Talk:Terrible Towel

Terrible Towel was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 12, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
July 1, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
November 2, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Pittsburgh Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area 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.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Football League: Steelers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL 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.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Steelers task force.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Colin Williams (December 2, 2024). "The Terrible Towel Wikipedia page is a must-read yinzer masterpiece". Pittsburgh City Paper. Retrieved December 2, 2024. For those still reading, the Terrible Towel Wikipedia page does what any good Wikipedia page should do: it's informative, well-organized, and cites sources. It's also, objectively, hysterical.

Not a gimmick!

I am getting a little frustrated that each and every article I have ever read on the towel bats down the "gimmick" label, it is a symbol almost a flag of a people, all proceeds of sales go to charity (which is more than I can say for the United States Flag, is that also a gimmick?) Since some on here can't seem to find the CNTRL and F buttons on their computer this is the section of article which dispels it being a gimmick:

BEGIN QUOTE::: "The original concept of a towel did not appeal to Mr. Russell. But in that playoff game against the Colts, the lumbering linebacker set a record that still stands with his 93-yard return of a fumble for a touchdown, towels all aflutter.

"It's kind of embarrassing for me," he said with a self-deprecating chuckle. "I told him I thought it was a gimmick, and the Steelers aren't a gimmick team.

"But when you see all those towels waving in the stadium now, and all those towels displayed at bars around the country and around the globe, it's safe to say I was wrong." END QUOTE:::

and the link: [1]

I will be happy to put "gimmick" on the religious articles concerning their symbols and the national flag articles for those that have united in their common heritage with this symbol to compare the towel to some microwaved ad promo that the Jacksonville Jaguars came out with 5 minutes ago is a little insulting. 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, 2009 generations of Pittsburgh diaspora WORLDWIDE and those adopted diaspora have used the towel as a link to their common legacy.

Anyone who dismisses this as a gimmick shows their absolute ignorance of Pittsburgh history, Steelers tradition and just basic football 101 ::: If this was 1977 you might have a point, this is not 1977. The Loyalists called the U.S. flag a gimmick in 1777, is that still a gimmick, please edit that wiki page accordingly thank you.

Hholt01 (talk) 05:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently the word "gimmick" has a negative connotation... If you read the article Myron Cope was approached to create a "gimmick" that's right out of his book. I would like to see an alternate, verifiable from reliable sources term that is alternately used before anything is changed. black ngold29 05:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this new article from ESPN.com, the Towel was called a "fan symbol" as in "the best-known fan symbol in professional sports". Is there anyone opposed to changing the opening sentence to "The Terrible Towel is a symbol associated with the Pittsburgh Steelers...."? black ngold29 21:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that would be an acceptable alternative, as "gimmick" sound a little POV to me, fan symbol sound neutral. Scapler (talk) 22:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Towel creator

The actual idea came from a man named Larry Garret, also in radio in Pittsburgh with Myron Cope. It was Myron who made it famous and made it a Steeler icon. Mr. Cope has given credit to Larry Garret on various occassions.

According to Cope's book, Double Yoi!, Garret did suggest the idea of using a towel, however it was Cope that came up with the phrase "Terrible Towel", and the idea that they should be yellow towels.Blackngold29 (talk) 01:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually... the idea of a "towel" came from fans of the Vancouver Canucks. They played a game against the Edmonton Oilers in which they were being victimized by horrible officiating, and the fans began waving white towels to symbolize surrender flags. It stuck as a Canucks gimmick, and fans of other teams have always waved a towel. ...Funny how the Pittsburgh Steelers use a gimmick that was originally inspired by bad officiating.12.26.68.146 (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Canucks fans did not start with their towels until the 1980s. Source black ngold29 23:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Dispute

There is a neutrality dispute of the related sports phenomena section. Why is this so? If it is noted what is disputed I am sure that it could be quickly fixed. Also, is this section really necessary to the article? Thank You. Blackngold29 (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the section, as it did not contribute to the topic. That should end the dispute, as well. Blackngold29 (talk) 03:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

GA Review by SRX^--^Latino Heat

Lead

Since its invention, The Terrible Towel has spread in popularity; fans often take their Towel to famous sites while on vacation. - This is original research, unless sourced, this sounds like a opinion.
- It is cited in the "Widespread recognition" section. As the intro is just an overview it doesn't need to be cited twice. Black ngold29 01:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Towel has been taken to the peak of Mount Everest and seen on Saturday Night Live. - Why is this important to the article, and what does it say about the towel?
- Just a few examples to back up the above statement. Black ngold29 01:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proceeds from sales of the Towel have raised over $2 million for a Pennsylvania school which cares for people with mental retardation and physical disabilities. - The currency used needs to be identified, a link to United States dollar would due good here.
- Done
Terrible Towel is credited with being the first "rally towel", its success has spawed similar trends. - Spawed? Is "spawned" meant here?
- Spawned? It initiated, began... That seemed like the best way to describe it to me. Black ngold29 01:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, but spawned is the correct word. Spawed is not a word.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done, stupid oversight on my part, gotta work on that "reading" thing.

Origin

In the weeks leading up to the game, Cope advertised the idea of the towel to fans on the radio and evening TV news, using the phrase "The Terrible Towel is poised to strike!" - per WP:ACRONYM, TV shouldn't be abbreviated, it should be spelled out, to "television".
- Done
Also against the idea of the Towel, Andy Russell mirrored Cope's original thoughts, "We're not a gimmick team. We've never been a gimmick team." - this can be reworded, Also against the ideas of the Towel, was Andy Russell who mirrored ..........and so on.
- Done
Growing nervous about the negative feedback, Cope, who had already advertised the towel on the news multiple times, polled the rest of the players with a "banana-republic vote", - what does banana-republic vote mean here?
- Doesn't the quote pretty much sum it up? He just faked it basically. That was the term that he used in his book, and I don't know of any comprable terms. Black ngold29 01:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Either way, it should be elaborated and explained for someone who is not aware of what that term means, if its faked, then it should be noted.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I chanded the sentence to "Cope, who had already made up his mind to use the towel...". Does that work? I think Cope knew that it would ultimately be a good idea, but I don't want to put words in his mouth. Black ngold29 02:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Do not use original research, you should just elaborate what the term means, nothing else.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 02:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't really know how to say it then. He said "What we need here is a banana-republic vote" and then proceed with the story about Bradshaw. Ah, how about adding this link: Banana republic? That seems to be pretty accurate. Black ngold29 02:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        That would definately work.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 02:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Done
The Towel made its debut on December 27, 1975, in a playoff game against the Baltimore Colts. - no comma is needed here
- Done
If possible, the poem should be put in a quote box.
- I wanted to have it centered, but couldn't find a quote box template that would do that (I don't want the one I used above with the big quotes, as it isn't a spoken quote) Suggestions? Black ngold29 01:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well if you want it centered, you should place the spoken quote in a {{quote box}} and embed it in the prose, and leave the poem as is, as in it's current format it takes up too much space.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. Why couldn't I find that...
      - Not quite, I said put the "spoken quote" the one before the poem in the quote box, and leave the poem as it is.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        How's that? Black ngold29 02:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Almost, embed it in the prose like it is in the "Honoring Cope" section.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 02:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Oh, I see. I kind of wanted that section to stand out, as it's basically part of the prose. I would prefer it centered, but if you think it should be embedded than we can leave it as is. Black ngold29 02:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean, I think it is better centered, Im sorry, you can leave it centered.SRX^--^Latino Heat 02:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Rights and proceed

This prompted Gimbels department store began to market "The Official Myron Cope Terrible Towel" during the 1976 season - reword here, the sentence does not flow due to the past tense, it should either be "to begin marketing" or "This prompted the marketing of "The Official Myron Cope Terrible Towel" by Gimbels department store.
- Done - Probably just a typo on my part.
During the 2005 season, when the Steelers won their fifth Super Bowl, over 1 million Towels were sold; with some fans buying 200 at a time. - reword, "as some fans bought 200 Towels at a time."
- Done

Opposition

The Steelers went on to win the game by 20 points. - source?
- Done
Pittsburgh went on to make a comeback victory, not allowing the Bengals another point the remainder of the game. - needs to be reworded, how about "After the touchdown, the Bengals were unable to score again, as the Steelers defeated them (whatever the score was ??-??)." It flows and sounds better. Plus, it sounds like Original research.
- Reworded, but I think the part about the comeback is important, so I left it in. Black ngold29 01:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Similar gimmicks

During the 2006 playoffs, in a game against the Steelers, the Indianapolis Colts handed out blue towels to fans; Pittsburgh won the game. - should flow more, mayby like "though" should be used after fans, and the semicolon should be changed to a comma.
- Reworded

References

The book used as a source in the article should be used in the {{citebook}} template, with the author, page number, publisher, etc.
- I'm not sure I understand, it is listed as the first ref with the {{citebook}} template. Black ngold29 01:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any other references to the book, should also be in that template, as many references are not in that format.
- I see, but you dont have it bulleted.
  - Done
- They're done per WP:CITE#Shortened notes. Black ngold29 01:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay.SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the references have parameters that are not used, those should be removed from the reference if not used.
- Done
Because more than 20 refs are used, you should use the {{reflist}} with 2 colums, {{reflist|2}} Also, have you removed the unused parameters I stated above?--SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done

Closing Comments GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Per the many concerns above.

B. MoS compliance:
Per the many concerns above.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
There was one instance above where there wasnt a ref to a source.

C. No original research:
Many instances above.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
POV issue above
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
On Hold-I will give this article a week before I pass/fail. Currently it needs work to meet the GA criteria, if the above concerns are addressed, I may pass/fail it.SRX^--^Latino Heat 01:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have not responded to the reference concerns.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 13:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok very well,

Pass.--SRX^--^Latino Heat 21:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knockoffs

Should the green knockoff be added to the article that was used in Super Bowl XL for the Seahawks?

--207.162.187.145 (talk) 19:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you could cite it to a reliable source, I would certainly think so. Black ngold29 21:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Easier said than done.All i've found is some text snippets on it on google and no video clips.I'll keep trying but....

--207.162.187.145 (talk) 03:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,I have an account,and I have photo proof I found on Youtube and found a canadian(sorta) variation of the towel.But I can't post it cause it says that only confirmed members and admins can make an image.

EDIT:Nevermind,it got a reference--Legiondude (talk) 00:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You Tube isn't a relaible source, nor a pictures (thanks to Photoshop). I reverted the edits, because I saw no other source. Black ngold29 04:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sigh*Well damn....... back to searching then --Legiondude (talk) 20:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Linkage/Spelling

In the section about the Tennessee Titans stomping on the Towel, Keith Bulluck's name is mispelled, thus causing the link not to work correctly. It should be Spelled Bulluck.

Fixed. Thanks. black ngold29 18:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Towel actual appearance

I have tried several times to edit the appearance section of the Terrible Towel article to correct the errors and to accurately describe the towel. When originally released by Gimbel's Department Store, the towel was available in gold with black lettering and black with gold lettering (not yellow, as reported in the article) and was emblazoned simply with "The Terrible Towel" logo. Since the original release of "The Terrible Towel", modifications have been made to the design. The current version of the Towel adds the words "Myron Cope's Official" above the logo and "A Pittsburgh Original" below it.

I bought a Terrible Towel at that time and still have it.

Here is a photo which I just took:

Appleseed15219 (talk) 06:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated before, it's WP:V that counts, that's official WP policy. I personally believe you, I think that is an awesome collector's item and certainly a piece of Pittsburgh history, but unfortunately we'll need a reliable source before changing the prose. black ngold29 06:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of Towel Waving disputed by Vancouver

In the article Towel Power about the Vancouver Cannucks tradition that started in 1982, there is an editor who refuses to do research but claims towel waving in sports started with them. Despite the fact that the article has existed in part as a description of the general sports towel waving phenomia, with mention of the Homer Hanky etc, this editor insists on removing all mention of the Terrible Towel in order to further his rewriting of history. As I am going to run into a three revert rule, so I need help maintaining the accuracy of that article. You may want to check out and help with the article and the article's discussion and add it it your watch list. CrazyPaco (talk) 18:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was also disputed in the "Terrible Towel creator" section above. I posted the same article over at the Towel Power talk page, hope it helps since it does specifically mention Vancouver. black ngold29 03:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Steelers vs. Ravens, Nov. 29, 2009

Is it worth noting that the Baltimore Ravens provided their fans with towels of their own colors prior to this game? The source is http://www.baltimoreravens.com/News/Articles/2009/11/Press_Release_-_Ravens_To_Provide_Rally_Towels_Sunday.aspx. Not sure if the story is notable enough, but the Ravens are the Steelers' biggest rivals I believe, so this could be worth a sentence or possibly more. 68.63.64.51 (talk) 08:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget T.J. H's dropped pass at the end of the Jan 2011 AFC Division Divisional game that sealed the Ravens fate. "Baltimore appeared to have Pittsburgh in trouble just prior to the Roethlisberger-to-Brown strike -- had the Ravens gotten a stop there, they would've had the ball back with a chance to win. Instead, in the area where the Ravens were most vulnerable all season long -- defending the deep pass -- Pittsburgh overwhelmed them. T.J. Houshmandzadeh's fourth-down drop on the following drive put the ultimate nail in the coffin." Source: http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2011/01/15/ravens-vs-steelers-ben-roethlisberger-breaks-baltimore-hearts/ , Disrespecting the towel continues to haunt Houshmandzadeh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RJBSpin (talk • contribs) 13:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move after full listing period, and no ongoing debate. (non-admin closure) — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Towel → The Terrible Towel – Wikipedia:Article titles says that articles (i.e. "A", "An", and "The") should not be used in article names. However Wikipedia:Article titles#Article title format allows articles when it's part of the official name, like The New York Times.

Here, the official name for this object is The Terrible Towel. See the official trademark filing: THE TERRIBLE TOWEL. Also, just look at the towel, which clearly shows "The" GrapedApe (talk) 22:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't move was one editor's vote when this was temporarily listed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 October 9. Below my signature, I copy what was written there; it's all formatted in italics so that you can easily tell what's copied from elsewhere. I'm not offering any opinions of my own right now. Nyttend (talk) 23:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the article at Terrible Towel. Reading the article text and referring to WP:THE seems to me to indicate "The" is best not in the title. The running text frequently and appropriately uses "the" in lower case or omits the word completely. Thincat (talk) 09:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - The use in the article is also incorrect, and I would fix it once the article is moved.--GrapedApe (talk) 11:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Oppose You've misread WP:TITLEFORMAT, albeit in a rather subtle way. It's not a matter of whether it's part of an official name, otherwise we wouldn't have Ohio State University and George Washington University, for example. It's a matter of whether it's a proper name. It wouldn't be correct to refer to Old Man and the Sea, even though people would probably know what you're talking about. This may not seem like a very important distinction, but keep in mind that appeals to official names generally aren't worth much in titling discussions.

This fails WP:THE; you wouldn't capitalize "The" in running text, for example. It's helpful to think about how you'd refer to these entities in everyday speech. "I picked up a copy of The New York Times" versus "I own a Terrible Towel." Unless the idea is that there is one platonic ideal of The Terrible Towel, maybe sitting around in Myron Cope's closet, and the pieces of fabric waved about by Steelers fans are just imitations of the real thing. Would you say "I own a The Terrible Towel"? I don't think so, and if you wouldn't, this move shouldn't happen. --BDD (talk) 23:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had to laugh when reading your Platonic comparison; perhaps the Steelers store it in a cave :-) Nyttend (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, you'd say, "I just read an interesting The New York Times article" ...? Dohn joe (talk) 18:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't, and for that reason probably wouldn't oppose a move to New York Times, though I wouldn't necessarily support either. I know in that case the "The" is often capitalized in running text, though I can't say how often. --BDD (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Neither condition of WP:THE are met to warrant a move. There seems to be no significant change of meaning between "The Terrible Towel" and "Terrible Towel". In addition, most reliable sources do not capitalize "the" in every instance. Even the Pittsburgh Steelers' own official web site uses "the Terrible Towel" without "the" capitalized in most instances.[2] (e.g. "the" is not currently capitalized in that web page's phrase "Since then the Terrible Towel has been a staple in the homes of all Steelers fans, and players as well". Nor in the phrase "Among those who have proudly waved the Terrible Towel are former players ... on the 40th Anniversary of the Immaculate Reception") Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:09, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Terrible Curse

OK, do we REALLY need to mention whether or not the Ravens "ended" the Terrible Curse? I highly doubt it. It wasn't ended. Plus, it's not relevant to the article anyways and is either being added without sources or from a blog, which isn't a reliable source. Let's just keep the Ravens Super Bowl run out of the article. It has to be added by some jealous Ravens fan. Jgera5 (talk) 16:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would be leaving out facts, and leaving out facts would be antithetical to the whole point of this website.

To not include what happened after the game on December 2 makes it appear that the Ravens were cursed for the remainder of the 2012 season, in keeping with the entire "Opposition" section and events contained therein. And that's inaccurate. That would not tell the entire story to a reader that doesn't know the history of the NFL. And while I know it must have been inconvenient for Steelers fans to see Baltimore hoist that Lombardi Trophy after desecrating the towel (and mocking their rally song), facts are facts: the Ravens disrespected the Terrible Towel and became World Champions. Does a "cursed" team win the Super Bowl? No. The towel had a long run, but it ended on February 3, 2013.

Every time I see that my contribution is erased, I will correct it. I will correct it in 1 year, I will correct it in 50 years. See you around. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horde 00 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Raiders socks

The Dolphins white hankies are mentioned in the article. Oakland Raiders fans responded by waving black socks. When Cope introduced the towel in his TV commentary, he said the towel was in response to both the hankies and the socks.Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 00:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

There is uncited text throughout the article, particularily in the "Opposition" section
The "Opposition" section seems like an indiscriminate list of events, instead of organised and encyclopedic prose. I think much of this information needs to be summarised more effectively or removed.
The lead is too short and does not address all aspects of the article.

Is anyone willing to fix up this article, or should it go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 01:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Terrible Towel

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. charlotte ^👸♥ 05:40, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is uncited text throughout the article, particularily in the "Opposition" section. The "Opposition" section also seems like an indiscriminate list of events, instead of organised and encyclopedic prose. I think much of this information needs to be summarised more effectively or removed. The lead is too short and does not address all aspects of the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.