Talk:Lansdowne Road

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


Untitled[edit]

"[Lansdowne Road] is also the second oldest international football venue still in regular use after the Millennium Stadium." What?! The Millennium Stadium was only built in 1999! Removed. Grunners 15:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New Lansdowne[edit]

Should the new image of Lansdowne be removed. It is highly misleading considering that the new stadium has not been built yet and therefore this picture is not accurate. I propose a picture of the present stadium be left here until the new stadium is complete.--Play Brian Moore 01:15, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A picture of current Lansdowne shoul be in the caption but a picture of new Lansdowne should also be included on the page. Tunney 01:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I think it makes much more sense to show the current stadium, and then go on to describe the redevelopment with the new picture. Dugo 00:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You know instead of discussing it, why doesnt some one just go ahead and get a picture, tag it right and put it in the article. Thr were pictures before, be that jave since been deleted.--Boothy443 | trácht ar 00:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Because, the system won't let me upload a picture.--Play Brian Moore 00:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Done Rcnet 09:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I edited (Rcnet)[edit]

Has anyone got a legit to use image for Lansdowne, having that rendering there is wrong - especially as other stats in the info box refer to current capacity, not the "maybe" renovation. The render could be used elsewhere in this article - but it's current usage is misleading - it is not what Lansdowne looks like - it's what it might look like. This should be used in the reconstruction section.

I changed: "Renovated 2005–2009" to "Renovation (estimated start, completion)". Tense problems, and offers the 2009 date as fact, not goal. Changed 2005 to 2007, see http://www.lrsdc.ie/schedule/default.asp?NCID=63 The planning process is not actual Renovation.

I deleted: "Original Construction Cost IR£" no value there and I don't have one.

I edited "Reconstruction Cost", adding "Estimated", I can't think of a single Irish building project having an accurate figure before it even began.

I was sorely tempted to delete the engineers and architects - as this could be misconstrued as the ones for the CURRENT stadium. I instead qualified it as "(reconstruction)", this isn't great - can someone come up with a better way of handling this?

Added link to owner's site in external links.

Fixed bad spelling and spacing errors Rcnet 08:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed images, this is not a great shot, but it's accurate - we should find another current image.

Deleted this NONSENSE "although its use is currently temporarily suspended for renovation." Per: http://www.lrsdc.ie/fixtures/default.asp?NCID=62 AUGUST 2006 WED, 16 AUG Ireland v Netherlands

SEPTEMBER 2006

OCTOBER 2006 WED, 11 OCT Ireland v Czech Republic

NOVEMBER 2006 SAT, 11 NOV Ireland v South Africa WED, 15 NOV Ireland v San Marino SUN, 19 NOV Ireland v Australia SUN, 26 NOV Ireland v Pacific Island Rcnet 09:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not mark stadium's as closed unless you know this for a fact. The day after you marked the stadium as closed, Ireland will play Australia there! Rcnet 09:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The last game is leinster v ulster on the 31/12/06 (Gnevin 12:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Apologies if I made some errors., and becuase I came here from the Ireland football team page I was, erroneously, thinking in terms of the closure of the stadium, and that was, of course, premature. But I would like to think that I added considerably to the layout and content of the article, and would ask Rcnet to serious reconsider his tone in making future edit notes, and ask that he desist FROM SHOUTING. Kevin McE 17:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise, the tone was way off and uncalled for. Incuidently Ireland won at Lansdowne Vs Australia today. There are a few more games to go Rcnet 23:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They did indeed: a great result and it bodes well for the period of exile at Croke Park.Kevin McE 00:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer / Football[edit]

Football is not the proper term, this is a stadium in Ireland. The game is primarily referred to as Soccer in Ireland as is the case for many english speaking countries excluding the UK, as the most popular sport in Ireland, Gaelic Football is often known just as Football. Historically in the UK, the birthplace of the game of Football/Soccer, Football/Soccer was known as Association Football to differentiate it from what was then known as Rugby Football.

This is an article about a rugby stadium which is used occasionally for soccer which has no major stadium of it's own. The Soccer organisation is called the "Football" association, and this game is often referred to as football as well as soccer by it's Irish adherents - however amongst the population at large in Ireland - Football = GAA Football, not Soccer not Rugby Football.

Soccer is used here as it is the most common term in Ireland, is globally understood, and is the only possible term that can be considered an unambiguous word in Ireland. Soccer (number 2), like rugby (number 3, possibly 4), is a minority sport in Ireland. Soccer players and supportters do often refer to the game as Football in Ireland, however this is largely a result of the proximity of a major professional soccer nation such as England, and the resulting reliance on English media for coverage.

Had these been an article about the FAI, or an Irish soccer/football club, the use of football would have been more justifiable; as the game is called soccer by almost all but it's adherents in Ireland - football is a confusing term for thi sartcile about Rugby and a Rugby grounds, which is occasionally borrowed by Irish Soccer teams.

By way of example I would point to the largest media outlet in Ireland, http://www.rte.ie/sport/ from Radio_Telefís_Éireann where Soccer is used. Rcnet 04:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Irish and most people use the term "Football" for both Assoc Football and Gaelic Football which can get confusing. Football should be the used term. Niall123 08:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That comment doesnt make much sence , Football can get confusing so we should use football ? Instead of the disambigious term soccer ? (Gnevin 16:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Football is the name of the game as used by proper football supporters in Ireland, i.e. ones that follow their local club, football is the most popular team sport in Ireland not gaelic games and the uk is not the "birthplace of the game" of football, learn your history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.164.61 (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use by FAI[edit]

Toword the end of the History section, the article says "From 1971, and exclusively from 1990 to 2006, the ground was used by the Football Association of Ireland for international matches." However, friendlies were played at RDS on February 18, 1992 against Wales, and at Tolka Park on February 17, 1993 against Wales. Seems to me the article is wrong. Am I missing something? Tarafuku10 19:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope current edit addresses this to your satisfaction. Kevin McE 21:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your attention. The new edit leads to another concern. A friendly against Italy B was played at Lansdowne in 1927. I guess this was the first time the FAI leased the ground for a soccer match. I am translating the article into Japanese and I just want to make sure I understand things correctly. Tarafuku10 19:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genitive case[edit]

Why not Bó(tha)r Landsúin? Has someone been using a dictionary...?!

Fair use rationale for Image:C1b3ef8a.jpeg[edit]

Image:C1b3ef8a.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 09:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tense[edit]

The opening par says Lansdowne Road was... This to me seems incorrect. Surely a more accurate description would be Lansdowne Road is... After all the ground is being redeveloped - something quite clear from the article - suggesting it is still there one form another, so to talk about the venue in the past tense seems more than a little odd (especially where in the rest of the article it is still present tense) even if it is a building site at the moment. I've edited back for the time being, unless there are any objections. Does anyone know how this was handled with say Wembley? Dan K (talk) 00:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct - good point. (Sarah777 (talk) 05:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Aviva Stadium[edit]

In line with other stadium demolitions/renovations/replacements (eg. Wembley Stadium and Wembley Stadium (1923); Gillette Stadium and Foxboro Stadium), I'm going to create an article at Aviva Stadium which will specifically deal with the new stadium, while Lansdowne Road shall continue to be the article for the old stadium. Also, I think now is the time to use was in the LS. Everyone okay with that? Any other suggestions? --Schcamboaon scéal? 00:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There'll also have to be some adjustments made to the infobox; right now it has some figures from the old stadium and some from the new. --Schcamboaon scéal? 00:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that might be premature. A brand new stadium on a new site will usually be known popularly by its sponsor's name, as there is no other common name, but it remains to be seen whether this new name for an existing site gains any appreciable usage beyond those who are obliged to use it. Wikipedia receives no money from sponsors, so is under no obligation to change the name we use unless it becomes clear that it is in everyday use. In soccer, we refer to the Premier League, without mentioning Barclay's and the article for my favourite team's home stadium is independent of the building society who sponsor it. Kevin McE (talk) 07:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, let me explain further then. You appreciate we need two articles - one for the old stadium and one for the new. According to WP:DISAMBIG: "When there is another term (such as Pocket billiards instead of Pool) or more complete name (such as Delta rocket instead of Delta) that is equally clear and unambiguous, that should be used." Therefore Aviva Stadium is that unambiguous name, allowing us to leave Lansdowne Road as it is without the need for some other form of disambiguator such as Lansdowne Road (1872) (and of course our choice of such would be controversial, since there is no obvious single date for when the old stadium was built, by virtue of the fact that it was renovated and changed so many times). --Schcamboaon scéal? 16:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would dispute that we need a new article. Most football stadia in England contain neither a brick, not a seat, nor a blade of grass that was in place 30 years ago, but we do not change the article. Same purpose, same place: same article. Kevin McE (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty standard that when a completely new stadium is built, it gets its own article. If you look at Ground improvements to football stadia in England, you'll note how if a stadium undergoes small-scale ongoing renovation, it holds onto one article, whereas if a stadium is completely demolished and then replaced or rebuilt, it splits into two articles to deal with both versions, as both are appreciably different entities. Good examples as I've already mentioned are the two incarnations of Wembley, and also the Patriots' two stadiums - Gillette Stadium was actually built in the parking lot of Foxboro Stadium, and while it is still called Foxboro colloquially, the new stadium has its own article. --Schcamboaon scéal? 18:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm not sure why you ask whether people are OK with your proposal if you are a) going to act on it within less than an hour at a time at which few interested people are likely to be on-line, and b) you are determined to refute any other opinion. You asked whether it was thought to be a good idea: I don't think it is. Kevin McE (talk) 19:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And refuted quite well too. ;) I guess it was more a statement of intent than a question though I do apologize for not waiting a bit longer. Look then, can you simply find me any examples of any stadiums which have been completely demolished then rebuilt but which are contained in one article? That's really my point. At the end of the day the name of the two articles is secondary to that fact. --Schcamboaon scéal? 19:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Renovation[edit]

I would suggest removing the renovation section and maybe going with something like "Replacement" and rewording it to emphasise that it's a completely new ground rather than a redeveloped lansdowne. This article about a proper ground should be left here and the monstrosity that's replacing it dealt with elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.164.61 (talk) 21:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest International Test Venue?[edit]

This should be modified or removed. The first international rugby test was played at Raeburn Place in Edinburgh - a rugby venue that is still used today and hosted the women's rugby world cup final in the mid 90s. Caleyjag (talk) 00:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)caleyjag[reply]

1995 riot[edit]

Was the 1995 riot on the 6 or 15 February? This article disagrees with Football hooliganism. Drutt (talk) 15:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original Name[edit]

"Royal Irish Parks Stadium" is a fabrication. A plausible sounding bit of vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.141.87.10 (talk) 14:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "Aviva Stadium"[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of the discussion was no change — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 19:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge the Aviva Stadium back here. Croke Park was demolished and rebuilt on the same site yet there is not "New Croke Park" and "Old Croke Park" articles. Football Park has the sponsored name of "AAMI Stadium", but he article is still called "Football Park" and there's still only one article. A similar point can be shown in Stadium Australia. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 13:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See discussion above, entitled Aviva Stadium: examples are cited there of stadia where a rebuild led to a new article. Kevin McE (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The owners of the stadium are entitled to call it what they want. Wiki needs to follow the official name. The history section is there to deal with previous names. It's not up to wiki to pamder to sentimentality about former names. It is what it is. Laurel Lodged (talk)
Oppose A simular discussion took place with Cardiff Arms Park and the Millennium Stadium, with the outcome that they should be separate articles...this is the same discussion. SethWhales talk 18:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The two stadiums are notable in there own right, the argument to merge seems to be one of other stuff does not exist. Mtking (talk) 00:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As above. Nelson50T 10:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As already stated both stadiums are notable in their own right. Also Croke Park wasn't demolished, closed for several years, the pitch turned through 90 degrees and renamed and that's why Croke Park has still only one article. Bjmullan (talk) 13:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose. I can't improve on the arguments made by others, but I will add one point. The two examples cited by the nominator, Football Park and Stadium Australia, have never been demolished. The name changes are solely due to corporate sponsorship deals. (An even more extreme example from the same country is Docklands Stadium, which is currently on its third sponsored name since it opened in 2000.) — Dale Arnett (talk)
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.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lansdowne Road. 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 17:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lansdowne Road. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lansdowne_Road&oldid=1203488642"