# Talk:Marquette Stadium

MOS:INTRO indicates that the lead should be "accessible to as broad an audience as possible". WP:AUDIENCE expands that "Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. People who read Wikipedia have different backgrounds, education and opinions. Make your article accessible and understandable for as many readers as possible." Given this context, this edit should be reverted; we cannot assume that readers are American, particularly given that this article is planned to appear on the Main Page, and we shouldn't force everyone else to follow links to understand where we are. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:05, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Nikkimaria you have been editing long enough top know that during a discussion about a content dispute, the original version is restored. This is the WP:BRD cycle and your editing is getting pointy. Your quoting of MOS does not state anywhere that the country of a place needs to be stated in the lead sentence. Furthermore, the infobox currently provides this information, plus a map that includes a caption clarifying its in the United States and "U.S." is added to the infobox. Your concerns about a broad audience are overblown and come across as more making a point, that Wikipedia should overcorrect on its US bias. Lastly, although it covers our article naming conventions, our MOS makes clear that "CITY, STATE, United States" is not common usage, which is clearly reflected in our articles. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @  13:49, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
@Gonzo fan2007: with respect, it's your edits here that are pointy: you're fighting to remove two words that, worst-case scenario, tell a US reader something they already know but provide a benefit to others. The country in which something is located is very basic information that should be included in the lead to make it accessible to a broad audience, and recognizing that most of the world will not be familiar with US geography is not in any respect "overcorrecting". The information in the infobox, in most views, is not visible until after the lead, and should not substitute for it; article naming conventions, meanwhile, are completely irrelevant to how things are referred to within an article. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
Nikkimaria, you are fighting to add two words that don't appear to be consistent with the MOS, nor common usage. How about we both assume that each of us has a good reason for our perspective? I am always happy to follow the WP:BRD process and will always engage in discussion on content disputes. My recommendation to you would be to propose an addition to the MOS, maybe at WP:FIRSTSENTENCE that states something like For physical locations, structures, or places, the country of location should be included in the first sentence. For cities in the United States, this should be written as "CITY, STATE, United States" (e.g. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States). This would make things plainly clear and easy to apply. Regardless of OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, the prevailing usage across Wikipedia is not to include this. At a certain point, overall prevailing usage is consensus. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @  18:53, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
I am indeed assuming good faith in believing that you are not deliberately seeking to make the article less accessible, and I do appreciate you personally do not need this context. But it simply is not the case that the absence of an explicit sentence like you propose means that being inclusive is inconsistent with MOS. MOS:INTRO already says exactly the opposite, emphasizing the importance of accessibility, which is why it is indeed common to include country in lead sections - see for example the university whose games this stadium hosted, FA-level sports venues like Lumen Field or Gateshead International Stadium, or much more widely known landmarks like Big Ben or the Eiffel Tower. And there does not seem to be any harm in taking this very small, easy step to help meet the needs of our international audience. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)