Talk:Sports memorabilia

I am doing some research on irrefutable authentication. Certificates of Authentication themselves are extremely vulnerable to counterfeit, yet it seems much of the collector community simply assumes a COA or a hologram is "proof". I know that the comments below are from a few years ago, but what about the concept of using RFID to validate, if witnessed, the actual act of a signing that is then collected in a maintained database and provides for full, auditable provenance, including the actual collector's info as well? --MikeMuni (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this really a technology? Maybe it is in the anthropological sense, but not in the sense of the category or template. -- Rmrfstar 04:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Truthfully, I don't see any technology in collecting things. maybe in an anthropological sence, yes, but any other way, no.--66.203.238.61 01:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Not sure about the definition of technology being used here, but technology is a tool used to meet a need. Here the need is to capture memories of the sport.  Clothing, coins, cards, trinkets, etc., are all technologies. Not to mention, the means and methods for making memorabilia, which certainly involves technology.  I guess I would ask, what is not technology about memorabilia?  Steven McCrary 22:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


 * A technology is not a whimsical "tool" but an "application of science". Sports memorabilia undergo no technological advancement. Maybe the methods of producing memorabilia are technologies, but the signed baseball itself is not. Could you find a definition of technology which would allow for sports memorabilia? -- Rmrfstar 21:51, 20 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Rmrfstar, thanks for the response. 1. That definition for technology is too narrow.  Please refer to the technology page.  Definitions contained therein are common among those in that field.  2. Must ask, what is whimsical about memorabilia?  3. Many, if not most, memorabilia undergo technological advancement for the exclusive purpose of being memorabilia.  For example, take the swatches of clothing from professional athletes, made into "collector's editions," and then marketed to the public.  The examples could go on and on.  Steven McCrary 04:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delayed response, but I still disagree with you ;). 1. I cannot find a definition of technology in technology or anywhere that is broad enough to include memorabilia. 2. I was not calling the memorabilia whimsical, but the "tool used to meet a need" of which you spoke. 3. The memorabilia themselves do not undergo scientific advancement, though the production or marketing techniques may. I hope that explains my perspective, maybe the definition of memorabilia will help:


 * "Main Entry: mem·o·ra·bil·ia
 * Pronunciation: "me-m&-r&-'bi-lE-&, -'bE-lE-&, -'bil-y&
 * Function: noun plural
 * Etymology: Latin, from neuter plural of memorabilis
 * things that are remarkable and worthy of remembrance; also : things that stir recollection : MEMENTOS" http://webster.com/dictionary/memorabilia


 * -- Rmrfstar 14:22, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Rmrfstar, thanks for the considered response. The technology page recently underwent some edits that removed some important definitions of technology.  I reverted the page earlier today.  However, I suspect that those revisions will still leave you unpersuaded.  On that page, please find that one defintion is that "technology is a tool that fulfills a human need" or something to that effect.  As humans, we have a "need" to remember significant events.  Using only our memories fails to capture that event accurately, especially with the lapse of time; memorabilia helps with that need; without the memorabilia we forget.  Our inability to remember is a need.  The memorabilia tool fulfills that need.  In other words, memorabilia is a technological tool that fulfills the need of accurate remembering.  Steven McCrary 18:47, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should broaden our definition of "technology". Is there a consensus on Technology concerning your edit, I think a technology is more than just a "tool" (all tools fulfill human needs or wants). Let me give you an example. A hamburger fulfills the human need to eat, and evolves much in the same way sports memorabilia does. Would you call a hamburger a technology? Even a tool? Not everything ever meddled with by humans is a technology. -- Rmrfstar 14:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Those definitions of technology are based on consensus, they are not mine, they come from other experts in the field. (The sources of the definition are contained at the bottom of the technology page; see McGinn and Winston.) Some people actually do consider processed food, such as the hamburger, to be a form technology, although maybe not a tool.  There are certainly many technologies associated with the improvement of food, from how it is grown, to how it is made and consumed.  Steven McCrary 19:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Regarding the definition of technology: I must say that there are those who are concerned about the breadth of the definition of the word technology. To many, the meaning of the word technology is so broad that it has too many meanings and therefore creates confusion.  However, other students of technology simply provide the definitions as used in language, and do not comment on any concern about the breadth of those definitions.  Finally, there are others that believe that technology is indeed very broad, but that is the nature of humanity, and therefore technology.  Steven McCrary 19:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Steve, I think you have a point in that there are certain types of technology used in the preparation of memorabilia, and so the article could reasonably be classified under "technology." HOWEVER if you read the article itself, you will note that it contains no discussion of this technology. Rather, the article contains various examples of memorabilia, information about them, reasons why people collect them, and what they mean to people. A person wanting to know these things probably wouldn't look for them under "technology," but under "history" or the like. Also, look at the other sports technology articles. The one one "sports equipment" contains, for example, paragraphs on the aerodynamics of triathlon bicycles and and the constructions specifics of various types of golf clubs. These are the kinds of things that one would probably expect if one were researching sports technology. So, while a technical definition of "technology" can reasonably be used to argue that "sports memorabilia" is part of sports "technology," it doesn't make sense to classify it that way when you're looking at ease of access for the common man. Damien Maxwell 22:53, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Shall we remove the template until the article itself describes sports memorabilia as a technology? -- Rmrfstar 01:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Damien's points are well taken. At this point, I am not prepared to modify the article to overtly connect memorabilia and technology.  I will remove the technology template.  Steven McCrary 01:49, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you. -- Rmrfstar 10:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Picture
Anyone willing to take a picture of a piece of Sports memorabilia? --Liface 20:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Ho hum
another US-centric article: what about memorabilia from other countries around the world? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.191.166 (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow
This article is complete crap. Needs a major rewrite. 96.226.199.138 (talk) 07:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Have a autographed mickey mantle baseball
This ball is new never been out of original box have letter of authenticity with the ball.Would like to know the value?? Thank you, Bob SH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.53.172 (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)