Talk:Multi-purpose stadium: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:47, 25 February 2010

Baseball Start‑class Low‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball 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.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Event Venues (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Event Venues, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Event VenuesWikipedia:WikiProject Event VenuesTemplate:WikiProject Event VenuesEvent Venues

It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.

RFK Stadium

Is it my imagination, or is RFK Stadium too old to be a cookie-cutter? Just asking. --Carn29 13:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seating chart

A diagram showing the typical seating chart/field layout would be useful to illustrate the deficiency of these stadiums in providing good views of various sports, as mentioned in the article. Pimlottc 07:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFK

RFK is actually a pretty poor example of a cookie cutter stadium. 1). It did not have a fixed-radius upper deck like the others, resulting in a unique roof line. 2). its upper deck utilized the same technology as the renovated Yankee Stadium, with cables in the concrete to allow it to cantilever a remarkable distance over the lower deck. 3). It opened with, and always had, a grass field. 4).

Riverfront, The Vet and Three Rivers are the prototypical cookie cutters. Also, the new retro parks could easily be considered a new version of the cookie cutters, since they all use the same fundamental elements. Laotzu41 04:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research and citations

This article lumps together a number of different buildings with the intent of disparaging the design or purpose. Even the title violates NPOV. The article has been tagged for references since July. Group29 18:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metrodome not a cookie cutter

The Metrodome is not one of the "ashtray" parks disparaged by this article. It is a football stadium that converts into a baseball stadium, the complete opposite of Candlestick Park or Anaheim Stadium. It is a domed stadium. The only category it fits into would be multi-purpose stadiums, which should not be covered by this original research article . Group29 (talk) 14:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cfd

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 17:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--D. Monack | talk 00:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Multi-purpose stadiums. That's the least-POV common term for these monstrosities.--Mike Selinker (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Copied from the category discussion. Category renamed to Category:Multi-purpose stadiums Group29 (talk) 14:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Multi-purpose stadiums

I believe Multi-purpose stadiums to be a legitimate category denoting stadiums that can be used for American football and baseball. It could also be similar or synonymous with Multi-purpose arenas to denote those that can be used for hockey and basketball. As a side note, all stadiums and arenas host concerts, tractor pulls, religious revivals or trade shows, so it could be argued that ALL stadiums could fall into the Multi-purpose bucket. Group29 (talk) 14:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Multi-Use may be a better use for situations like that. Good point though.

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 ==About Multi-purpose stadiums==
 I believe Multi-purpose stadiums to be a legitimate category denoting stadiums that can be used for American football and baseball. It could also be similar or synonymous with Multi-purpose arenas to denote those that can be used for hockey and basketball. As a side note, all stadiums and arenas host concerts, tractor pulls, religious revivals or trade shows, so it could be argued that ALL stadiums could fall into the Multi-purpose bucket. [[User:Group29|Group29]] ([[User talk:Group29|talk]]) 14:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
+::I believe Multi-Use may be a better use for situations like that. Good point though.