Talk:Cleveland Browns Stadium

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

A couple things about this article...[edit]

  • This article is relatively short and incomplete compared to other wikipedia articles about NFL stadiums currently in use.
  • The "Criticism" section doesn't seem to meet Wikipedia's neutrality and accuracy guidelines. Additionally, the lack of proper citations and timeliness of the criticism raised in the section seem problematic.
allaboutme ♦ BRIAN ♦ talk2me 16:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since the section in question has been removed, I am deleting the tag.

Move? 1[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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: page not moved for now. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 16:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland Browns Stadium → FirstEnergy Stadium – (move)

  • JaMikePA (talk · contribs) copy/pasted the original page into the new, rather than moving, which damaged my own attempt to move the page. When I attempted to move, it stated that the target page exists, though as a redirect. ZappaOMati 06:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Contested. The common names policy provides that "If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change". While the name has changed, and this move may be warranted, I don't think this move is uncontroversial because what name is being used in reliable sources published after the name change is an open question. It may be that is should be moved now, or it may be that need to wait a few months before that question can even be tackled. Regardless, not uncontroversial.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until City Council approves. The lead clearly states that Cleveland City Council must first approve the name change; Cleveland.com ref in body verifies. Levdr1lp / talk 09:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The name is still officially "Cleveland Browns Stadium" until it is approved by Cleveland City Council. While that is almost certain to happen, there's no need to move the page until it's official. The only thing that can be done for sure is add the info that the Browns reached a deal to rename it FirstEnergy Stadium contingent on city council approval. Once it's approved, then the page can be properly moved (without blanking and cut-and-paste). The way this has been moved destroys the edit history for this page as well as the FirstEnergy Stadium in PA. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Too early until official decision is reached. Srsrox (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No rationale at all for the move has been given above in terms of policy, and it seems most unlikely that one exists. See WP:AT for the policy, or WP:official names for a more approachable explanation of the policy as it applies to cases like this. This sort of well-intended proposal was one of the main reasons WP:official names was written, in fact, as the page itself says. Andrewa (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Requested move 2[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved to FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland) by Frank Anchor. --BDD (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland Browns Stadium → FirstEnergy Stadium – Please see previous move request at Talk:Cleveland Browns Stadium#Move?. Cleveland City Council approved name change on February 15th. See Cleveland.com ref here. FirstEnergy Stadium currently serves as redirect to article so disambiguation is no real concern (moreover, FirstEnergy Stadium (Reading, Pennsylvania) move was performed specifically to facilitate this move); name is clearly recognizable as subject is NFL stadium; name is natural as the Browns are already using the new name (readers will surely search for this term when looking for information on the subject moving forward); etc. WP:CRITERIA is met. Levdr1lp / talk 03:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. It is probably too early to tell whether the new name will be accepted in common practice. I see it appear in news stories, mostly about the new name though.[1] vs.[2] Apteva (talk) 04:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Short of this deal completely falling apart (if that's even possible at this point), I really don't see how the name "Cleveland Browns Stadium" will continue to be used in common practice. Apteva- can you point to any specific examples where a U.S professional sports venue sold its naming rights but the WP community opted *not* to use the new name (or some variation) as its article title? Levdr1lp / talk 04:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – even the most current sources, news, are more about the Reading baseball stadium than the Cleveland football stadium. So what's the rush? After there's evidence that the name has caught on, we can move the article. For now, people who enter the name will already find it, since you already hijacked the name from the article that had it. Did you consider a disambig page? Dicklyon (talk) 05:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Dicklyon, I haven't "hijacked" anything. Look at the edit histories for FirstEnergy Stadium and FirstEnergy Stadium (Reading, Pennsylvania) again. User:JaMikePA attempted a cut-and-paste move last January between this article and its redirect. Before that, the Reading stadium page was moved by User:Frank Anchor, creating the FirstEnergy redirect. I myself, as well as other members of WikiProject Cleveland, have repeatedly reverted edits to this page which prematurely identified the subject by its newly-approved (as of 02-15-2013) name. I also opposed the first page move request (see above) prior to the City Council's approval. There's no rush here. Levdr1lp / talk 06:12, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it was Frank Anchor who hijacked the title here. Anyway, we should wait and see whether the new name catches on, and even when it has, not presume that there will be a new primarytopic for this name of two stadia. Dicklyon (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I linked to Frank Anchor's move, too (see piped use of {{diff}} template-- "moved"). IMHO, I really don't see how a 9,000 seat double-A minor league ball park has any chance of rivaling a 70,000 seat NFL stadium in terms of overall coverage, certainly in the long run. That said, and as I noted below, I have no problem with waiting before declaring this the primary topic. Levdr1lp / talk 17:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would have no problem with this, although every use of "FirstEnergy" is combined/without a space between the two words. Levdr1lp / talk 17:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize; I had missed the absence of the space. That complicates things a bit. Powers T 15:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no problem with a move to FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland) with the plain FirstEnergy Stadium serving as a disambiguation page. I do believe per Levdr1lp that eventually the majority of coverage on the topic of "FirstEnergy Stadium" will be about the Browns' stadium as the Browns, an NFL team, are much more publicized than the Reading Fightin Phils, a AA minor league baseball team. Frank AnchorTalk 01:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's important to bear in mind that this has taken place in the off-season, so it makes sense that there hasn't been a whole lot of news articles (relatively) that mention the NFL stadium. It has been referred to by the new name consistently, though, in almost all reports. Personally, I don't think it would be a problem to make the NFL stadium the primary topic because it is already better known than a AA minor league baseball park and the name change itself received national coverage and it's now reflected in stadium guides and on sports websites. Simply relying on counting news reports is more a reflection of it being baseball season and not football season as well as the amount of time the NFL stadium has been known by the new name. We should also be looking at where the coverage is coming from (national vs. local). I'm all for following naming conventions, but something should be said about following simple logic too, in that the NFL stadium is arguably already better known and certainly will be very shortly if it isn't. But if it makes people feel better, I don't have a problem using "(Cleveland)" in the title to start out. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose use FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland) instead , FirstEnergy Stadium should be a disambiguation page. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Populous / HOK Sport[edit]

In regards to the name of the Architect, in 2009, the HOK Sport group bought itself out in its entirety[1] – taking its portfolio of work and staff with it, and rebranding as Populous. As part of the buyout agreement from HOK, Populous had full claim to the portfolio of work done while under the HOK Moniker. HOK is not/was not allowed to claim any of those projects as their own.

In 2014, five years after the buyout was complete, HOK chose to re-enter the sports architecture space, acquiring another architecture firm, 360[2]. In turn, with the reemergence of a new company called HOK Sport, providing clarity in what company can actually claim this as their own work would be beneficial to the article and its readers. Hence rallying for the change from HOK Sport to Populous (then HOK Sport). The HOK Sport of today is not the same HOK Sport that completed this project and this change will minimize confusion for readers. If you click through to the Populous Wikipedia page, readers will be able to see the detailed firm history of Populous – including information on the buyout.

I'm aware that there are guidelines about editing pages if there is a potential conflict of interest, so I would like to disclose here that these contributions are made on behalf of Populous and in employment with them, and I intend to follow all of Wikipedia's guidelines, including those on WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NPOV, very closely. My aim is to work with and seek advice from impartial editors to make positive contributions to Populous' article and projects, hopefully leading to improved articles. Brianfolkers (talk) 16:38, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Factory of Sadness[edit]

I removed the mention of the "Factory of Sadness" nickname from the lead mostly because it didn't have any sources with it. Even if it did, though, it doesn't appear, at this point, to be a common enough nickname to be included in the lead; certainly not in bold. I haven't found any solid, consistent sources for a nickname (similar issue with "The Jake" for Progressive Field). Even colloquially, "the stadium" seems to be most common nickname in my experience, which was also true for Cleveland Stadium. In a Google search for "Factory of Sadness", the Mike Polk video comes up and most of the related links are either directly related to that or are commercial links for a few items featuring the phrase. I'm obviously well-aware of the term and have used it myself, but it isn't producing sources consistent with a well-established nickname. That said, I think it could be worked into the article ("Factory of Sadness" not Factory of Sadness), in the section on naming. I just don't think it warrants a bolded term in the lead at this point (subject to change based on sources). --JonRidinger (talk) 00:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The name should probably be retired from the article, or maybe buried in it somewhere, since even Polk has said (in so many words) that it no longer applies, per a 2019 update. It was a joke all along, anyway. Mapsax (talk) 01:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[sefl reply] Err, I didn't see the text that's not so buried referencing Polk from 2021, so, since there's been no discussion, I'm deleting it from the infobox. Mapsax (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer games[edit]

As with other stadium articles, the tables showing every soccer game played at the stadium are not appropriate for this article. For starters, none of the soccer games played at this stadium were of any major significance, but more importantly, why would we have a table of each soccer game and not every Browns game? How about every college game or high school game? The soccer game table would be appropriate for an article on a specific soccer tournament or season, but not the stadium article. This article is about the stadium, not details of every sporting event to ever be played there. --JonRidinger (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.stadia-magazine.com/news.php?NewsID=11613
  2. ^ http://www.hok.com/about/news/2015/01/13/hok-completes-acquisition-of-360-architecture/

Requested move 19 September 2016[edit]

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: Move. Consensus is that this is the primary topic among stadiums with the same name. Cúchullain t/c 17:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland) → FirstEnergy Stadium – While not the only stadium with the name, it appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the name based on secondary sources and pageviews. Other uses are a college soccer stadium and two minor league baseball parks. Initial concern three years ago seemed to be due to the name being new and not established as the primary topic. In turn, the current disambiguation article at FirstEnergy Stadium should be moved to FirstEnergy Stadium (disambiguation), which is currently a redirect. JonRidinger (talk) 16:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Pageviews Analysis tool, which goes back to July 1, 2015:

--JonRidinger (talk) 16:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Based on these numbers, the Cleveland stadium seems like the primary topic. I believe this is rationale to move the page, but I will not officially support the move at this time.  ONR  (talk)  08:20, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused by your comment. If it's a valid rationale, why wouldn't you support it? --JonRidinger (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for those living in the other 3 cities this is unhelpful. To those in Cleveland, removing (Cleveland) won't make life easier but more difficult, In ictu oculi (talk) 11:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wikipedia isn't about convenience to those who live in different cities, it's about what the most common use of the term is based on secondary sources, article pageview traffic, and incoming links. Please read WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In this case, web searches and page traffic indicate that when people are looking for "FirstEnergy Stadium" they are most often referring to the NFL stadium in Cleveland, not the minor league park in PA or the soccer stadium in Akron. Just looking at the page views, the NFL stadium gets over 10 times the amount of page views per day than the next closest use of the term. Not sure how removing "Cleveland" would make it more difficult for people in Cleveland either. No one in Cleveland (or anywhere for that matter) calls it "FirstEnergy Stadium Cleveland". Hatnotes at the top of the articles can easily direct people who may be looking for the minor league stadium or soccer stadium. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another criterion for determining WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is incoming links from other Wikipedia articles:

--JonRidinger (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. All the evidence points to this being the primary topic, and the arguments against the move are weak (to put it politely). Calidum ¤ 03:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Repeated Vandalism[edit]

Please add the page to your watch list, as anonymous users are repeatedly vandalizing the owner section of the page. Bocomoj (talk) 01:47, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Domed? Open air? Shouldn't that information be on the top level highlight sidebar?[edit]

I searched the article today for dome, for roof, for open (thinking open air). What? Nothing?

Suggestion: as a standard, have all major U.S. football and baseball venues show that prominently on the upper right, next to seating capacity.

E.g.
Design: Domed with retractable roof
Type: Open air (most seating stands covered by partial roof)
Design: Open air
Type: Open air with cooling fans and cooling mists for open seating
Design: Closed dome2600:6C56:6600:1ECF:1078:10AD:7899:589D (talk) 13:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like something to be suggested at Template talk:Infobox venue rather than at a single stadium article. This article is similar to every other stadium article I have edited and the infobox has no parameter for the characteristic "open air" or "retractable roof"; that's a characteristic mentioned in the lead along with things like being "multipurpose". Having edited hundreds of stadium articles, the only time the roof is mentioned is when it covers the entire stadium, whether it's permanent or retractable, such as at AT&T Stadium or RCA Dome. If no mention is made, it's assumed to be open-air since most stadiums in the world are still open-air and pictures usually show right away that a stadium is open air (which is true for this article too). --JonRidinger (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cleveland_Browns_Stadium&oldid=1206720816"