Talk:Madejski Stadium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to better organize information in articles related to Berkshire. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
WikiProject on Football
English football Portal
The article on Madejski Stadium is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the England task force.

Contents

[edit] London Irish removed - why?

London Irish do play their home games here, does that not imply it is also "home of" London Irish?. If it is the home fixture of a Rugby union team, why then can it not be called a rugby ground as well? At the very least it should mention thet London Irish play theri home games there, I see no reason to remove that information. MartinRe 22:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disputes

I have re-inserted the fact that London Irish play their home games here (vs home ground), as this is verifable via multiple sources.[1] [2]

However, there are two other related issue that are unclear/disputed:

  1. Does the fact that London Irish play their home games here, make it their "home ground" or not? (and included under "home of")
  2. Should it be added under Category:Rugby union stadiums in England due to London Irish playing there regularly?

Comments why/why not to the above welcome. MartinRe 21:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Third opinion: If London Irish do play their home games there, then it's their home ground, though personally, I feel that it's very much six and half a dozen as to using one or the other. I can see no argument against categorising it as suggested either. --Scott Wilson 22:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rugby issues

Theres seems to be some disagreement one how to describe the stadium with regards to the rugby issues. I have tried to contact the anon editor who has removed the rugby related issues several times in the past, but as they edit from dynamic IP address this is proving very difficult.

So, while understanding that Voting is evil I thought a quick straw poll might be the best way to get the overall view as the questions are all yes/no. Plus it would make me feel better if there was a clear consensus as I feel bad making the same changes multiple times without the ability to discuss with the other editor. MartinRe 21:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It's probably worth noting that "London Irish" appears in foot-high letters on the outside of the stadium, below Reading F.C. (who themselves are below "Royal Berkshire Conference Centre"!). The place was built for football, though, and the pitch is a bit short for rugby (not a lot of space between the try line and the dead ball line) --Deadlock 21:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How should the stadium be described?

"Football Stadium"
  1. Robwingfield 22:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Deadlock 21:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Just "Stadium"
  1. MartinRe 21:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Lancevortex 18:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. --Pudduh 10:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should it be added to the category of Rugby Union Grounds

Yes
  1. MartinRe 21:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Robwingfield 22:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. Lancevortex 18:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  4. Deadlock 21:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
No

[edit] Should infobox "Home of" include London Irish

Yes
  1. MartinRe 21:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Lancevortex 18:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC), but RFC should be first!
  3. Deadlock 21:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC). agree with Lancevortex
  4. Pudduh 10:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC) , agree with Lancevortex
No
  1. Robwingfield 22:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capacity

For years this was listed on the web site as 24,200, despite the club sticking a big screen in the corner, removing six columns of seats in the South Stand, constructing the Megablock, etc. In the 2006/2007 Supporters' Guide the capacity was given as 24,054. I queried the webmaster about this; he replied saying he believed the capacity was 24,225, and has updated the web site with this number. Since that is the most easily verifyable, I'm updating the page again with that figure. --Deadlock 21:30, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The web site now says 24,045 (sic). Updated accordingly. Deadlock 19:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In April 2006 John Madejski said "We have a very nice stadium, with a capacity of 24,700 seats"[3]. - JoeWiki 01:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Attendance: 24,122 at the game against Villa at the Madejski Stadium today. - JoeWiki 18:07, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, and looking around me, there were a fair few seats empty... I would have thought you could add at least 500 on to that to get the true capacity, which kind of ties up with what John Madejski said. robwingfield «T•C» 18:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
have added new record attendance from 19/2/08 - widely verifiable such as here. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.29.24 (talk) 00:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

London Irish have announced that they have sold out saying that the "has sold 23,700 tickets for the game – the maximum capacity available at the Reading stadium for a rugby match." Does this mean that there are different capacities for Football & Rugby? I would have thought there would be more seats availible for Rugby because it doesn't have any of that segregation nonsense..(link here --85.210.70.21 (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion

User:Reading FC has added some unreferenced material about the expansion plans. However, I've already added all of the information that the club has released... any other additions to this article are either repetition or speculation at this point. Please could people only add details that can be referenced as information sourced from the club. Thanks. Robwingfield (talk) 23:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Type of stadium

While I accept that the stadium was originally built as a football ground, it's more now. Why not call it a sports stadium - which does not imply anything - in the intro and mention that it was designed as a football stadium elsewhere; probably in the second paragraph? --Scott Wilson 20:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I would say it's a football stadium that is also used for rugby. It will always be used for football, but the same cannot be said for rugby. The stadium is designed to cater for football (e.g. pitch size), so it is a football stadium. Robwingfield (talk) 23:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
The pitch size is a good point. The dimensions are for a football pitch and if you look closely at the 'in-goal' area [4] at the Madejski Stadium it's not really ideal for a rubgy pitch. Also Bramall Lane lane has been used to play cricket. Is the home of Sheffield United F.C. a football and cricket pitch. --JoeWiki 12:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

Could somebody please add the pronunciation for 'Madejski'? --Patik 01:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tenants

How can Reading FC be described as tenants for the ground that they own? I will change it unless someone can demonstrate that this follows an established format.

Also didn't Richmond move out in 1999 rather than 2000? The Cube (talk) 23:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding tenancy, check out Emirates Stadium and Old Trafford for other examples. Regarding Richmond... I thought so too, but reading the Richmond F.C. article, it seems Richmond became London Irish through a merger, so I assumed my memory must have failed me and the tenancy contract effectively transferred. Happy for it to be changed to 1999 in the absence of any other info, but it would be good to quote a source. robwingfield «T•C» 23:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
On the first point, I checked a lot of other stadia and it seems to be the normal - if not universal - format, although I don't think it's a very good way of expressing the position.
Richmond definitely left in 1999 so I have changed that. I don't know how to quote a source, but http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/2000/04/13/srgall13.html covers it and perhsaps someone else can add it as a note. The Cube (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)