Talk:List of stadiums by capacity/Archive 2

Croke Park is NOT all seater

Yet the list states order by seating capacity. Anyone who has visited Croke Park will know that it has a terrace at one end (Hill 16 and the Nally) This holds around 9000 giving a seating capacity of 73,500 not 82,300 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.10.76.112 (talk) 15:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Well for this list as it says seating capacity, then it should be just the seating capacity listed The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see the rest of this page for clarification that the page deals with total capacity, not just seating capacity. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Cowboy Stadium

108,000+ at cowboy stadium for the 2010 nba allstar game. I do believe an update is necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.55.69 (talk) 14:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

• This article is ranked by seating capacity, not total capacity. Therefore the article is correct. Patken4 (talk) 23:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

No, please see the "Temporary seating" section above.Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Motor racing venues

Entries for Goodwood and Nurburgring are very likely either wrong or misleading. The Goodwood Circuit hosts the Revival; the Festival of Speed is held on the drive of nearby Goodwood House and is, I strongly suspect, the figure cited for capacity (and then for the site as a whole, much of which is out of sight of the non-circuit course). The Nurburgring, meanwhile, is effectively two separate circuits, with the bulk of running being on the substantially smaller section. I would be very surprised if the capacity figure cited is accurate for the circuit which is primarily used as the 'Nurburgring'. (This is likely beyond the scope of this article, but the capacity for Istanbul Park is largely theoretical, never having come close to selling out.) 213.105.186.12 (talk) 19:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

They are in there because they have sourced capacities on their respective pages. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Again,see List of horse racing venues by capacity, List of motor racing venues by capacity and List of sports venues by capacity. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

What happens with Maracanà in Brasil

See Estádio do Maracanã, at the final game of the 1950 FIFA World Cup was 199,854 spectators .Please somebody make the correction in the article--Ciberprofe (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Maracana's current seating capacity is 82,238 according to page 54 of this website. In it's current configuration and modern fire safety codes, 199,854 simply cann't be reached. Maracana's record is recorded at List of sporting venues with a highest attendance of 100,000 or more however. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 00:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

We use current capacities. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Benste, 14 June 2010

capacity and rank of Signal Iduna Park (Germany is wrong)

see Signal Iduna Park 81,264[6] Dortmund Germany Germany Borussia Dortmund http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_stadia_by_capacity

http://www.signal-iduna-park.de/?2202A0A0A14 ^ SIGNAL IDUNA PARK: Das Stadion Kurioses 80.552 Gesamtplätze im SIGNAL IDUNA PARK teilen sich auf in Steh- und Sitzplätze. Bei internationalen Spielen bietet das Stadion 65.718 Zuschauern Platz.. Retrieved January 2, 2010.

As the ranking is for overall stadium capacity and not for the one in international games I'd suggest changeging it to 8x.xxx

Benste (talk) 19:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Melbourne Cricket Ground

The largest crowd to ever attend the MCG was the AFL Grand Final played between Collingwood and Carlton in 1970. The attendance was 121,696 As this venue has now been renovated it now only accommodates about 110,000. Jasmine in oz (talk) 05:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

References

missed out highbury (arsenals old ground)

please put it in the non exsitant column please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.130.18 (talk) 10:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Highbury had a capacity of under 40,000 spectators when it closed, which is the limit for inclusion. Patken4 (talk) 23:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

My bad

Yeah, so I agree the tone of my comments was innapropriate. Sorry. In mitigation I was very drunk. The comments have since been removed, so no harm done? Im actually rather pleased that no-one disagreed with my point, just with the admittedly crude way I expressed it. I am an experienced, normally very consciencious editor, but once in a blue moon if editing whilst drunk I go of on one. I hope you can appreciate how frustrating it is to have put hundreds of hours work into an article, then find that no-one else is willing to lift a finger to maintain or improve the page, and that the vast majority of edits actually make it worse. Willy turner (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

No worries. We all have those thoughts sometimes. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Referencing

Seems a bit spotty. I'm wondering if it's necessary to reference each capacity claim, as they are (should be) referenced in the articles themselves. It seems we should either reference all of them or none of them, else fact tags should be added. I'd like to avoid that. I'll add some, but it'd be nice to figure out whether they're needed or not. Throwaway85 (talk) 05:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is essential to reference every capacity. See WP:CITE. Many, or probably most of the stadium articles do not give a reference to a reliable source. No offence, but your suggestion that because many of the stadiums in the list dont have references we should remove all the exisiting references is clearly absurd. Please, please can everyone reading this start adding capacity references from the stadiums or tenants official websites. If this official figure is different to the figure on the stadiums or tenants article then please remember to change and reference these pages too. I have been meaning to do this myself for years, and I apologise for only adding a few dozen so far. I am quite happy to add, say 100 references, however I strongly suspect that no-one else would follow suit. So if I see a handfull of other people adding, say 10 references each, I guarantee that I will add hundreds. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Please note that all changes to capacities that do not include a reference to an official website will from now on be immediatley reverted. Willy turner (talk) 22:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Instead of just the official website, I think we need a tiered way of referencing capacities. First and foremost will be the official website, whether it be specifically for the stadium or from the official club website. Next will be reliable sources that have the capacity listed, but mostly in situations where the official stadium website doesn't list the capacity and a reliable source can be found. Third will be worldstadiums.com or like database of stadiums, where neither of the first two situations can be met. Keep in mind, some stadiums change their capacities but are slow to update their website. As an example, when Michigan Stadium lowered it's capacity from 107,501 to 106,201 back in 2009. It took a couple months to change the capacity on it's website, but a university lawyer did have a quote in a New York Times article saying what the new capacity would be. In this situation, I think it was correct to quote the Times article because it came from an official university source. This would probably be a rare situation. Patken4 (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that it what I meant. The first place to look for any capacity is the official website of the stadium, or any of the teams that play in it. If, and only if, there are no such websites, or if said websites don't mention the capacity, then one should look for the website of a tournament that has recently been staged at the stadium. If there is no such tournament one should look for a reputable english language newspaper that mentions the capacity, (ie. a newspaper that is reputable enough to have a wikipedia article;- see Category:English language newspapers), or one of the major stadium databases, ie worldstadiums.com or fussballtempel.net. (in my experience fussbaltempel is more accurate, but possibly updated less frequently - someone should invite Gunther, the guy who runs fussballtempel, to give us a hand) Personally I wouldnt touch any other online list of stadiums with a shitty stick. If we're going to be uber-accurate/anal about the thing, then when these two websites give conflicting capacities the issue should really be brought here to allow deeper analysis. (Man, how did my life come to this?). Willy turner (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

P.S. other reliable sources are reputable english language media organisations (eg BBC), or see if the website of the relevant sports league or governing association (eg the national Football Association) mentions the capacity, or check the website of a relevant local council.

You will note that tonight I added several references. Can somebody throw me a fricken bone and do likewise? Willy turner (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Seating capacity vs Record attendance vs total capacity

There are several reasons why this article, and others, has traditionally been sorted by the seating capacity and not total capacity.

First, it is generally much easier to find sources for the seating capacity. The websites for most of these stadiums will have the figure for the seating capacity while for the total capacity you may have to go to newspaper articles for the total capacity. About the closest thing to total capacity is highest attendance, but for many stadiums that figure can be broken several times. So for these stadiums, the total capacity may never be known.

Second, as I said above, total capacity is never really known. I suppose the fire marshal could have something saying exactly what the maximum capacity could be, but that would be very difficult to find. And highest attendance isn't too reliable because the highest figure could have come at a time when the stadium had a different configuration or has since become an all-seater. Witness Hampden Park for an illustration. It's highest attendance is almost three times more than it's current seating capacity. Keep in mind, we do have an article listed by highest attendance ever, regardless of the configuration, List of sporting venues with a highest attendance of 100,000 or more. I would not have a problem if that list were expanded to include stadiums with a lower attendance figure.

Third, most articles for these stadiums list the seating capacity in it's infobox, making it easy to find the figure. Some have the highest capacity in the infobox. Some have it in the body of body of the article. Some may have the figure lacking.

Fourth, most governing bodies say events under their jurisdiction must be competed in all-seater venues. UEFA, for instance, won't allow standing sections in matches under their control.

Fifth, seating capacity makes it easier to compare stadiums in different countries. Some countries allow standing areas, some don't. Some countries have different fire codes and definition of attendance (some stadiums use total tickets sold, some stadiums use total number of people in the venue).

Given this, I propose we revert back to sorting this article, and perhaps other, by the current seating capacity. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 12:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

No, Patken is completely wrong on this. The capacities in the list, and all other lists of sports venues that I created, are, and always have been, the total capacities, including sitting and standing. And I was sure that Patken knew this. The statement that, "it is generally much easier to find sources for the seating capacity. The websites for most of these stadiums will have the figure for the seating capacity while for the total capacity you may have to go to newspaper articles for the total capacity", is just plain wrong. And I am particularly confused becuase given his interest and excellent work on stadiums, Patken must know this is wrong. In all the hundreds of official websites I have looked at I have never seen a figure soley for seating capacity; they always also give the total capacity including any standing. Given the fact that the stadium section of at least all profesional sports teams in north america and europe always gives an official figure for total capacity, the statement that,"total capacity is never really known" doesnt make any sense. Please dont even mention historical record attendance figures, because thats just going to confuse people. Record attendances are completley irrelevant to a stadiums current official capacity. What is in a stadiums infobox is irrelevant, because the only relevant capacity figure is that given on a stadiums or tenants official website. Many of the stadiums in our list allow standing at domestic matches; UEFA's rules are irrelevant, this is not a Europe or Soccer-centric list. Restricting the list to seating capacity does not make it easier to compare stadiums in different countries, for the very reason that many stadiums include large standing areas. Your suggestion would inevitably ruin the list, as it would become a hodgepodge of different figures, some only seating capacity, and some total capacity. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this is a geographical thing, but Michigan Stadium's total capacity is over 112,000. On the official website, it is lists the capacity of the stadium at 109,901. The 109,901 figure is the seating capacity, with the other 3,000 people coming from standing areas. Cowboys Stadium's seating capacity is 80,000. It's total capacity is over 110,000 because it has a party deck with a capacity for over 30,000 people. Darrell K Royal – Texas Memorial Stadium has a seating capacity of 100,119. The stadium website then lists it's highest attendance as over 101,000. There are many other examples, mostly in the US. So which figure do we use for say, Cowboys Stadium; 80,000 or 110,000 (for football, it's record attendance is over 105,000)? I say 80,000 because the party pass figures don't count against the NFL tv blackout rules.

As a side note, most of the examples I picked are currently being sorted by the seating capacity. What I don't want to have happen is users coming here and updating entries because a stadium set a new attendance record. This happens often in the US, particularly with college football. If instead of seating capacity, maybe something can be added indicating that attendance records shouldn't be added. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 17:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

And exactly where are you getting the figure of 112,000 for michigan stadium from? Certainly not from its official website, which is the only reputable source on the issue. And exactly where are you getting the idea that it has 3k standing places from? And exactly why are you deliberately provoking me by again mentioning completely irrelevant record attendances? And why are you even bringing up the temporary extended capacity of the Cowboys Stadium when you yourself have just agreed by your recent edit to the lead that we are not including temporary additional capacity. Patken, please tell me that you do understand that in an all-seater stadium the "seating capacity" is the same thing as the "total capacity". ie. when a website of an all-seater US stadium mentions its "seating capacity", this does not imply it has some mysterious secret standing places. Willy turner (talk) 22:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want a source for 112,118, all you need to do look around mgoblue.com. The stadium consistently attracts more people than it's seating capacity. Granted, they have been accused in the past of counting every person in the stadium as part of the attendance (whether they be band members, members of the media, etc), but as far as I know its never been proven. For instance, Michigan averaged almost 109,000 people per game last year, despite having a seating capacity of 106,201. So it's only logical to wonder where did those almost 3,000 extra people come from? Is it that much of a stretch to think they came from standing room areas? As for Cowboys Stadium, it isn't temporary standing areas. The standing areas are available for all events. Whether they sell 30,000 standing room tickets depends on the demand for the tickets. Also, keep in mind WP:CIVIL Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 23:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I think a line of "only official capacity should be used. Record attendances should not be used as the maximum capacity" would solve many of the problems. Agree? Patken4 (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree 100% that the only figure we should quote is the official capacity. Given that the chances of anyone providing a reasonable argument against this position are practically nil, I henceforth declare this to be consensus, until proven otherwise. ie. all edits changing official capacity to record attendance should be immediately reverted. And in case anyone is wondering, Patken and myself are in agreement that temporary seating and "standing room only" places do not count as contributing to official capacity; ie. are irrelevant Willy turner (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Ranking and notes columns

The ranking column has been removed. Firstly someone had reformatted it so that the other columns were no longer properly sortable. Secondly, having the rank column means that every time a capacity is changed the rankings for the entire following section of the table had to altered. This was obviously an incredibly tedious task, and consequently no-one was willing to do it. And remember that since almost all capacities are unreferenced, when references are added (hint hint) and capacities altered there will be a great many changes in the ranking. In other words, having the rank column meant that the ranking almost inevitably became innacurate at some point in the list. In a nutshell having the rank column caused far more problems than it was worth.

The notes section should never have been added. It is a classic example of WP:CRUFT, a list of superflous, unreferenced, random trivia. Furthermore, since the table is sortable by country, the largest stadium in every country is readily apparent, so notes such as "largest stadium in country x" were completley uneccessary. Having the notes column merley encouraged people to add more unessessary factoids, rather than doing what they should have been doing- adding references. The notes section also made the table too wide and ugly,and added unessessary kilobytes to an already very large page. Willy turner (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

FNB stadium

FNB stadium (formerley Soccer City) now also has Rugby matches, can this be changed? Bezuidenhout (talk) 18:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Is it a one-off or will it host rugby on a consistent basis? Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a reference to a reputable source stating that rugby matches will be regularly held; otherwise we cant change it. Willy turner (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Neyland Stadium

Neyland Stadium in Knoxville, capacity 102,455. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5551323. please udate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.145.167 (talk) 17:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Bristol Motor Speedway

This stadium seats 160,000 and should be listed second!69.137.121.17 (talk) 03:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Bristol Motor Speedway is not a stadium. It's a race track. Please see List of sports venues by capacity to see where it is ranked. Patken4 (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Indianapolis Motor Speedway

This one should be listed first 200,000+ capacity.69.137.121.17 (talk) 03:54, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Indianapolis Motor Speedway is not a stadium. It's a race track. Please see List of sports venues by capacity to see where it is ranked. Patken4 (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Stadium - Large usually open structure with tiered seating for spectators. Bristol fits all of the above, and they have shown the ability to host American football there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabazap (talk • contribs) 04:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Look in the design section of the article on stadiums, you'll see that stadiums are primarily used for the various codes of football, athletics/track and field, etc, i.e. sports that can be played in less than than 600 feet of real estate. Bristol Motor Speedway's straghtaways are 650 feet long, and this figure wouldn't include the turns. Currently, it would be extremely difficult for Bristol Motor Speedway to host a football game there since there is a scoreboard and video board right in the middle of the infield. At one time, it was rumored that they were trying to get Tennessee and Va Tech to play a game there, but this was before the installation of the new scoreboard and video board. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 21:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Faurot Field at Memorial Stadium, Columbia Mo

Wikipedia list this stadium a seating 71000. Not on your list. This list is by far complete. There are several college football stadiums that are not listed that seat more than 40,000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.229.212 (talk) 01:20, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Faurot Field's capacity was correct, but it's placement was wrong. I've fixed this. What stadiums are missing from the list? Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 20:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, unless I've gone bline, Faurot Field has gone missing again. With the new addition open in 2014, the official capacity is 72,168. Wschart (talk) 05:04, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Aztec Stadium (Mexico) & Melbourne Cricket Ground (Australia)

why do the numbers vary through different wikipedia pages?, Azteca Stadium can hold 115,000 people and Melbourne Cricket Ground can hold 110,00 people. please fix.124.180.122.89 (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Azteca's own website lists the seating capacity at 104,000. The MCG seating capacity is 100,018 according to this article on the AFL website. What sources do you have about their capacities? Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 20:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Add a first column with number position?

Do we have today a quick way to know which position corresponds to a stadium in the middle of the list? Shall we add a column at the left, with 1, 2, 3, 4 etc ? --Jordiferrer (talk) 23:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Such a thing has happened on this page before but was removed as when many people made additions they couldn't be bothered to go all through the list and change all the numbers (myself included in the past, I admit) so we either had duplicate numbers or numbers that didn't correspond. I think it would just cause too much trouble to add it in again. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 10:20, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I understand your point. However, does someone know other quick methods to be able to know which position corresponds to a stadium in the middle of the list? --Jordiferrer (talk) 00:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Cordoba's stadium remodelation

The old Chateau Carrera's stadium has been renamed to Estadio Mario Alberto Kempes. After remodelation, the capacity increased to 57,000. [[1]] . That should change the list 190.18.21.244 (talk) 19:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Updated. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate Entry (RFK)

I don't know which capacity is corrected, but RFK Stadium in Washington, DC is on this list twice. Waterloosunset27 (talk) 20:32, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Standing Capacity

Most venue lists go by standing capacity, but do not include "temporary seating", I believe this is the most accurate way of listing capacity. Additionally, can above topics that have been removed be deleted, is that allowed? Terrance the James (talk) 23:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The page is listed by official permanent seating capacity. Temporary seating is not included in the figure as this is only used for one-off events, etc and does not represent the true size of the stadium in its intended configuration. Those with high temporary seatings are listed on List of sporting venues with a highest attendance of 100,000 or more. I'm unsure what you mean by your second sentence though. Ravendrop 23:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a difference between standing sections in European stadiums and standing room only sections in North America. Standing sections in Europe are when seats are actually removed and people stand in the areas where seats would normally be. Generally, most major sporting organizations like UEFA and FIFA do not allow standing sections and only allow "all-seater" stadiums. In the US, this is not the case. The standing room only sections are generally behind the seating sections. Cowboys Stadium is unique in that it has the party plazas which can fit over 30,000 people. However, only a few of those 30,000 could see even part of the field. source. For this list, we have used seating capacity, mostly because that is what the NFL uses to determine if a market gets a tv blackout. In addition, the seating capacity is easily verified, including standing room areas is not. There are other stadiums in the NFL that have higher capacities with temporary seating, like University of Phoenix Stadium and Lucas Oil Stadium. With both these, the NFL capacity is used. Jacksonville's situation is somewhat unique in that they cover-up seats for the Jaguars, so it looks like the list includes the covered up seats in it's ranking. Thanks! Patken4 (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Another Duplicate Entry

The first two stadiums listed from Argentina are duplicates. --195.226.147.252 (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

"old capacity" column

As I've seen this issue is much discussed, I have a proposition: how about we add a column with "one-time maximum capacity" or something (simpler!) similar. i.e. that way we can add the fact that, say, Maracana used to have an official capacity of 200,000. Thoughts? BigSteve (talk) 16:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

List of sporting venues with a highest attendance of 100,000 or more has that information. The problem with this is we don't know what the attendance record is for every entry. Unless we have that, it would be very difficult to compare the stadiums. Patken4 (talk) 20:51, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

London 2012 Olympic Stadium?!!

I can't see it on the list! Capacity 80,000... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.114.234 (talk) 22:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hauptstadion Aachen

what about the Hauptstadion in Aachen, Germany? its capacity is 40.000 or 60.000, but enough for sure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.197.7.115 (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Strahov Stadium

This is the largest and its no closed. --Pölkkyposkisolisti (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

http://www.copaargentina.org/es/sedes/101_Estadio-Ciudad-de-Lanus.html

46.619 capacity. is not in list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Botteam (talk • contribs) 21:36, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Definition of Tenant

Extreme apologies for not starting with a "Talk" entry - I have inadvertently and unintentionally created a tiny spot of friction with my learned fellow editor JonRidinger.

Sorting by "Tenants" column shows 18 other stadiums on this table that include the original namesake tenant, such as the applicable Olympic Games for Seoul Olympic Stadium, Montreal's Olympic Stadium, Fisht Olympic Stadium, etc. Thus, I respectfully take at face value JonRidinger's edit comment "precedence seems to indicate", with existing precedence indicating that 1978 Commonwealth Games should be included for Edmonton's Commonwealth Stadium.

Also, as specifically stated in the notes/instructions at the top of the article, an asterisked FC Edmonton is to be included, which "indicates that the team plays only some (few) of its home matches at the venue, and may have another (primary) home ground". The article for FC Edmonton confirms that they play their major national games in Commonwealth Stadium, which is next door to the smaller Clarke Stadium that serves as their primary home ground. I'll check back here for comments. Jmg38 (talk) 01:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with a general rule that special events should not be included as stadium "tenants". Goodness, the Rose Bowl list would go on forever. I think the case of stadia built for such events might be a slightly special case - it's how they got their name after all - but broadly? Confine the list to the folks that are actually there. JohnInDC (talk) 02:53, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Agree with JohnInDC. You also cannot simply insert your own instructions into an article. Stadium and arena articles do not list things like the Olympics, World Cup, Super Bowls, etc. as tenants because they do not fit what a tenant is. A tenant is a team or organization (like a college bowl game) that uses a facility regularly; it's their "home". Tenants usually have some level of control over day-to-day operations of the stadium, scheduling, have offices in the stadium itself, and typically have a say in any physical changes made to the building. Even with stadiums that have names like Olympic Stadium or Commonwealth Stadium doesn't mean the 1976 Olympics or the 1978 Commonwealth Games are/were tenants. The event was simply the main impetus for their construction and no other name was selected. Many other venues for the various special events like the World Cup and Olympics have other names, such as the Los Angeles Coliseum, which only lists USC Trojans Football as its tenant. The Rose Bowl is another example that only lists UCLA football, though could also list the Rose Bowl Game. Further, most large events like the Olympics and Commonwealth Games are held at multiple venues. For instance, the 1978 Commonwealth Games had events at ten different venues in Edmonton, so listing the games as a tenant is inaccurate since they weren't all held there anyway. Jmg38 is correct that many entries do list special events, but that's simply a case of it not being addressed yet. I reverted the addition of the Commonwealth Games because it was a recent edit that I noticed. I did not have the time to go through the entire list and make the additional edits for other entries. For the sake of this list, only the current tenants should be listed. That seems to be the most consistent practice at first glance and makes the most sense. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:55, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

That makes sense - show only the ongoing and asterisk tenants, which I agree would also include the repeating annual tenants, such as Rose Bowl Game. In case someone wants to suggest it, I'll jump ahead now to say that this probably should not include repeatable but "roaming" events like a Super Bowl or Grey Cup or UEFA Cup, which return to some venues on a random semi-regular basis.

Can you complete your efforts by making changes to the other 18 entries, or does this need to wait for further consensus? (or, at least, allow a small number of days to see if anyone has comments?) Should there be an additional note, at top of article, explaining this criteria? Jmg38 (talk) 04:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can see, I removed all instances of special events I could find and left only clubs and organizations. It's the same principle that is used in the articles on each stadium/arena. The point of this list is simply to compare seating capacities. The tenant column is there to supply some additional context, not a detailed list of every major event. Since the capacity listed reflects the current capacity, it makes sense to also supply the current tenant(s), if any. The standard in stadium and arena articles has been to include teams/clubs that play (or played) at the facility. Bowl games have also been included consistently because the organization that puts on the bowl game is often headquartered at the stadium too. The difference from that and an event like the Super Bowl, UEFA tournament, Grey Cup, or even a conference tournament or championship game (which are often contracted to a facility for multiple years) is that the league or conference holding the championship or tournament isn't headquartered at the stadium; they're simply renting it for their event. Beyond the brief time they are holding the event, they have no real say in stadium scheduling or operations that a formal tenant does. If other editors think not including bowl games on this list is preferred, I would have no problem with that. It would only affect a few stadiums. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

some links

Casablanca, Grand Stade de Casablanca, 80000: http://www.yabiladi.com/article-sport-919.html

Tbilisi, Boris Paichadze Stadium, 54549: http://www.fcdinamo.ge/en/club/stadium

Munich, Allianz Arena, 75000: http://www.fcbayern.de/de/news/news/2015/ab-sofort-75-000-fans-bei-bundesliga-heimspielen-genehmigung-130115.php

Columbia (Missouri), Faurot Field, 71168:http://www.columbiamissourian.com/sports/public-gets-sneak-peek-of-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_7d72381e-a2dc-5e75-a181-03e412843b5f.html

More inconsistent stadium capacities

The capacities on the individual stadium Wiki pages differ from what appears on this page:

Riverside Sports Center (Shanghai) ... 40,000 this page vs. 20,000 on stadium page
March 28 Stadium (Benghazi) ... closed in 2013; slated for demolition
Gelora Sriwijaya Stadium (Palembang, Indonesia) ... appears on list twice; 40,000 this page vs. 36,000 on stadium page
Harapan Bangsa Stadium (Banda Aceh, Indonesia) ... 40,000 this page vs. 45,000 on stadium page
Peoples Football Stadium (Karachi) ... 40,000 this page vs. 25,000 on stadium page
Goodison Park (Liverpool) ... 40,158 this page vs. 39,572 on stadium page
Estádio Municipal Paulo Machado de Carvalho (Sao Paulo) ... 40,199 the page vs. 37,730 or 37,952 on stadium page (stadium page has conflicting capacities)
Stadio San Filippo (Messina) ... 40,200 this page vs. 38,722 on stadium page
Ladd Peebles Stadium (Mobile) ... 40,646 this page vs. 33,471 on stadium page
Estadio Olimpico Atahualpa (Quito) ... 41,000 this page vs. 40,948 or 35,742 on stadium page (stadium page has conflicting capacities)
M. M. Roberts Stadium (Hattiesburg) ... 41,000 this page vs. 36,000 on stadium page

There are many more, but that's a good start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C5A0:A800:25A7:9CBD:58C1:9CA8 (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Some stadia counted as UK, some as England?

Why are some English stadiums classes as 'United Kingdom' (Old Trafford, The Emirates), where as some, such as Stamford Bridge and St James' Park, are classed as 'England'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.212.244 (talk) 18:07, 12 March 2016 (UTC)