Talk:Rice–Eccles Stadium

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Completely new build stadium?

It may be that Rice-Eccles Stadium is not a complete new build, and if this is the case then this article should be merged with the Rice Stadium (Utah) articleRockford1963 (talk) 22:04, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Attendance records

I think that the attendance records should be capped at 15 or maybe even 10 games. 17 seems really arbitrary. Thoughts? UteFan16 (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I think 10 is a good number. Right now, that would mean all crowds would be 45.5 k or higher. The top 15 are listed on the Rice–Eccles Stadium webpage. So after the season is over, the University of Utah updates the page, but the wikipedia community updates it immediately with any new records. That's how we ended up with 17. But I think 10 makes more sense. —Ute in DC (talk) 01:23, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Rice–Eccles or Rice-Eccles?

Why does the title use an ndash instead of a hyphen? When two last names are combined it's usually done with a hyphen. Thatotherperson (talk/contribs) 19:16, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

A Google search of "rice eccles" shows almost every site using a hyphen, which I'm pretty sure is the proper English way of spelling it. I'm going to update the article to use hyphens instead of ndashes if no one can provide a reliable source that uses an ndash.
Thatotherperson (talk/contribs) 14:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm guessing if anyone was going to comment on the matter they would have done so by now, so I'll just go ahead and do it. Thatotherperson (talk/contribs) 13:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rice-Eccles Stadium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090817155137/http://utahutes.cstv.com:80/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html to http://utahutes.cstv.com/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090817155137/http://utahutes.cstv.com:80/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html to http://utahutes.cstv.com/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090817155137/http://utahutes.cstv.com:80/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html to http://utahutes.cstv.com/trads/utah-trads-ricestadium.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:59, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 7 July 2018

The following is a closed 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: moved. (non-admin closure) Sawol (talk) 00:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

---

Rice-Eccles Stadium → Rice–Eccles Stadium – dash is appropriate here, not hyphen cherkash (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

The fact the technical move is contested does not mean I oppose it, only that I consider the presence of past discussions on the matter means it should not be decided unilaterally. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 08:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

 Note: This reply was originally in response to the now-deleted technical move request, specifically at this point in the discussion. What follows is now superfluous, given how it developed while I was typing. The TL;DR is that I support the move per MOS:ENDASH and WP:TITLE.

Apologies for the length, but hopefully this rationale is sufficient:

That is also true for hundreds if not thousands of articles on Wikipedia. Nonetheless, Wikipedia's Manual of Style—specifically the section on en-dashing in article titles—endorses the use of en-dashes in constructions (including eponymous ones) like "Rice–Eccles Stadium". That is why an en-dash is used in article titles like Bose–Einstein statistics, blood–brain barrier, Cheyne–Stokes respiration, and so on. All of the aforementioned terms are hyphenated by some and are even recommended to be hyphenated in a few style guides (unfortunately), but not ours. Many of the articles whose titles involve en-dashes, including those with eponymous compounds and proper names, are hyphenated by the article subjects (or their creators); I distinctly recall this to be the case with some universities and stadia, including some whose very logos depict a hyphen. Nonetheless, the way an organization represents its own name is its own business and I think our style guide takes precedence when those two conflict. We value naming convention consistency over official names, so sometimes we punctuate differently from those officiators.

To demonstrate this point, consider the following article titles for stadia (and their official names, which sometimes differ) in North America (compiled from List of stadiums in North America): Lawrence–Dumont Stadium, Bryant–Denny Stadium, Carter–Finley Stadium, Dowdy–Ficklen Stadium, Ladd–Peebles Stadium, Navy–Marine Corps Memorial Stadium, Ross–Ade Stadium, Vaught–Hemingway Stadium, Beard–Eaves–Memorial Coliseum, Carver–Hawkeye Arena, Coughlin–Alumni Stadium, and Atlanta–Fulton County Stadium—a total of 12. I suspect that many reliable sources, including the stadium owners, do not use en-dashes when spelling these names.

For comparison (though I did not exhaustively check every link for redirects), here are article titles from the same list that use hyphens when en-dashes should be used: Mercedes-Benz Stadium (though Mercedes-Benz is consistently hyphenated throughout Wikipedia as a historic exception), Jordan-Hare Stadium (en-dashed throughout article, has MOS:DASH errors, now fixed), Dickey-Stephens Park (had MOS:DASH errors, now fixed), Homestead-Miami Speedway, Williams-Brice Stadium (needs significant style cleanup), and Welsh-Ryan Arena—a total of 6. I think that all of the latter, with the likely and unfortunate exception of Mercedes-Benz Stadium, should also be changed to en-dashes.

Needless to say, I support the proposed move by cherkash. Punctuation is a publication decision and we are the publishers. For the record, I am not at all involved with the article; I just discovered it while visiting the requested technical moves page for a different technical move request (coincidentally also involving en-dashing). Lastly, thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 23:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose move. As seen in the above 2011 discussion, reliable sources use the hyphen. ONR (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

  I do not think that the stated rationale in § Rice–Eccles or Rice-Eccles? (permanent link) above is justified because it is not only grammatically incorrect, since compound eponyms like "Rice–Eccles Stadium" are en-dashed according to numerous style guides, including ours; but also the punctuation used in reliable sources is irrelevant, at least in this situation, because the punctuation in question is a stylistic choice made by the publisher and not one that is crucial to understanding the meaning of the name. If anything, a stronger case can be made that the reliable sources and the stadium owners themselves misunderstand the punctuation of this stadium's name, since it is named after two men whose surnames were Rice and Eccles respectively, not a single person named Rice-Eccles (as is the case for the Lennard-Jones potential, named after John Lennard-Jones). —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 23:54, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support per above rationale. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 23:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhkohh (talk) 12:30, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support. This article title should use an endash, per our MOS. Agree with Nøkkenbuer, other sources usage of the term is irrelevant. — X96lee15 (talk) 18:37, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
• Support per Nøkkenbuer. GiantSnowman 12:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support per my original nomination, and fully agree with the extended argument by Nøkkenbuer (thanks!) cherkash (talk) 21:57, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support per reasons given above, especially that the hyphen makes it seem like one name instead of two different names be recognized. Bsuorangecrush (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

---

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.