This article is within the scope of WikiProject Event Venues, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Event VenuesWikipedia:WikiProject Event VenuesTemplate:WikiProject Event VenuesEvent Venues articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
@Olos88: and @RandomCanadian: I disagree with the complete removal of discussion on women's football. WP:RUNOFTHEMILL appears to concern whether or not something should have an article, not whether or not something should be included in an existing one. I'm not sure how mentioning that a team plays at a stadium violates WP:NOTNEWS either. NemesisAT (talk) 19:48, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd strike the bit about the friendly match; that's pretty trivial. That the stadium's been used as a World Cup and Euro qualifier, that's not trivial. (Doesn't bolster notability, of course, but if the stadium keeps a standalone article, I'd judge that to be a significant fact.) Ravenswing 21:14, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not trivial, official friendly games of national football teams are quite valuable, they are counted to FIFA ranking, and are listed in every historical and statistical summaries (like here for example). Olos88 (talk) 21:28, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, these are absolutely trivial. Stadia around the world host matches all the time. That some are included in FIFA rankings have nothing to do with Wikipedia. We just don't list every friendly in every stadium article. (Hell, we don't list actual internationals for every stadium: Santiago_Bernabéu_Stadium#Major_international_tournaments doesn't list any international except for when it hosted a Euro and a World Cup. I appreciate that unlike Ludost Mlacani you're editing in good faith, but yelling for an admin against consensus comes off as complaining just because you're not getting your way. If you haven't yet reviewed WP:UNDUE and WP:ROUTINE, it's time. Ravenswing 22:34, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Do I hear you well that hosting an international women's national teams match "is pretty trivial"? This is not a fucking Santiago Bernabeu, it's a stadium in a city of 20,000. I'm trying to be neutral in this stadium-deletion pissing context, but at least Olos88 is getting their sleeves up and expanding the articles according to available coverage. No such user (talk) 22:40, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Despite harsh words from No such user, I have to totally agree with the substantial part. Hosting an official friendly game or promotion of residing club to the top flight were one of the key events in this stadium's history, and these are such meaningful events, that even mentioning about same things in Santiago Bernabeu article would be appropriate (I'm sure, it will appear, when someone will expand the article, you have list with friendlies for example in Stadion Śląski, Chorzów), if you deny that fact, then, of course with the respect to your point of view, but you are just ignorant. Olos88 (talk) 23:22, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, in fact, I do deny that fact. I'm at a loss to figure out why this is so hard for you to understand, but there is only one basis for notability of a stadium. Only one: WP:GNG/WP:GEOFEAT. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. Not the number of matches that are played there, not how many "key events" happened there, not how many press releases you can find about installing lights, not how big the city is, not whether a first-division team plays there, nothing. (Nor, strange as No such user must find it, are there different rules for small town obscure stadiums and internationally famous ones.) Just significant, in-depth coverage about the subject in reliable, independent, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Ravenswing 00:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, the notability discussion is somewhere else, we are discussing here about content deletion of some important facts from stadium's history, which I've added not to necessarily prove stadiums notability by significant coverage, but just to improve the article. Olos88 (talk) 00:18, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It would be far, far less frustrating for you if you could stop writing an history of the club here and write it instead in the article about the club itself? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:41, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It would be far less frustrating for me, if you just could focus on something more constructive, than deleting useful content from articles. Olos88 (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Olos88: Can you tell me what exactly is "useful" (I assume you mean "relevant" or "pertinent", since something being "useful" is not the relevant criteria) in an article about the stadium (which is not an article about the club!), in the following paragraph (for example, others have similar issues):
On 6th June 2010 the final game of 2009–10 Prva liga season played in Kolubara Stadium turned into scandal. If the hosts would win against FK Teleoptik, it should give them historical promotion to the top flight. However, in 86th minute the result was 0:1. Then the hosts scored a goal, which was disallowed by the referee. Unsatisfied fans entered the pitch and started to chase the referee, who was eventually saved by the police. FK Kolubara players left the field and the match wasn't continued. The result of the game was turned into walkover for FK Teleoptik and instead of FK Kolubara, FK Sevojno gained promotion by using its chance and winning their last game of the season.[1][2][3]
Not only is none of the above about the stadium (safe for the fact it just happens to have happened in the stadium), it's the kind of sensationalist overreaction about a routine sports event (referees disallowing goals is common, and there are plenty of perfectly valid reasons for that) which has no place in an encyclopedia (plus, it's obviously an example of undue focus on recent events). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It all happens at the stadium, so it is part of its history, it's more than obvious to me. It wasn't definitly some routine issue, first, the game was extremaly important and could give the hosts historic promotion to the top flight, second, of course, referee dissallowing a goal is something completely normal, but if it provokes fans to enter the pitch and chase him, it is definitely not an ordinary issue, third, if the author of "Hundred years of football club "Kolubara" from Lazarevac" counts this match as one of three most relevant and memorable games in the century of the club, then we don't have much to discuss about... Olos88 (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An encyclopedia is a summary, i.e. not everything that is to be said about a topic. And while this could, arguably (clubs missing promotion happens literally all the time, and despite fans being saddened by this and thinking it is "historic", it is not), be included in a history of the club (in a much more summarised fashion), the mere fact it happened at the stadium does not mean it's an important event in the history of the stadium (if this had happened elsewhere, it could possibly be "important" for the club, but likely not for the place it happened at). The literal only relevance of this is that "it happened in the stadium". Crowd unrest happens at other places without getting mentioned there either (for example, Wembley_Stadium#Football does not mention the ticketless fans who entered for the England semi-final at the Euro last year, even though, yes, this is a verifiable fact). But anyway, I'm bored and more importantly bored of wasting my time. You're just insisting on throwing sh*t at the wall until it sticks, and are not interested in addressing the issues I point out. I'll remind you that WP:ONUS requires you to get positive consensus for the inclusion of material. If others object, and you are unwilling to address their issues, that does not give you carte blanche to keep adding it back in. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed, I've made a summary, as you can see even after expansion, article is still very short (I've removed stub template, but I wasn't sure about it). There are just mentioned or briefly described the key events connected with the stadium, that happened throughout its history, and yes, besides renovations, mounting floodlights or hosting international games, also the key events connected with the club that regularly plays its games at the stadium from the very beginning, are important part of ground's history and we cannot just completely skip it if we want to make the article comprehensive. Of course, lost promotion, pitch invasion and chasing of the referee were not same-scale events like Bradford City stadium fire for example, but sill it was one of the most dramatic and memorable episodes, that happened on that pitch. Wikipedia also rely on sources and if a peer-reviewed source indicates, that this was an at least worth-of-mention affair, then, no disrespect, but it means more, than your opinion on that. Olos88 (talk) 23:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm objecting to the database-like listing of every one of them; and to the inclusion of other trivia unrelated to the stadium (football clubs, in the European system, get promoted and demoted all the time. That has nothing to do with this stadium). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:21, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
