Talk:Brisbane Road

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Brisbane Road article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Football: England Low‑importance

	Association football portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Event Venues (inactive)

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

Untitled

The picture and factual references to Hackney Marshes in this article are not strictly relevent. Should they, therefore, be removed?

Requested move

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 move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matchroom Stadium → Brisbane Road — The stadium is commonly known as Brisbane Road (per WP:COMMONNAME). "Matchroom Stadium" is the sponsor name, which almost no-one except officials with the club use (even the BBC call it Brisbane Road). —Number 5 7 14:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support as per nom. Popular names should be used on Wikipedia as per WP:COMMONNAME, even if they don't match official names. Paulbrock 14:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. It has been known as 'Brisbane Road' for decades and will no doubt be known as 'Brisbane Road' long after Matchroom departs the scene. WP:COMMONNAME applies. --Malcolmxl5 18:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support probably only the satdium announcer and club officials call it the "Matchroom Stadium" and when the company leaves it will be called "Brisbane Road". Kingjamie 20:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - everyone except those forced to use sponsored names (i.e. those paid by the club or the sponsor) still calls it Brisbane Road. - fchd 19:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: It should be Brisbane Road Stadium, per naming conventions, since Brisbane Road is the road the stadium is on, not the stadium. Whether people commonly drop "Stadium" colloquially is of no consequence. Concur strongly that, again per naming conventions, WP:SPAM, and the manual style that we should not use a name that is purely for sponsorship purposes. By way of cross reference, the draft cue sports naming convention at WP:CUESPELL makes this point very explicitly, and I've seen some other topical naming and style conventions that do so as well. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Meadow Lane, Bramall Lane, Gigg Lane, Carrow Road, Bloomfield Road etc etc are all articles at the common name location; there is no reason why Brisbane Road should be different. Number 5 7 08:49, 26 July 2007 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brisbane 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, 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: 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) 17:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brisbane 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: 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) 23:16, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]