimlottc (talk) 10:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The big scoreboard in center field used to say CLEVELAND STADIUM across the top. I don't know what the exterior sign might have said, or maybe it changed over time. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Spent my first 22 years as a native (beginning in 1972) and it was called both. Usually just 'The Stadium', or Cleveland Stadium, but it was also referred to by it's official name as well. Most often you'd here the 'Municipal' part mentioned in reference to the (old and massive) 'Muny Lot', which was just east of the Stadium and was where you'd tailgate before the game... and be stuck in ridiculous traffic afterward. The Fourth of July game in '84 comes to mind as far as traffic goes... Ryecatcher773 (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Did they write it as "the stadium" or "The Stadium"? That's significant, because there's a debate going on at Talk:Yankee Stadium as to whether "The Stadium" is a notable nickname for the new one. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 17:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think I ever saw it written as either "the stadium" or "The Stadium," I think it was much more spoken than anything by fans and media. Any time you have "stadium" as part of a name, it's going to get called "the stadium" which is true of Cleveland Browns Stadium today.  As for the discussion over "Municipal" I heard it used frequently ("Cleveland Municipal Stadium" and "Municipal Stadium"), but also heard "Cleveland Stadium" just as frequently if not more so.  It was common enough that the "Major League" movies also use "Cleveland Stadium" in both movies on signs and in dialogue.  I would guess "Cleveland Municipal Stadium" was perhaps the "official" name, but I have no way to verify that.  The best place to find out would be any Browns or Indians media guides from that time. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's a photo that shows the scoreboard with "Cleveland Stadium" displayed on it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 22:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Look, if there is any doubt (and this mainly applies to anyone not actually from Cleveland -- who wouldn't know the first thing about it anyway, or are too young to remember the old building) all you have to do to confirm the official name as Cleveland Municipal Stadium, is to go to Amazon, and enter it as a search... and see how many hits come back that include the official name of the stadium in the title. One thing I've learned about Wikipedia over the years -- people (mainly outsiders) will doubt anything and everything, even with legitimate sources. Primary sources on any subject (i.e. people who were acquainted with someone/something firsthand) is completely irrelevant to anyone who wants to argue. I'd been to the place over a hundred times, and have stacks of old Browns and Tribe ticket stubs with the official name (that includes Municipal) on it, and I know for a fact what the name was besides... but it doesn't matter because some 17 year old kid in Idaho says he can't confirm it. Go to Amazon, look it up. Case closed. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 13:56, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Except that the big scoreboard within the stadium itself didn't have "municipal" in it. So did they just not feel like putting 3 words on the scoreboard instead of 2? Or did the name of the stadium actually change at some point? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 14:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The Sporting News guides first mention it in 1939, as Municipal Stadium, and they are consistent with that from then on. However, the official major league guides published by A.S. Barnes in 1945 and 1946 say Cleveland Stadium. The 1956 Pocket Baseball Almanac says Cleveland Stadium. The Turkin and Thompson Encyclopedias of Baseball in the 1950s say Cleveland Stadium. In The Scrapbook History of Baseball, a clipping (newspaper not stated) reporting the July 31, 1932, Indians debut calls it the "New Muny Stadium" in the headline and "the Municipal Stadium" in the text. A lesser-known series of guides from the 30s and 40s, Who's Who in the Major Leagues, calls it Municipal Stadium. Lamont Buchanan in 1951's The World Series and Highlights of Baseball calls it Cleveland Stadium. Hope that helps. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 03:12, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

As it's been said elsewhere in the discussion, it was called both almost interchangeably as an official name, depending on (most likely I'd surmise) who was publishing respective media guides and/or newspapers. The official listing in the 1992 Cleveland White Pages lists it as Cleveland Municipal Stadium, and although it generally was referred to as Cleveland Stadium (it's easier to say and takes up less space in print, yadda, yadda, yadda), the full official name was Cleveland Municipal Stadium. An officially published NFL Encyclopedia dated from 1979 actually shows captions under each stadium (in the section on stadiums) and Cleveland's includes the title 'Municipal' (funny sidenote: I actually remember asking my dad as a kid what that word meant when I saw it as an 8 year old kid...)As for he scoreboard, I'd (again) surmise that it was a matter of space. You're talking about a town originally that dropped the 'a' in Cleaveland because it fit better in a (now defunct) city newspaper (there is actually mention of that fact in the History of Cleveland, Ohio article... and surprisingly, when I went to check I saw that it's lacking a citation, but I know it was in our 8th grade Ohio History textbook... I got that right as an ectra credit question in 1985 ;-) .... Anyhow, the full official name of the building was Cleveland Municipal Stadium. The intro (and the title) should be reversed to Cleveland Municipal Stadium (also known as Cleveland Stadium, or Lakefront Stadium). Ryecatcher773 (talk) 04:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note the subtlety of the sources I cited: either Cleveland Stadium, or Municipal Stadium. None of them used all 3 words together. Possibly, again, due to space issues, or "wordiness". During the 50s and 60s, then, there were two different "Municipal Stadium" listings in the MLB guides: Cleveland and Kansas City. However, if you're physically in one of those cities, you wouldn't say all three words, since the city name would be understood. The Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome, which is its official name, is typically called the Metrodome, or just The Dome. There are plenty of other "Domes" around, but there's only one in Minneapolis, so the prefix is not needed. Kind of the same deal with Cleveland. It would be so much easier if they had actually posted a sign on the exterior, but apparently they didn't. In contrast, K.C.'s exterior had a sign that read "Municipal Stadium", so there was no doubt there. FYI, the mid-1970s book called The Ballparks, the first of its kind actually, calls it Cleveland Stadium. Lost Ballparks calls it Municipal Stadium. The first edition of TSN's Take Me Out to the Ballparks leads off its article by calling it CMS and then MS the rest of the way, while also reproducing a photo of the scoreboard with CS on it. If you're anywhere near Cleveland, it might be instructive to go to the library and see what the locals were calling it in 1931-32. That would be the trump card. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 05:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Infobox
From the Elkman generator: §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  00:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Dubious: WPA
The article says "Another common misconception is that Cleveland Municipal Stadium was a Works Progress Administration project", which I've tagged as dubious. The tag was removed, with a supporting reference that the WPA was created in 1935, well after the stadium was built.

Just to clarify: the date of the WPA's creation is not the dubious bit. I don't think that date is controversial or any way in doubt. What is dubious is the claim that it is a "common misconception" that the stadium was a WPA project. I've reinserted the tag, directly after the "common misconception" statement.

The only thing I can find remotely supporting this is a passing mention in a book about baseball brawls.

This book doesn't claim that the stadium was built under the auspices of the WPA; it reads more like the author's impression of that era of building. Even if it did, the book is about baseball brawls, it's not a reliable source on beliefs about the stadium's building process.

The passage sounds like something someone heard from their uncle or something, not something that can actually be verified by reliable published sources. Is there anything to support the statement that this is a "common misconception"? TJRC (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Taking a closer look at User:Piriczki's edit, it's apparent that the source cited is about the Indians and their stadium, not just the WPA. I've removed my tag.  Thanks, Piriczki. TJRC (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Here's a gem from one of Cleveland sportswriter Terry Pluto's books: "The Stadium was a Works Progress Administration project designed to bring the 1932 Olympics to Cleveland." Piriczki (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and good work documenting it in the article. I'm surprised Pluto vectored that; I remember him as better than the typical Cleveland sportswriters (Heaton, whose first name escapes me, excepted), despite writing for, as I recall, the Akron Beacon-Journal. TJRC (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places
Cleveland Stadium was most likely delisted from the National Register of Historic Places at some point after it was demolished. The NRHP template has a paramter "delisted" but it requires a date. Can anyone confirm the date it was delisted? Piriczki (talk) 13:57, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I assumed it was delisted since it was demolished, but haven't been able to find a date yet to verify (otherwise I would've included it). It may be a case where it just hasn't been updated yet. I'm not opposed to having 1996 as the date, but everything I can find indicates it's still officially listed. In cases where something has been delisted, it is usually not available in search results anymore. I know locally we have a site still listed that was torn down in the 1980s; no one's gotten around to requesting it be removed. Another site, however, was delisted and isn't available in search results. --JonRidinger (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The National Register of Historic Places research page says:
 * We have not yet digitized the following states: Arkansas, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, and Virginia.


 * If the file has not been digitized yet you can request a copy from us. Please include the name of the property, the state, and the reference number (or as much information as you know on the property). And e-mail the request to us at: Reference [mailto:nr_reference@nps.gov e-mail]


 * The Listed properties on the National Register spreadsheet still lists the stadium, as reference no. 87002287 (Cleveland Municipal Stadium), with a listed date of 1987-11-13. TJRC (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

What Name to Use for the Baseball Team
Should "Indians", referring to the Major League Baseball team, be changed to "Guardians"? If so, should it be changed everywhere, or only in selected places? The team name was Indians for the entire time it played at this stadium, and it's unclear to me what would be clear and correct. --cratermoon (talk) 23:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)