Jump to content

Talk:Mercedes-Benz Stadium

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stadium name

[edit]

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)[reply]

Protection

[edit]

Can we please just leave it as it's set now so we don't have to worry about a certain user using IP's or newly created accounts to vandalize the article. It's getting really aggravating with them doing that just to have the protection changed back and forth. I don't mean keep it permanently, just until the stadium's completed and unveiled so they can see that the name is Mercedes-Benz Stadium and shut up about it. CrashUnderride 22:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Admins don't like protecting talk pages for long periods, as in general they need to be open to IP comments. That said, it might be good to try 10 days or 2 weeks this time, instead of just one week. - BilCat (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
YesY—Bagumba (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea BilCat, but I actually meant the whole stinkin' article. lol CrashUnderride 22:53, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bagumba. Crash, the article hasn't actually any vandalism for over a week, as the vandal has been focused on the talk page. - BilCat (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Hmmm, could we not protect certain sections so no one can edit them? CrashUnderride 23:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Protection can only be applied to an entire page - sections cannot be protected independently. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, here's an idea, let's get someone to make it possible. lol CrashUnderride 23:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then you will need to file a feature request at phab:. They're likely to close it as "won't fix" though, since sections in Wikipedia pages are somewhat arbitrary, being determined by the position of the headings, which are not fixed - they may easily be added, amended, repositioned and removed. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:40, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mind telling me how? I can't figure it out. lol CrashUnderride 23:50, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the box headed "Welcome" there should be a link (How to report a bug?); otherwise, see WP:PHAB. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Updated construction cost to $1.6

[edit]

Updated construction costs to $1.6 and cited source. Skiendog (talk) 05:01, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Current picture

[edit]

The article needs to be updated with a picture of the compete stadium. Dlambe3 (talk) 00:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The stadium is scheduled to open on Aug 26 (next week US time), so hopefully someone attending the game will post some free photos after that. - BilCat (talk) 01:17, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Ytoyoda has added a photo of the nearly completed stadium. Thanks, YT! - BilCat (talk) 06:36, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Current State of the Stadium

[edit]

The whole article seems to be stuck in the past, talking about the development of the stadium. Should we encourage a move to update to reflect the current state of the stadium - such as the opening games for the Falcons, Atlanta United, musical events, etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisu87 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Garth Brooks concert sound issues

[edit]

Should there be a section about the sound problems and customers wanting refunds for this event? http://music.blog.ajc.com/2017/10/13/garth-brooks-fans-sad-and-disappointed-about-sound-issues-at-mercedes-benz-stadium/BillVol (talk) 12:24, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mercedes-Benz 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:

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) 00:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retractable roof(s)

[edit]

The article currently says: "...is one of few American football stadiums with retractable roofs..."

Some readers will be interested in the general topic of stadiums with retractable roofs, and will not be particularly interested in this specific stadium. We should really have an article on stadiums with retractable roofs. Geo Swan (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:21, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kanye reportedly taking up residence

[edit]

@Sixone63: The rationale you gave for inclusion is: added information, this is backed up by multiple photos on kanyes instagram, multiple sources including tmz, and multiple photographic proof on featured artists instagram, this is 100% verifiable with basic research, why has this been deleted when its verifiable and correct? admin please do research before blindly deleting stuff blindly for no reason, thanks. Here's my counterargument to these points:

  • this is backed up by multiple photos on kanyes instagram ... multiple photographic proof on featured artists instagram -- These sources are primary and effectively self-published. There's circumstances where it's appropriate to use such sources, but I don't think this is one.
  • multiple sources including tmz -- See WP:TMZ. This seems to be gossip and TMZ does not name their source. I would hardly consider TMZ a bastion of reliable reporting.
  • this is 100% verifiable with basic research -- So come up with one of these other "multiple sources" that passes WP:RS.
  • why has this been deleted when its verifiable and correct? -- Even if we assume it is "verifiable and correct," Wikipedia is not a newspaper and we don't need to report everything that happens in this stadium. Recent events may not be historically significant and we shouldn't rush to include every artist's interaction with the stadium before we know its historical significance.

--Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sixone63: at this point youre undoing just to be annoying -- Chill, and go read WP:AGF. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- chill and go read? mate youre deleting information just because you deem it to not be valuable, do you not see an issue with this? if you spend 5 minutes researching you can see this topic clearly is verifiable, perhaps we need a second opinion because most readers and editors all seem to come to the same conclusion that this is a worthy inclusion.

and even if you took issue with some of the content, why delete the whole section? just silly theres multiple photos of them setting up bedding with artists etc, but if you think first hand photos aren't enough evidence thats fine, but that doesnt justify deleting the whole section, its undeniable kanye is staying there right now recording his album, which is a worthy mention at the least.

one of the worlds most famous artists has taken up temporary residence in this stadium to record his studio album and you dont think thats at least worth a mention....? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixone63 (talk • contribs)

I pointed you at WP:AGF specifically due to your comment that I am reverting "just to be annoying." You're assuming bad faith on my part, and we have a policy against that.
you can see this topic clearly is verifiable -- Verifiability is only one aspect of my objection to including this comment. I doubt there is any lasting significance, a point you haven't addressed yet. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"I doubt there is any lasting significance, a point you haven't addressed yet." Kanye west is one of the worlds most famous and well known artists, I believe him being holed up in a stadium to record an album is worth a brief mention as its a part of history of the stadium and the artist. it deserves a brief mention.

":I pointed you at WP:AGF specifically due to your comment that I am reverting "just to be annoying." You're assuming bad faith on my part, and we have a policy against that.

you can see this topic clearly is verifiable -- Verifiability is only one aspect of my objection to including this comment. I doubt there is any lasting significance, a point you haven't addressed yet. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)"[reply]

cant assume good faith in this situation with the way youre acting, even if you dont believe the full content should be included, its insane to deny the significance of this and say it doesnt deserve a single sentence or two because its apart of the stadiums history.


also, on "lasting significance", the places where albums were recorded are frequently written into wiki posts, why is this any different? if anything this is more worthy of an inclusion because of the unique circumstances.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixone63 (talk • contribs)

Good grief, it's frustrating trying to discuss with you when you're copying and pasting my comments around without quoting them, and not signing your posts. Please read through WP:TALK. Indent when replying to keep the thread structure apparent and use templates like {{tq}} to quote others.
cant assume good faith in this situation with the way youre acting -- What? This is a run-of-the-mill content dispute. It happens all the time, and both sides think they're right. If you aren't willing to assume that I am acting in good faith, then why are you still talking to me? If you can't AGF then discussion is pointless and we may as well stop here.
even if you dont believe the full content should be included, its insane to deny the significance of this and say it doesnt deserve a single sentence or two because its apart of the stadiums history -- I'm not saying it's not significant, I'm saying it's too soon to tell if it's significant, and I still think the sourcing is inadequate. It may very well be significant, and if it is then coverage in more reliable sources will indicate this. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:49, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is it too soon to tell? Who is the judge of that? He is recording his new album at the stadium, that is significant enough, perhaps do some research into Kanye West and how well known he is if you're unaware. Theres a ton of media coverage, previous editors had just linked tmz. Sixone63 (talk) 05:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is it too soon to tell? -- Good question. I'd suggest that within two days is probably way too soon for this kind of content.
Theres a ton of media coverage, previous editors had just linked tmz -- So we should be able to come up with some sources that substantiate this better. The NME source just references TMZ's article, so I don't think that really qualifies as it's re-reporting, a layer removed. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 05:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest that within two days is probably way too soon for this kind of content. So you think its significant but too soon to say if its significant? kinda a paradox

regarding tmz, whilst their validity can be questionable at times, in this matter, when its also backed up by firsthand evidence (i.e photos, videos), i believe theyre a valid source.

regardless, one of the worlds most well known artists is recording an album there, this is worthy of a mention. we dont need to wait a yr to see if its any different, its not like kanye is going to get more famous in a year, this is a worthy inclusion due to the historical value of the content. perhaps we need another admin here for a 3rd opinion.

(really youre just delaying the inevitable here) Sixone63 (talk) 06:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you think its significant -- I never said it was significant, did I? I said it might be.
perhaps we need another admin here for a 3rd opinion -- It is true I am an administrator, but that does not give my opinion more weight than any other editor's (except insofar as it may indicate more knowledge of Wikipedia). In fact, I am explicitly forbidden from acting as an administrator within disputes in which I am involved. Administrators deal with behavior, editors deal with content, and we don't wear both hats at once. Indeed, some of our best editors are not even administrators. So, when you are discussing with me in this particular dispute, you are discussing with an editor, not an admin.
Having said all of that, a third opinion would be valuable but it need not be from an admin. It's the middle of the night in much of the US right now; we will very likely see more people show up spontaneously to discuss as the US wakes up.
My opinion remains that I don't think TMZ is an appropriate source in this context; others might well disagree. Hopefully more editors join the discussion and we can achieve consensus. And if the consensus is that I'm wrong, then hey... it won't be the first time that's happened!
I will be heading to bed very shortly so may not respond until morning. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 06:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note (since we are talking admins vs editors) to clarify my edit summary (i am done trying to convince you through edit summaries to discuss), I realize in hindsight this could be perceived as a threat to take administrative action if you reverted again, but that is not how I intended it. I meant it as "I am trying to get you to discuss on the talk page and if this revert doesn't work then I am done reverting." I very much do not like edit warring and wasn't going to continue on. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion remains that I don't think TMZ is an appropriate source in this context have to disagree with you here bud, like i said, tmz is reporting this based on insider reports (people at the stadium), photographic evidence from outside sources and artists directly involved in the situation as well as videographic evidence proving their report to be true. So while i agree tmz a crap resource typically, in this case when its backed by undeniable photographic and video evidence, i cannot see how one can conclude its unreliable. regardless of tmz, multiple musical artists involved in the recording of the album have posted to social media photos/videos of them recording/staying at the stadium, multiple photos have came out showing beds, the locker-room converted into a recording studio, as well as firsthand reports of kanye's staff team confirming the matter on social media.

at the very least, this article should include a mention of "Kanye West temporarily staying at the stadium to finish recording and mixing his album", this is undeniable, if you take issue with other content then whatever, but the core point of this inclusion is fundamentally sound, while you may not consider it significant, one of the biggest musical artists is recording an album at the stadium, if this was another super high profile artist (perhaps one you like or know), would your opinion on this matter change? I'd bet it would. At the end of the day this all boils down to historical value and it deserves a brief mention at the very least. Sixone63 (talk) 06:27, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

have to disagree with you here -- Indeed, that disagreement is the basis for this dispute.
if this was another super high profile artist (perhaps one you like or know), would your opinion on this matter change? I'd bet it would. -- Honestly? No.
I am curious to see what other editors think. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 06:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

other editors previously were pretty unanimously for the inclusion, it was just debated what parts should be included and what shouldnt be, most agreed the core point should remain. Sixone63 (talk) 06:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure "unanimous" is correct. At least two other editors removed this (or similar) verbiage. Regardless, while "how many people try to add content" can be an indication of consensus, it is not as reliable as having a discussion where policy is argued. For example, if a dozen single-purpose accounts support one side and two well-established and seasoned editors support the other, most impartial editors would likely judge consensus to be for the side of the seasoned editors. (I'm not saying that's what is happening here, only giving an example.) Consensus on Wikipedia is a bit nuanced in that regard and can't be reduced to a simple statement of "more editors are trying to add ___ than remove it." --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 06:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

regardless, I think it's a major error to not include a mention of this topic, when someone as famous as kanye is recording his album at the studio, why does this not deserve a quick sentence under his listening party section?? what harm does this cause? there really is no legitimate reason to not include a short sentence summing up the situation. Sixone63 (talk) 07:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the interests of trying to resolve this dispute and compromise, here is what I would suggest:
  • We assume for now that West remaining at the stadium to work on his album is historically significant. I have my doubts, but will not argue this point further. (To be totally clear, I think it's absolutely appropriate to include in Donda (album), as it's part of the album's production history.)
  • We accept the TMZ source for now, but tag the citation with {{better source needed}}.
  • We reduce the text to the most basic assertion made by the TMZ article, as very much of the verbiage present when I reverted it is either unsubstantiated or not particularly relevant to the stadium itself, which is the subject of the article.
  • We don't mention that he is staying until he finishes his album per WP:CRYSTALBALL, we only assert what we know from the source at this moment in time -- that he worked on the album while residing at the stadium.
Here is my suggestion:
After the listening event was concluded, West temporarily resided at the stadium to continue working on the album.[1][better source needed]
What do you think? --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 07:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added "temporarily" to the draft; when we know how long he was there, we can more precisely describe the duration of his stay. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 07:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sounds good chris, thats really all i think we needed anyway, all i wanted was the inclusion of the main point which youve done, one final suggestion is this:

After the listening event was concluded, West temporarily resided at the stadium to continue working on the album with renowned musical producer Mike Dean

just adds a lil extra detail and context to the situation, thanks Sixone63 (talk) 07:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, the source makes no mention of Dean. Is there another source that does? --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 07:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we can substantiate Dean's collaboration then my only objection is to the term "renowned" per MOS:PEACOCK. If we can substantiate Dean's collaboration then my only potential objection is to the term "renowned" as it seems unnecessary (if accurate). The reader should be able to follow the link to Dean's article and make up their own mind. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 07:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

-https://www.instagram.com/p/CRsgJXYpLUE/ There's multiple photos/videos of them together at the stadium, Dean has also produced majority of Kanye's recent work. -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-98CcMoPTP8 (YouTube video of them together in the temporary stadium studio) -https://twitter.com/therealmikedean his twitter is also full of recent references to him working on the album

not sure if this is what youre after, will try find more sources (no biggie anyway, just adds more context to the situation) Sixone63 (talk) 07:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The best would be something from a secondary source instead of a primary source. I will add the text not referencing Dean for now, and we can sort that out independently. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 07:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Because there was asked for a second opinion, I would like to give my opinion too.

I would have to agree with the admin on this part. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and Kanye should absolutely not be mentioned in the introduction. At least until there is better sourcing than TMZ and self-published Instagram posts. (A small mention is possible of course)

@Sixone63:, I think you could add the "taking residence" on the Wikipedia page of the album itself, should one exist. As it is valuable information there, not on this page. ItzLarz (talk) 11:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

fortunately Chris and I reached an agreement in regards to this content. Sixone63 (talk) 11:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BilCat:, multiple editors have reached an agreement upon the inclusion of Kanye's residence and listening party details, may I ask why you're reverting my edits regarding the 2nd listening event to be held at the stadium. Why do you consider this not news? If we have reached a consensus that the original listening party and events surrounding it are considered worthy of inclusions, why is a mention of the 2nd listening event to be held at the stadium an issue for you?

@BilCat: you are now on your second undo, as per wiki rules I'd be careful about a third, also can you communicate here please? Don't need to have an edit war with you when you can just freely talk here, thanks. Thanks Sixone63 (talk) 07:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you, I've stopped watching this page. While I realize Kanye is popular, it's still a minor event in the stadium's history. But you're acting like every minor piece of information surrounding the event is the MOST IMPORTANT EVENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!! It isn't. It's barely made the news outside of celebrity gossip sites and that's really all it is - celebrity gossip. Until you realize that, you're going to continue to be a nuisance on this article. So I'll just wait until it all blows over, and you move on to the next MOST IMPORTANT EVENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD, and I'll come back and help cleap up the messes you've made. BilCat (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concerts

[edit]

Can we put the concerts that are confirmed for 2023? I understand that they have not happened yet, but since we have stuff for 2026, can we place them here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.183.180 (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus on many stadium articles is that future concerts are not notable. Further, many past concerts aren't either. Please don't keep adding these, or you may be blocked for edit warring. BilCat (talk) 00:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mercedes-Benz_Stadium&oldid=1209004607"