Talk:Karađorđe Stadium

Name

Can you write some references about the new name? --Göran Smith 18:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this one ok: http://www.danas.co.yu/20070404/hronika2.html PANONIAN 20:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Including Vojvodina politics ???

Is including an autonomous province as a legitimate location politics ? There are million of examples where this formulation is being used in Vojvodina and Serbia related articles and all over wikipedia. Please refrain from problematic comments "always was and will be".Adrian (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. Vojvodina is an legal political entity within Serbia and therefore mention that something is located in Vojvodina is completely legal as well. If User:Nightwolf87 supports some centralist political parties, this is no place where such political opinions should be expressed. Furthermore, few years ago this stadium was known as "Stadium of Vojvodina" and it is still stadium where football club Vojvodina plays, so it is unbelievable that someone can say that this is not related to the autonomous province of Vojvodina. PANONIAN 20:13, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

User: PANONIA He confuse something. No matter which football club is here described, it stands only the city and the country, not the district, provinz ect. Vojvodina is a Serbian province and we have for example in Italy also a lot of provinces ect. In the infobox for the Italian club(especially the stadium infobox) description is only the city and the country, not the provinc, district ect. and thats rightly so. More information are not necessary and would be superfluous in THIS CASE. This has nothing to do with politics as User:Panonia and User;Adrian said. In addition, the first name of the stadium was Karadjordje stadium. The communists changed the name in Vojvodina. Only when the Communists as disappeared, the fans / people want the old name back ad got him.User:PANONIA said that User:Nightwolf87 support some political parties. I could say the same abot user:Panonia rather support seperatist political parties. Maybe?He insists that the name of the province of Vojvodina is written there. Why that bothers him so much?? I dont know. User: Adrian sad, there are million of examples where this formulation is being used in Vojvodina. Likewise, there are million of examples where this formulation is not used. This is a Sport description and Novi Sad and Serbia is right and enough(see my example with Italy). For Serbia other rules? I dont think so. The only correct here is: Novi Sad is the City and Serbia the country.Thanks!--Nado158 (talk) 02:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

There are examples like this in football too. Ex: FC Barcelona, FC Bayern Munich (actually, Bayern doesn`t even mention Germany),FC Augsburg,Borussia Mönchengladbach,FC Baden,FC Luzern, FK Kozara Gradiška, FK Modriča, Bologna F.C. 1909 - Bologna doesn`t even mention that it is in Italy aslo Cagliari Calcio, Calcio Catania,A.C. Cesena,ACF Fiorentina, Genoa C.F.C., U.S. Lecce, A.C. Milan, Novara Calcio, Parma F.C., Udinese Calcio, Juventus F.C., Modena F.C., Calcio Padova. I guess this examples are enought. Please refrain from personal "analysis" or comments on any user on wikipedia, please read WP:NPOV and WP:NPA, comment on content, not on the contributor. There is no special rule for Serbia and Vojvodina but in countries that have autonomous areas/provinces this province is mentioned - like the examples I provided. Adrian (talk) 08:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Adrian wrote: "Please refrain from problematic comments "always was and will be". I ask, why is this problematic FOR HIM??? Hmmmm???What he want? What he want to read? Let us stay with the theme. Vojvodina is a good club with a lot of Serbian fans,but also Hungarian Fans and other citizens of Serbia, and that is normal and good.They all support togheter the club and the country and this is normal u rightly so. They all go togheter to the Karadjordje Stadium in Novi Sad, Serbia ;)--Nado158 (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

It is a tendentious statement that has no encyclopedic purpose, except to state that Vojvodina is a part of Serbia and always will be? It is purely his personal opinion and nothing else. Adrian (talk) 08:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Adrian, there are also examples where it is not mentioned. Ex:Real Madrid, Espanyol Barcelona(actually, Espayol doesn `t even mention Catalonia), Hamurger SV, but you can German clubs compare here, because they come from German states, and not provinces. This is of much greater importance. FC Baden? You give me a Swiss third division? Also mention here the Canton, which is a Swiss state not a province. I give you the top Swiss clubs Grasshoppers Zurich and FC Basel (there is even no mention of Canton). In FK Kozara and FK Modriča the Republika Srpska is mentioned. One of two entities in Bosnian and Herzegovina, not a province.Thats not comparable.In Italy: And again, it will be mentioned here that adminastriven regions and not really any single Italian provinces. See Lazio Roma, AS Roma, Inter Milan, SCC Napoli, AC. Siena, ect.Even with PSV Eindhoven, Ajax Amsterdam, Paris SG, Olypiqu Marseille nothing. Especially not in in the stadium infobox. I guess this examples are enought.--Nado158 (talk) 14:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course that there are and without mentioning the province, but as you can see, almost every club from Italy does ( Italy has autonomous provinces - most comparable with Serbia, also France does not have autonomous regions, German states are equivalent with autonomous provinces), and others. That is more than enought to include Vojvodina here according to this examples. I have listed exampes so you can see there is nothing special here not that there isn`t others that do not use this formualation. This is important especially because it is the home stadion of FK Vojvodina from Novi Sad, a capital of this province. If it wasn`t the capital we are talking here, maybe we could omit this info, but in this case there is no encyclopedic reason not to mention Vojvodina. As you see, in Spain and Italy ( in Italy most of them) mention the autonomous region/province when the club is based in the capital of that province. We don`t need to add Vojvodina as a location to every club from Vojvodina, but this one from the capital it should contain this info.Adrian (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Nado158, I do not know from where you are, but no matter what you think, there are no separatist parties in Vojvodina (you can check that very easy by yourself if you just read political programs of each political party here). Vojvodina is not somebody's colony but a land of a free people and it is not part of Serbia because of presence of Serbian tanks (like Kosovo was), but because majority of citizens of Vojvodina wants to live within Serbia. Autonomy of Vojvodina is also supported by majority of the citizens of Vojvodina, and attitude that deny Vojvodina is, therefore, insulting for most citizens of Vojvodina. I suggest that you do not listen a populist self-proclaimed "saviors of the people", who after proclaimed independence of Kosovo are lacking external and internal "enemies" so they telling to their voters that Vojvodina is their enemy and that if they vote for them they will "save them from that enemy". The populist politics is always based on the "defense from an invented enemy". Anyway, speaking about examples, we saw that names of the provinces are somewhere used and somewhere not, so we cannot use these examples here. The important argument here is that name of the football club and former name of the stadium are directly connected to name of the autonomous province and that name of the province should be mentioned due to that reason. Even if we would not have that name connection, I do not see any valid argument why we should not mention that stadium is also located in Vojvodina. PANONIAN 17:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

@Adrian.Why do they ignore the facts? I see it, but in Italy the provinces not mentioned the regions mentioned(PROVINCES from Italy not).The German federal states are not = provinces. What is with Inter Milan, Lazio Rom, AS.Rom, SCC Neapel???What is with Ajax Amsterdam, PSV Eindhoven, Paris SG, the big Swiss clubs??? Why bring up over 70% of football clubs is not their province, especially in the Box? Espanyol Barcelona is from KATALONIA, its only mentionetd Espanol. Why do you see the one truth and not the other much smaller truth lift you out? No one has problem with Vojvodina, wie all know that is a province in north Serbia, but this is a football site. It is unnecessary. If Milan plays, all say the club from Italy and not from the Lombardy.--Nado158 (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

@PANNONIA..I also dont know where you come from, but you can not say that any Nightwolf87 supportet parties. I also just did bring contra argumment.I never said that it is so. I know very well that there is no seperatistic movements and parties. I heard it drom many Serbs, also Hungarians, some Slovaks and some Croats as well. They all live together happy without proplems. No one said that Vojvodina is a colony. You feel attacked for nothing.BUT,BUT..how can you say that Vojvodina is not a part of Serbia? It is a part of Serbia. This is an insult to the absolute majority in Serbia including Vojvodina.Know i understand youuuuu. This is your personal opinion, the wrong has nothing to do here. In addition, we are talking about Vojvodina, not Kosovo. That's not even comparable. No one denies Vojvodina, we all know that she is a province in Serbia. You go to far away from the topic. True, he is the name of club, and says it enough or not? Why must now Vojvodina are everywhere. At other clubs does also not in the info box.Best wishes--Nado158 (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

And this is exactly what I spoke about: where I said that "Vojvodina is not a part of Serbia"? It is exactly the effect of acting of populist parties that I spoke about - some people are so misguided in their knowledge about Vojvodina that if somebody said that he is from Vojvodina he is instantly accused for separatism. Obviously, it is you who denying that Vojvodina exists by removal of its name from the infobox (and I do not see that anybody removed name Serbia from that infobox). Vojvodina exists and, therefore, there is no single valid reason for it not to be mentioned in the infobox, especially in relation to stadium and club that are (or were) named after it. Also, Vojvodina is not just some unimportant province, but an autonomous entity with its own parliament, government and prime minister. Such entity is notable enough to be mentioned. As for articles about other clubs and stadiums, Vojvodina should be mentioned there as well, although I do not have now enough free time to edit these articles, and there are certainly other more important things that should be done. PANONIAN 21:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

@Pannonia..it may be a miss understanding. I thought you said thats Vojvodina is not a part of Serbia.You said: "Vojvodina is not somebody's colony but a land of a free people and it is not part of Serbia ...Listen, may be you misguided but, i want speak about sports not policy, but why you wrote that?Listen, nobody have problems with Vojvodina, you imagin something. Nobody deny Vojvodina, and nobody said thast a unimportent province.You imagin man. I mean the foreign clubs not the Serbian clubs do not mentioned there provinces. How many more times. The foreign clubs not mentioned her provinces. Vojvodina is still in the name of club and in the description. I think that's enough.--Nado158 (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

As I tried to explain, it is a club from the capital of Vojvodina, there is no encyclopedic reason not to include Vojvodina as a location - because after all, it is a location of this club. I don`t understand ( it has no sense ), just because the name of the club is Vojvodina we should exclude the name of the province? By the same reasoning, should we erase locations such as Belgrade from the OFK Beograd lead? Barcelona from FC Barcelona? Roma from A.S. Roma? Porto from F.C. Porto ( Porto is listed the region it is, and it is not even an autonomous province)? It is in the club`s name already? Foreign clubs do mention their provinces, I have added examples in my previous post,many clubs from Italy and Spain mention the province location, in many examples even without mentioning the state. In Italy, in Serie A there are 20 teams, and only 5 or 6 of them don`t mention the province, I believe that is more than a convincing example. Adrian (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I added examples in my previous post, that many important clubs in Europa dont mention the province. Italy clubs mention the region, not the provinces, thats fact. You can t remove the city from a clubs name(like FC Barcelon and Vojvodina Novi Sad). Thats names. What is with the other clubs, Ajax ect. No provinces. I think we both have somewhere right.Ok, Novi Sad, Vojvodina, Serbia in the stadium description, but please not in a stadium infobox. No other club in Europe does that. It is already in the description from where is Novi Sad. We remove Vojvodina only from the stadium infobox. Can we agree on that? --Nado158 (talk) 15:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Nado158, please do not pull parts of my sentences out of context. If you do not speak English well enough to understand meaning of some sentences, you should use some online translate engines or dictionaries. Examples of foreign clubs are irrelevant. There is no an official Wiki rule that says that name of the province should not be mentioned in the infobox and there is no valid reason for name of the province to be excluded. Infobox with more info is better and more useful to readers. Wikipedia is not a place for censorship. PANONIAN 18:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Panonia...Ok no problem, but exist an official Wiki rule that says that name of the province must be mentioned in the infobox? Your reason is no valid too. The description explains everything? Where is the problem?--Nado158 (talk) 19:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Karađorđe 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/20120702073846/http://www.fkvojvodina.rs/stadion/stadion-detaljno/ to http://www.fkvojvodina.rs/stadion/stadion-detaljno/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131011081053/http://www.dnevnik.rs/sport/mondo-pao-dogovor-vosa-gradi-stadion to http://www.dnevnik.rs/sport/mondo-pao-dogovor-vosa-gradi-stadion

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 06:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)