Talk:Multi-purpose stadium

It is requested that an architectural diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Multi-purpose stadium article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Baseball 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 articles
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 articles

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Dhtwiki, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on July 24–26, 2024.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

RFK Startup

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]

No because it was the stadium that led the "revolution" of multi-purpose stadiums. {..::M@®©™ ::..} (talk) 07:01, 27 June 2010 (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]

Metrodome, Dolphin Stadium, (now SunLife Stadium, but i never liked calling the stadium by its naming rights with the exception of Pro Player Park/Stadium.) are only convertable stadiums. Candlestick Park and Angel Stadium really can't be mensioned either, since they arent cirucular like the traditional cookie cutter and because they were converted back or to a one sport stadium Mc134 (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2010 (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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mc134 (talk • contribs) 04:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I think the pictures of Dolphin Stadium and the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum should be replaced with pictures of a more traditional multi-purpose stadium, such as a cookie cutter. Those two pictures are the worst examples because Dolphin Stadium is just a football stadium that converts to a baseball stadium and the field layout of the Oakland Coliseum is different than the layout of most cookie-cutter multi-purpose stadiums. {..::M@®©™ ::..} (talk) 07:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skim Flickr and Commons for better free images, then. If the photos we have are poor examples, then let's replace them... SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove American Bias

This seems to completely ignore the multipurpose stadia outside North America. There are a significant number of multipurpose stadia that play neither American Football or Baseball. For example Eden Park in Auckland is a Cricket and Rugby venue, the Melbourne Cricket Ground is used (primarily) for Cricket and Australian Rules Football, but has been used as the main stadium for an Olympics, the Antigua Recreational Ground is the premier ground in Antigua for both Football and Cricket. A number of large stadia in France are also used for Football (Soccer) and Rugby.

The issues that these stadia face are similar to the North American ones, although the layout required is different for the different sports, and sports like Cricket have very specialist demands on the turf.

Mykuhl (talk) 02:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you know something about this. You should get your sources in line and add something about it! SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Multi-purpose 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20120722131620/http://www.thephins.com/2010/01/08/plans-unveiled-for-dolphin-stadium-renovation/ to http://www.thephins.com/2010/01/08/plans-unveiled-for-dolphin-stadium-renovation/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 02:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]