Talk:Vic Aldridge

Middle Name

Victor Aldridge Sr. (Vic Aldridge) had no middle name. His mother's maiden name, Eddington, is sometimes mistakingly listed as his middle name, or "E." as a middle initial. It has been suggested that he, at times, used this middle initial because he felt it filled his name out. To that extent, when his son was born, he was determined he would have a full monogram and bestowed a middle initial (Victor E. Aldridge, Jr.). Approximatly 50 years later, a grandson was born and Vic Jr. decided to take the naming convention a step further, but he and his wife were unable to decide upon a suitable middle name, finally choosing to drop the period, giving me the obscure middle name of "E". My name is Victor E Aldridge III. Alas, even MY birth certificate is wrong because the person filling it out made the same assumption most people do and made it an initial.

I have no sources aside from family lore in the form of direct conversations with my father and my sister. I am not sure what method needs to be done to substantiate and legitimitize my claim, but I've altered this entry three times now because of this issue. Any assistance would be appreciated.--Lonadar (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone unsigned (and unsited) entered a middle name of Edward. I have removed it and reiterate my previous argument. I'd expect anyone not related to cite sources before making such edits. --Lonadar (talk) 00:03, 24 Mar 2015 (UTC)

Birth Location

I altered the birth location from "Crane, Indiana" back to Indian Springs because that is the closest community to where he was born. The entire area of Indian Springs / Cale is fairly rural in southern Indiana. He grew up in Cale and then later moved to Terre Haute. I have no verifiable or citable sources aside from my own knowledge of our family history. --Lonadar (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

There are sources that say Indian Springs.--Bedford ^Pray 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Someone unsigned (and unsited) changed this to Cale. I removed the language regarding primary and secondary education, and restored the birthplace to Indian Springs. I've said before I have no verifiable sources, but I'd expect anyone not related to cite sources before making such edits. --Lonadar (talk) 00:03, 24 Mar 2015 (UTC)

Opinionated?

I sent Mary Turner word that this entry had been updated and directed her towards it in the hopes she might have some additional information to add. She was very disappointed with the entry. Though she appears to have an understandably bias view of our grandfather which would not be approperiate for the actual entry, I thought I would include her thoughts here and look closer into some of her concerns about the article. I have thought that the article emphasized more of Vic Aldridge's negative moments then positive ones, but I don't know what types of information have been published. These comments below have been edited only to remove personal family comments.

Disastrous, dependable SECOND starter, protect, slipping on a slick pitcher's plate, suffered, had enough, out of shape, pitched poorly.

The only reason I can think of that you would send me such an article is hoping I would stroke and die. Your "friend" not only has no business altering Papa's life, he CERTAINLY has no business adding his own little IDEAS.

If Papa were alive you and your "buddy" would be in dire straits, believe me!

He was NOT a teacher after his baseball career.

[...]

Get it out of the article, Bink. I'm not one to aggravate where Papa is concerned.

--Lonadar (talk) 16:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

If you look in the page history, you'll note that I wasn't the one that added second starter to the article. The various sources said he taught school after his career, so that did not come from nowhere. A few sentences could be added about his two complete game victories in the 1925 World Series, but the seventh game needed elaboration for what bad luck he had, and it was explained how bad the mound conditions were. As far his 1928 career, it needed to be explained why such a good pitcher left the business.--Bedford ^Pray 16:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Rereading your sister's comments, there were other things she disliked that were in the article BEFORE I edited it. I didn't add many of those words; I just let them be.--Bedford ^Pray 22:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry that Ms. Turner seems to think her father was the perfect little Hall of Fame baseball player, but he was not. First, the dependable second starter thing. Aldridge's main active years were 1922-1927. In 1922 and 1924 he had the most starts on the Cubs staff. In the other four years, he had the second-most or less. In 1922, he had both the most starts and the best ERA+ on his team, but in 1924, Pete Alexander had a better ERA+, though in half the starts, and Vic Keen had basically the same stats he did. The one year he was the "ace" of the Cubs staff in 1922 (and even that is debateable since Pete Alexander's stats were nearly identical and according to Retrosheet it was Alexander that got the nod as opening day starter), he was only 8th in the league in ERA+ and was not in the top 10 in ERA. He never finished in the top 10 in ERA, only made the top 10 ERA+ list three times, never higher than eighth, never led the league in any major pitching category. How is that NOT a dependable number two or three starter for most of his career? Ms. Turner is familiar with the concept of baseball statistics, yes?

Second, she takes exception to the statement he pitched poorly in 1928? Is she serious!? His ERA was nearly a full run above the league average, his ERA+ was a below average 81, and he walked 13 more men than he struck out. That looks poor to me. I do not know if the above quoted missive was supposed to be a private message rather than one for public dissemination, so that may lead one to the wrong idea, but Ms. Turner comes across as a bitter woman who would rather keep some idealized image of the man in her head than face statistical fact. Opinionated indeed! Indrian (talk) 19:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about "public dissemination"; I get the impression she wanted her opinion heard, or else Vic III wouldn't place it here. He started in Game 2 in both 1925 and 1927, which pretty much says "second starter". He did pitch two complete game victories in a World Series; most pitchers dream of that. BTW, it was her grandfather, not father.--Bedford ^Pray 19:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, just saw the term Papa and assumed, so thanks for the correction. Not knocking the man's World Series success at all; just pointing out that Aldridge was a slightly above average second starter that had a bad exit year in 1928. Ms. Turner seems to want us to believe he was a special number one ace that never had a bad moment in his career. Indrian (talk) 19:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Papa (though apparently my parents spelled it Pa-Paw) was our childhood nickname for Vic Sr. My sister has stated on several occasions that Vic Sr. was her hero, and that's not uncommon between a grandfather and granddaughter, but the context and nature of this site makes it also approperiate to post the negative. She did not ask me to post her comments, but I did ask her for her input, and receiving it, added it to the record thusly. She has the same access I do and can remove it if she wishes. She also could edit the entry as she sees fit, which I invited her to do originally, but I doubt that she will (or would within Wikipedia guidelines).

I have, however, checked with another family source and they confirmed that Vic Sr. did not return to teaching after his baseball career. I intend to contact the authors of the Pirates Encyclopedia and see if they will cite their sources so I can further research this, but for the time being I have removed the references to a post-baseball teaching career citing, as before, family history as my source. I forgot to log in before making the edit, in case there is any question. --Lonadar (talk) 13:26, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I just had the following strange message posted to my talk page:

How can so many people be discussing someone they know nothing about, except for articles they have collected. Each article was someone's opinion, but the children have made it fact. BUT, the facts in each article, are facts. None of you will ever be Grantland Rice. So many "facts" are not accurate concerning Vic Aldridge. Where he was born, where he was raised, what he did after baseball. Discuss on, it gives you something to do.Diablos82 (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is a definate possibility that this was some random vandal just having some fun, but due to the relative obscurity of the subject, it seems far more likely that this is someone with an actual agenda here. I certainly hope it did not come from the Aldridge grandchildren, because this is a level of demented bitterness I would not have thought possible from anyone. Indrian (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is entirely possible that this is Mary Turner. I have been told her late husband had connections to the Diablos.

(EDIT 06/08/10: My original source has clarified themselves that Mary's husband did not have a connection to the Diablos, but that Mary herself may have had after his death. I'm not trying to incite more conversation, but wanted to correct the discussion since my earlier source has clarified their statement.)

I also received the following message:

How sad, Bink, with your involvement with all this about Papa.

So many of your "facts" are so wrong. Where he was born, where he went to school, what he did after baseball,etc.

I know these things.

You have involved yourself with these uninformed people with obviously no life of their own.

Shame on you. "Rose colored glasses". How dare you. You know NOTHING of the story of your family and all that goes with it. I'm saving that for "good".

I will say my sister is not a stupid woman, but though I hoped she would get involved in some fashion, I didn't expect it after she expressed her distress to me directly instead of through this channel. Her reference to an aside I made in User talk:Bedford's talk page shows me she has been observing and reading, and I'm glad to see it. It is for that reason I will respond, and make some overdue statements, here.

Wikipedia is intended to be a collaborative effort to produce the most complete, and hopefully, most correct encyclopedia of the world, in the world. This is achieved over time by people creating pages, and adding information to existing pages. This is achieved through moderation and adherence to guidelines that require that any "facts" be proven as such as much as possible, and that these facts are not weighted by personal bias or opinion.

I have been accused twice now of perpetrating false information as fact in what is nothing more than guilt by association. I, personally, have added very little information to this page, and have made only minor edits to items I felt confident about. Since, as Mary as pointed out, I know very little of the details of my grandfather's life, I don't feel qualified to dispute the information people put into this article from citable sources. Just as information added is expected to be cited and not just taken as "true", any dispute over information is also expected to be backed with citable proof.

Neither I nor Bedford have added any of our own personal "ideas" to the main article, as that would not be appropriate. In fact, the only reason Bedford became involved was because I ran into him at a convention and, knowing he was knowledgeable of the guidelines and rules of Wikipedia, asked him to look into the issue I was having about being unable to cite a verifiable source regarding his middle name. I was surprised and delighted at the way he had expanded to the article. I imagine Mary would be upset for me to mention delight in this regard, but my delight was that the article had been expanded. Even though I felt there was an overbalance of negative information, it was still information, and I was glad to see Papa getting some attention.

I have not "involved" myself with anyone or any group personally, as each individual is welcome to contribute to and discuss the content of Wikipedia. I have involved myself with Wikipedia as an entity and as a project. Many of the people who contribute to Wikipedia are far from uninformed. Many are far more learned than I could ever hope to be.

I will, however, say that though I am glad Mary is observing the discussion revolving around Papa, she has elected to come across bitterly towards me and now Indrian instead of acting productively. If something is wrong with the article, correct it! If a "fact" is incorrect, fix it! If there is information missing, add it! That is the beauty of the collaborative effort behind Wikipedia. However, you must be willing and able to back up your statements with verifiable sources.

Mary, I sincerely hope you will rise to the challenge. Wikipedia is a worldwide entity, and I'm proud that Papa is a part of it. Help me, and others around the world, to make his entry complete. --Lonadar (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The biggest problem is verifiable info. Sadly, aside from base stats, the most verifiable is his 1925 World Series appearances (won two complete games, but had very bad luck on the seventh) and his problems in the 1928 season. Missing Spring Training was a bad thing for him, as it would for any player. Having a slippery mound was the reason for the 1925 seventh game; once again, bad luck. Aside from maybe another picture or two, this could become a GA. His career was nothing to be ashamed of, but sadly wasn't perfection.--Bedford ^Pray 04:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Vic Aldridge GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vic Aldridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Overall this article, while short, is pretty good. However, I noticed the following things that need to be fixed:

• Any note on a source or year made for the baseball card image? I don't doubt that it's PD, but adding that information in would be nice.
• Refs 9 and 13 are the same; combine them.
• The use of baseball almanac has been, from what I've been told in the past, discouraged as a reliable source, though it's certainly fine as an external link.

I'll do a re-read of the article upon completion of this, and then will put the article on hold. Wizardman 17:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I twitted the grandson and asked him if he knew the source; I do know it was 1922 as I have kept an Ebay Watch for usable pics (is 1923 still the cutoff year?) I have combined the refs. This is my first baseball GAN, so I did not know that the almanac was a problem, but I see nothign wrong for it as a source; any clue why it's bad?--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 05:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

(Grandson) Unfortunatly, I have not seen this card, or this photo, before it appeared on the Wiki entry. That's not saying much, though - I have only a few photos of him from his baseball years, and have yet to actually obtain or see any of his baseball cards. Despite some meager attempts to find them, I have been unsuccessful, and "Papa" (Pah-paw) didn't see any value in keeping any form of memoribilia. Lonadar (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

In response to Bedford, I think the main rationale for that is that there are more professional, reliable sites that have the exact same content in them. I used to think it was fine myself but others disagree. Namely, Baseball-reference and Retrosheet would be the big two to use (though I'm fine with baseball library personally). Sorry for the delay in reviewing the rest of this article, forgot about it. Wizardman 18:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's the rest of the review:

• It feels a little light in terms of information. Granted, he's a pre-1930s player so it would be quite hard to find information on him. It does feel a little light though, mainly on non-1925 stuff. Here's some sources that may or may not be useful: [1][2]
• I added a couple free images, so that problem's handled :)
• There's a lot of use of "he". Change some to Aldridge to make it flow a lil better.

I'll put the article on hold, just fix these things and it should be good to go. Wizardman 03:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Just got back from a long day trip;will do later today.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 08:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, did all the tweaks requested, and added a little more info. Will keep an eye out for the publisher of that pic, although as I said before it was a 1922 pic, and thus allowable.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 06:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I almost forgot about this GA review. After looking through it again, everything looks fine to me, so I'll pass it. Nice work, always good to see more nice baseball articles, imo. Wizardman 04:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Gracias.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 08:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Pre-Baseball Years

I had earlier removed some un-cited material about Papa's early years because it's material I've never heard and there were no citations. These changes have been reverted and come context given, so I'm allowing them to stay but the books mentioned do need to be cited. You can include the information here if you need help in adding proper references. I, unfortunately, don't know how myself or I'd message the editor privately. As to the distinction between Indian Springs and Cale, I know he grew up in Cale, but the family record has always been that he was born in Indian Springs. If the two are so indistinguishable, it's possible borders have moved or that he considered himself born of Indian Springs. It's also possible Christopher and Martha (his parents) moved after he was born, but I don't know how common that would be to that time period to move such a short distance as we do today. I would invite Mrpackratnow and 216.176.110.111 (if they are separate individuals) to message me privately through here and perhaps when I am in the area again the suggested meeting can be arranged. --Lonadar (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2016 (UTC)