Talk:Olympic Stadium (Amsterdam)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. After extended time for discussion, we remain at a standstill, with differing interpretations of an admittedly ambiguous policy being put forward. The better course of action in this case would be to propose an amendment to the language of the policy at issue directly on its policy page, clarifying the issue one way or the other, and then conform these titles to the letter of that policy. BD2412 T 19:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Olympic Stadium (Amsterdam) → Olympic Stadium, Amsterdam
• Olympisch Stadion (Antwerp) → Olympisch Stadion, Antwerp
• Olympic Stadium (Athens) → Olympic Stadium, Athens
• Olympiastadion (Berlin) → Olympiastadion, Berlin
• Olympia (Helsingborg) → Olympia, Helsingborg
• Olympic Stadium (Montreal) → Olympic Stadium, Montreal
• Olympic Stadium (Moscow) → Olympic Stadium, Moscow
• Olympiastadion (Munich) → Olympiastadion, Munich
• Olympic Stadium (Wrocław) → Olympic Stadium, Wrocław

• Support, per nomination. ― Ætoms ^[talk] 12:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per convention. Lembit Staan (talk) 17:43, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per convention. Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Unless I am blind or the "find" function on my browser is not working, where on
  Estadio Olímpico (Caracas), Independence Stadium (Zambia), National Sports Stadium (Zimbabwe) to name a few. As well as National Stadium (Ireland), City Stadium (Green Bay) and Central Park (Wigan), contrasting the three original examples cited by the OP. And Template:Infobox venue, the primary infobox used in stadia articles, is currently in Category:Buildings and structures infobox templates and listed on the {{Buildings and structures infobox templates}} navbox. Since I currently do not see any explicit mention of stadia on WP:NCPLACE, stadia seem to be treated more as buildings or structures instead of strictly a geographic place or name, and the fact that there are all these stadia articles that currently use the parenthetical disambiguation, I must oppose this RM. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  You're right that buildings and structures aren't specifically mentioned in

  WP:NGEO) does consider buildings and objects as "geographical locations".  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 05:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  A notability guideline such as WP:NGEO is not the same as a naming conventions guideline like WP:NCPLACE. "Geographical locations" can also include named natural features such as mountains, lakes, streams, islands -- which generally use the parenthetical disambiguation instead of the comma convention.

  WP:NCDAB is clear that comma-separated disambiguation is for "ambiguous geographic names are often disambiguated by adding the name of a higher-level administrative division". The general consensus on most of the RMs within the past few years seems to be only the topics explicitly mentioned on WP:PLACEDAB should have the comma-separated disambiguation. Even now, there is an open RM of a stadium article proposing to move Toyota Stadium to a parenthetical disambiguation title, not a comma one. Zzyzx11 (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I know it doesn't specifically mention sports stadia but

  WP:PLACEDAB does say: "Generic parenthetical disambiguating tags as used for most Wikipedia articles are used only occasionally for geographic names" which would mean normally we shouldn't use Stadium Name (City) but instead Stadium Name, City. The most recent RM I was involved in agreed with this, although there were only two other editors who put forward their opinions (see here). There will be exceptions as PLACEDAB sets out but I haven't seen any reason why any of these shouldn't follow that convention. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:58, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Again, one of my core arguments is that stadia should be generally treated more as buildings and structures, and not necessary "geographic names" or "place names" per se with the comma tags. Furthermore, an article stub like the

  Churchill Park in Fiji generates little traffic and attention, but a high profile name like "Olympic Stadium" is going to get noticed by someone like me who is probably more aware of how other stadia articles are titled. Even Category:Association football venues by country seems to have significantly more articles that use the parenthetical disambiguation tags than comma tags. Category:Football venues in Russia alone currently as about 40 of them with parenthetical disambiguation, none for comma. Category:Football venues in Romania also has a large amount of parenthetical disambiguation. These points need to be raised before we start inviting a mass page move of stadia articles without fully understanding what the convention most editors are actually using. Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:02, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I would point out that just because a lot of articles do one thing doesn't mean it is the right way to do it. For example, the established consensus for football club season articles and national team results articles (see MOS:Club season) is to use a table listing results yet there are still a large number of these articles which use the footballbox template. Sports stadia, more so than other buildings and structures, meet the criteria to be considered geographic or place names because they are essentially enclosed parks and park names most definitely fall into the category of geographic names and place names. A large number of stadia also take their names from the places they are built. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 11:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Many parts of MOS:Club season, including that section, seems to have not significantly changed since 2007,[1] so it seems more of a sign that it is merely outdated rather than what the actual consensus is being used. Buildings and structures, ranging from skyscrapers to bridges, can also take their names from the places they are built. Stadia and other sports venues can also be treated as enclosed entertainment venues, since sports can be treated as a form of entertainment. Category:Stadiums is a subcategory of Category:Sports venues, which is a subcategory of Category:Entertainment venues, and that is a subcategory Category:Tourist attractions. Category:Parks instead is a direct subcategory of Category:Tourist attractions. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  MOS:Club seasons hasn't been updated because the consensus has been to keep it as is and use that format. After looking through Category:Buildings and structures in the United Kingdom it would appear that the convention is to treat buildings and structures as geographic locations and follow WP:NCPLACE. More articles in the subcategories use Building Name, City to disambiguate than Building Name (City). I could list them as you've done above but I don't see the point. There are some exceptions and the ones I've seen follow the conventions laid out at NCPLACE and none of the articles I've proposed to move fall into those exceptions. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 18:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 12:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. GiantSnowman 12:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Many of those who have voted support for the OP so far have basically used the "

  local consensus of a lone WikiProject should not override the larger consensus or consistency of the wider community. Most of the stadia that I listed above are multi-purpose stadia that hold other sports events besides association football. And even the current open RM I previously mentioned, proposing to move Toyota Stadium to a parenthetical disambiguation title instead of comma one, is a football-specific stadium. And I suspect that many football-specific stadia that would also fall under WP:FOOTBALL's scope like Toyota Stadium (Texas) also have parenthetical disambiguation titles instead of comma ones. Zzyzx11 (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Oppose per Zzyzx11. There is no such convention.
  No such user (talk) 13:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose per Zzyzx11, per No such user and per
  Talk:National Stadium, Warsaw#Requested move 17 Decmeber 2020 and Talk:National Stadium, Karachi#Requested move 17 Decmeber 2020 — have been submitted. I would not oppose consensus to move all such titles to one form or the other. However, since the current standard form for this type of Wikipedia main title headers is "National Stadium (City and/or Country)", partial proposals of this nature run counter to the need for consistency. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose For unification of wikipedia article title style. Traditionally, In these case, All wikipedia article titles have used parenthesis ( ). Why do cause unproductive confusion?Footwiks (talk) 07:05, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. I couldn't find a convention specifically for sports stadiums. The typical disambiguation format outlined in
  WP:PLACEDAB seems appropriate. I can't see why stadiums would be an exception to that guideline. Grk1011 (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment. For buildings and structures, there are no set rules. For Commonwealth countries (except Canada) we generally use comma disambiguation. For North America we use parenthetical disambiguation. For other countries we have no conventions and usually go by whatever has been most commonly used for that country. The type of building is irrelevant and we do not impose consistency in this way. So to state that all Wikipedia building articles use parenthetical disambiguation is not true, but neither is it true to say that comma disambiguation is the standard. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  If that is the case, then we should instead

  retain the existing style on each of these articles and put a moratorium on such moves until there is a set of actual rules. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I would support that. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: OP's nomination relies on a "convention" that does not specifically apply to stadia. There is also longstanding practice to use existing disambiguation. Seany91 (talk) 12:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Zzyzx11, et al. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nom, they are in X places not an instance of. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:13, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. These are things, not places, and the places are appended solely for disambiguation, not as integral parts of the name of the topic. It's therefore more logical and clear to keep disambiguators in parentheses. Station1 (talk) 02:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nom. If the convention doesn't explicitly apply to stadia yet, then it should, with this RM used as evidence. The comma is a better, cleaner disambiguator here. SnowFire (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2020 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.