Talk:Mercedes-Benz Stadium/Archive 1

Archive 1

Naming the stadium

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Yes I moved this again and I know Mercedes fans won't be happy but I think some will agree that have two venue with the same name is borderline ridiculous. AoorwHead (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Oppose move: Moving the page because some people might be confused between two stadiums with similar official names is not a good reason. Red Jay (talk) 18:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Agree this needs to be moved back immediately, but only an admin can move it now, as the user vandalized the original title page, thus preventing most users from reverting the move. This should have been discussed beforehand anyway. It's not unusual for companies to sponsor more than one venue, as AT&T and Rogers Communications have done. - BilCat (talk) 18:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Agree Tell that to Mercedes-Benz. One is "Superdome", the other is "Stadium". The NBA has "American Airlines Arena" and "American Airlines Center". Doesn't confuse me. Roberto221 (talk) 19:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

At my request, an admin has move the page back to the previous title, and move-protected the pages, pending a consensus to move. Hopefully the user will not resort to moving by cut-and-paste. - BilCat (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

No, but I will say the whole point was to raise the issue of ambiguity given how odd it is to have two stadiums bear the name of the same car dealer. It could be a bad case of greed but i'm helpless in the matter. at least the article ought to have a more meaningful name, though.AoorwHead (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Making such moves against consensus twice, especially without discussion, is Being Disruptive to Make a Point, and also falls afoul WP:NOTSOAPBOX. - BilCat (talk) 21:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

More meaningful than the official names? Red Jay (talk) 21:57, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

@BilCat:, who saide anything about a box of soap? This is a talk page, you know. AoorwHead (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you trying to be funny, or do you not no how to read and comprehend guidelines? You moved the article twice, so yes, WP:NOTSOAPBOX applies. - BilCat (talk) 03:11, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

@BilCat: Funny? Yeah, I've got a sense of humour. but as far as I know, a soapbox is something that has to do with politics which I have no part of. You seem to be frustrated by the fact I'm trying to discuss why naming two stadiums in the same league -- and division -- after the same car realer is the right thing to do. AoorwHead (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Well I guess you haven't heard that the NHL is going to have a "Rogers Arena"(Vancouver) and a "Rogers Place"(Edmonton) next season, in same division(Pacific). Same corporation. Not to mention the MLS already has a "Toyota Stadium"(Dallas) and a "Toyota Park"(Chicago) for a few years. It's called marketing... Roberto221 (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 27 November 2015

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: Not moved. Nomination and supporters are all WP:DUCKs per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AS92813. Opposers in agreement to use official name, with one editor citing WP:NC policy. —Bagumba (talk) 10:56, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

---

Mercedes-Benz Stadium → Falcons Stadium – Although the official name is Mercedes-Benz Stadium, I challenge editors and readers alike to find a more meaningful name. I know this is contraversial and it's an uphill battle, but the oddity of naming two stadiums in the same league for one car dealer just might not sit well with the commisioner and the fans. We're not forcing you to discuss this, but your opinion is welcome. AoorwHead (talk) 02:53, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

• Very strong oppose - Wikipedia follows naming conventions to determine the names of articles. We don't make up our own "meaningful" names. If the commissioner of the NFL objects to the name, surely he has ways of doing that, such as contacting the owner of the Falcons directly. I'm sure he has Mr. Blank's phone numbers. The fans can use Facebook, Twitter, or riot in the streets. In addition, the stadium in Atlanta is named Mercedes-Benz Stadium, while the one in New Orleans is named Mercedes-Benz Superdome. "Stadium" and "Superdome" are not the same word, at least in English. - BilCat (talk) 03:20, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. I don't see a single valid reason given by the nominator to support such a move. WP:SOAP seems relevant as noted in the section above. Calidum T|C 04:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

• Very strong oppose I'll continue to assume good faith with this proposed move. Apart from being the official name, plenty of other venues having similar names, hatnotes being in place to direct readers to the other venue, it is hard to believe that if a reader did not know the name of a sporting venue, they would just go to the article on the team. If there was merit in this proposal, then several other venues would be moved as well. Red Jay (talk) 06:55, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support. I really think team owners need to kick the habit of naming their venues after banks and phone companies and go back to naming the stadium after either the team, location or do a fan naming contest. Despite the cost of building a new stadium, It's been done before (Yankee stadium, giants stadium, lambau field, etc.) so why can't it be done now? 08:30, 27 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.186.43 (talk)
• Comment I'd rather they didn't use corporate names, but the official name is the official name. Red Jay (talk). Previous comment was 1st edit by IP. Red Jay (talk) 10:01, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support per above. The only reason for this naming deal is for the money and nothing else, as if the stadium owners didn't have enough already. Since the stadium is still being built, theres time to reconsider and the owners of Mercedes ought to be satisfied with the Superdome deal 72.43.171.43 (talk) 14:04, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support. It's not enough to name one stadium for Mercedes, but two? They've gone too far this time. 2015Shoppr (talk) 15:50, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comment Previous two comments are by new users. Co-incidence? Red Jay (talk) 16:43, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose The precedent for stadium articles has been to have the article at the current name of the facility, corporate sponsor or not. Wikipedia has numerous examples of articles with similar or even the exact same names, so any potential confusion can be resolved with hatnotes or disambiguation. Nothing new here. So far, the "support" comments have all used personal preferences as their reasoning but in no way cited any relevant Wikipedia policy, guideline, or precedent in regards to naming articles. It's irrelevant whether you like corporate naming or not. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. Suggested name fails WP:NC.-- Dewritech (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support. The opinions from the IPs can be discounted and chances are the move might not be done, but I strongly oppose the decision to sell the naming rights to a sponsor that already has its name on another stadium. The NHL case that was cited above shows that the companies that sponsor multiple venues in the same league are wasting money on treating these venues as advertising billboards when they could be spending it on better service to their customers. IEdior (talk) 18:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
  • All that has nothing whatsoever to do with Wikipedia's naming policies and conventions. The stadium name is what it is, and it doesn't matter if we like the name or not. The main accepted reason for changing an article's title to a name other than its official one is that there is another name that is more common, and that doesn't generally include nicknames, such as "The Ted" for Turner Field. In ths situation, a strong case could probably be made for renaming the Mercedes-Benz Superdome article to The Superdome, as that name has been in popular use for over 40 years. - BilCat (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comments - I just want to make it clear to all the new and recent users coming here to participate in the discussion that this is not a forum for fans to express their opposition to the stadium's name, nor will the actual stadium be renamed as a result. This discussion is only about the title of this Wikipedia article, and none of the support comments so far have actually cited Wikipedia policies or guidelines in support of renaming the article. - BilCat (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

  @BilCat:, you seem to be frustrated that this discussion is taking place. If this is called a talk page why are you upset that we're discussing whether this was necessary or not? 100.1.12.177 (talk) 20:47, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment the new users are only commenting on the official name, nothing to do with the article; the talk page is to talk about the article, not the subject. Red Jay (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment: I second (well, third) what BilCat and Red Jay have said. Whether or not editors like or dislike corporate naming of stadiums is completely irrelevant to this discussion and inappropriate for any article talk page, including this one. Article talk pages aren't ESPN comment sections or online sports forums, they're for discussing any issues with the article itself (i.e. questions on its sources, whether it's written in an appropriate tone, suggestions for improvement, etc.). Please make sure to read WP:TALK#USE. --JonRidinger (talk) 01:24, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

it's clear that not everyone is going to look other pages and comment in the issue at hand. The issue being discussed is why this naming deal was necessary to begin with. I advise those who regularly edit these pages to assume good faith with new users who comment here and voice their support or opposition 97.47.67.118 (talk) 07:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

This talk page is the wrong place to discuss "why this naming deal was necessary to begin with", as it is beyond the scope of Wikipedia talk pages. Talk pages are not forums for discussing the subject of the article, but for improving the article itself, such as adding information to the article, or discussing the appropriate name of the article, not the stadium itself. If new users come here thinking they are discussing "why this naming deal was necessary to begin with", they are in the wrong website to do that, and should be informed of that mistake and asked not to comment on that topic. - BilCat (talk) 08:14, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

If BilCat feels this is the wrong page for a content dispute maybe we should move this discussion somewhere else? 97.47.65.51 (talk) 09:01, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

If you're wanting to discuss "why this naming deal was necessary to begin with", try Facebook, or a sports site. - BilCat (talk) 09:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

• Very strong oppose It's the official name of the stadium. These corporations are paying millions per year to have their name splashed on a stadiums/arenas, so they can call them whatever they like. The Falcons aren't the only tenant of the stadium, Atlanta United FC(MLS) will be playing there before the Falcons so you can't call it Falcons Stadium. In case you haven't noticed, the "official" web site and logo say "Mercedes-Benz Stadium". Roberto221 (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually, AoorwHead did notice, to the point of uploading a doctored version of a copyrighted image over the original file with his preferred name! I had to download the old version and re-upload it. SOAP, and probably WP:NOTHERE, seem quite applicable to the user. - BilCat (talk) 20:53, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support move per ambiguity reasons. While this might not convince the stadium owners to change their mind, I agree it's in the best interest of the writers to come up with a better title for this article noting the official name is Mercedes Stadium. I've read opposers' comments and all they've been stressing is that people can't use this talk page for discussion about the stadium itself but what goes on the page and whatnot. Such an opinion doesn't really make sense. HarrySnake (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
• Very strong oppose Since when do we not name and article after the official name of the subject? Crash Underride 04:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
• support. Mecerdes already has the naming right to the SuperDome. If anything this stadium should really be called the New Georgia Dome. 47.21.2.108 (talk) 04:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Mercedes also has the naming rights to this stadium so opinion on an official name is meaningless. Crash Underride 04:28, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

• Strong support per above. Also there's nothing wrong with using the talk page to discuss what the correct title should be. 24.89.147.146 (talk) 04:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Correct title? The official name is Mercedes-Benz Stadium. Therefore there's no need to discuss the "correct" title. Crash Underride 04:28, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment "New Georgia Dome" would fail Wikipedia's policy on article titles since the only third-party reliable source that ever refers to the building as the "new Georgia Dome" (lower case "n") is a news article from over 2 years ago (and within that article, the renderings call it "new Atlanta stadium"). We do, however, have reliable sources referring to it by its new name of Mercedes-Benz Stadium, along with the primary sources of the stadium and team websites. That means the article is correctly titled. Has nothing to do with whether or not editors like the name or support corporate naming, the same as what happened for AT&T Stadium. --JonRidinger (talk) 05:45, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comment, Jon, I appreciate your hard work, but I'm shocked that people commenting on this and support a move don't understand that the stadiums name is Mercedes-Benz Stadium. Naming this article something else would be the equivalent of changing Rob Gronkowski to Gronk. Ugh, some people. lol Crash Underride 05:55, 29 November 2015 (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.

Stadium name

As of Tuesday, December 8, 2015, the new Atlanta stadium is both officially and commonly being called "Mercedes-Benz Stadium" (see Atlanta Business Chronicle). Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)