Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Football venues

< Wikipedia:Categories for deletion

The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, where it is currently listed as unresolved. It may be reviewed again in the future in the light of evolving standards and guidelines for categorization. 21:51, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Round 1

edit

Category:Football venues

edit

Contains one article, might be better within the other categories' Category:Football (soccer) by country -gadfium 04:10, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Are you proposing "Football (soccer) venues in the United States"? If so, "Football (soccer) venues" should probably unify them, but this category would still need to be deleted. -- Beland 04:49, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The article it contains is not a soccer venue, it's a football/baseball stadium (or, was, it has since been demolished). Don't delete it. anthony (see warning) 02:39, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Ah, then this should probably be deleted and reincarnated as "Category:Football (American) venues". (Hmm, Category:Stadiums needs subcategorization.) -- Beland
I've thought about this, and I think the best solution is to keep all football stadiums in the category, regardless of the style. If it gets big enough, then we can break up into American football vs. soccer, but that's not necessary at this point (and doesn't require deletion anyway). anthony (see warning) 19:19, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Round 2

edit

Category:Football venues

edit

To be consistent with the rest of Wikipedia, the category should be renamed to Category:American Football venues, and should not be a subcategory of Category:Stadiums (instead being moved up one level to Category:Sporting venues) kelvSYC 05:58, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Get real. We don't have "venues." We have "football stadiums." Gene Nygaard 22:02, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Venues is a better, more inclusive name. Otherwise you'll have people saing "hmmm. Kyle Field. Not a stadium." or "L.A. Coliseum - not a stadium." Particularly since s many American Football stadia are officially called "Domes" (I know, it sounds absurd, but don't underestimate stupidity). Anyway, that's not the point of the suggestion. They're already listed as venues, the problem is that they are listed as "Football venues", and football can mean a number of different sports, and usually refers to soccer. Grutness|hello?   05:56, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Obviously Americans are a lot smarter than you are, and would have no difficulty figuring out that Soldier Field is a stadium in which soccer and football are both played. Or that "Dome" is a colloquialism for the more formal "domed stadium". Or that if it "walks like a duck" and "quacks like a duck" it probably is a "duck".
But choosing a name Americans would never use when referring to a stadium is just plain bizarre.
Furthermore, while the venue of the Super Bowl changes from year to year, it is always played in some stadium (which of course also changes from year to year, but the point is that there is a slight variation of meaning between the two terms--when talking about the "venue" the name of the city is more likely to be used than the name of the stadium, for one example). Even the Olympics jargon meaning of 'venue' is closer to what I have used here than to what the designers of these categories seem to have in mind.
Most of the articles in Category:English football grounds have either "Park" or "Stadium" in their names, and as is the case with the American stadiums, a total of zero have "Venue" in their names. But even the Brits aren't stupid enough to think that they would not find those that are called a "Meadow" or called a "Lane" in either the category as it is now, or if it were renamed Category:English football stadiums or even the bizarre Category:English football venues, are they?
However, arena football is played in a different kind of venue, and even though that is a variant of American football I do not think that its venues (arenas) should be put in the same category as football stadiums.

Rename to Category:Football stadiums and consider merging in Category:Football (soccer) venues which is similarly misnamed 'venues' rather than 'stadiums' and which has more subcategories named 'grounds' than 'stadiums' and more 'stadiums' than 'venues'. There is little reason to distinguish them by the variety or varieties of football played in them. Definitely keep as a subcategory of Category:Stadiums rather than one level up in Category:Sporting venues. I would also find Category:American football stadiums (including but not limited to both the CFL and NFL) as acceptable if there is any good reason to keep them separate from other football stadiums, with or without those two leagues among the subcategories. Gene Nygaard 10:01, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Brits can be just as stupid, or even more so. That is probably why all those British soccer stadia you names are listed as "grounds", even though they are all stadia. Many of them don't have "stadium" as part of their name - but that's what they are. But again, you're missing the point. KelvSYC's right about the name - at the moment they're listed as football venues, but that makes no mention of what kind of football. Since all the articles relating to the sport call it American football, rename as per the suggestion for consistency. Grutness|hello?   12:20, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename. Considering both Stadium and Venue would be appropriate, and all we're doing here is adding "American", I'm ok with it. And I'm pretty sure nobody is going to be confused if they see venue instead of stadium. -Kbdank71 16:18, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • The "football" part isn't wrong. The "venues" part is wrong. The proposal involves creation of a new category is any case. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. Even having to nominate changing Category:English football grounds to Category:English football venues and all the others for consistency purposes like it is a silly position to put us into. If, as you wrongly claim, "venues" is appropriate for the American stadiums it would every bit as appropriate for the English "grounds". It's no harder to create a correct category now, and to call it Category:American football stadiums.
  • Can't see any problem with that, if it can be shown for a fact that all places where American football is played are stadia (and, given that it's a US subject and "stadiums" is the correct plural in the US, that's fine, too). The important thing is the addition of the worl "American" to the front of the title, not the description of the sports facility at the back. Grutness|hello?   12:04, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • They are all called "stadiums" (stadia is an acceptable plural for some other meanings of stadium but not this one), even if they have some other word in their name. There is a subtle difference in the meaning of "venues"--a stadium might be the "venue" for some particular event, but stadiums in a more general sense are never referred to as venues in the U.S. Gene Nygaard 14:07, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • If the category was Category:National Football League stadiums, it'd be different. But it's not, strictly speaking, the NFL. It's American Football, and where they play. Go ahead, look up American football. That's more than the NFL. I don't know about you, but my high school football team didn't play in any stadium. -Kbdank71 14:41, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • And I'll bet that you've never once heard anybody from your school say that its football team played in a "venue" either; but it wouldn't be surprising to you or anyone else to hear someone talk about its stadium. The one thing they all have in common is the "field"--that's the American terminology. But your school's field will probably never warrant a Wikipedia entry in any case unless you throw in a vanity article to brag about your athletic prowess, so it's probably not much to worry about.
  • It's not just the NFL. Or the CFL for that matter--is it your understanding that it would also be in this category? Pretty much every one of the thousands of college football teams in the United States and Canada play in a "stadium" and a great many of the high school teams do as well. Gene Nygaard 17:18, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Gene, I'm not quite sure why you seem to have a chip on your shoulder about this. You obviously have a strong opinion, and that's great, but I think I'm going to keep my vote as it is. -Kbdank71 15:39, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • BTW, this was already brought up on CfD and was unresolved: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Football venues. At the rate we're going, it'll be back there real soon. -Kbdank71 16:40, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Oh, well, c'est la vie! It's not the worst thing that could happen. Better to be unresolved and leave it as it is, than to botch up an attempted fix. Maybe one of these times, somebody will have enough sense to propose a sensible alternative. Gene Nygaard 17:29, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Category:Football_venues&oldid=17058634"