Talk:Stadium MK

message: As and when the info becomes available, please update this infobox.  When it is ready, we can move into the article.
I've taken the infobox out as it seems that a suitable one has already been added to the article. Zorro77 19:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox to be added

message: Does anybody know if the Stadium consortium are going to persist with the daft "Stadium MK" name? (choose between colon, hyphen, non-breaking space or nothing between the words).  The centre:mk name has been a pathetic failure, imo. Any bets on Marshall Stadium?  --Concrete Cowboy 18:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Latest way of writing it is stadiummk - but there is no official name yet and this seems to still be a working name. Mk3severo 13:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. See Stadium of Light and Emirates Stadium for precedent. Move.  --Concrete Cowboy 22:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved it. --Concrete Cowboy 17:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Small S seems to be preferred version (as per the centre:mk), but sentences still have to start with a capital letter. Just because the overpaid brand management company comes up with something they imagine is "kewl" is not a good reason for us to use it obsessively and illiterately.  --Concrete Cowboy 17:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been fixing the redirects from Denbigh Stadium.  Mostly I've used capital S and where I haven't, I wish I had.  In English, proper nouns have capital letters.  In my view, we shouldn't be seduced by the branding, we should use Stadium:mk in all references.  What does anybody else think? --Concrete Cowboy 17:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter what we think: easyJet, occam (programming language), dinnerladies, lovehatetragedy and iTunes are all examples where the branding has been to start the proper noun with a lowercase letter. (For a full list see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Lowercase.) However, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) indicates that a capital letter should be used (as it currently is). The uniqueness of the :mk section of the name is not covered so is a judgement call I feel. SeveroTC 18:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, that settles it.  All textual use in wikipedia is Stadium:mk, but the infobox can use "stadium:mk" in the title. --Concrete Cowboy 12:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name - and proposal to move this article

message: Should the s of stadium be a small one or large one? I'm getting confused as it's written several different ways on the MK Dons website... SeveroTC 15:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Small S seems to be preferred version (as per the centre:mk), but sentences still have to start with a capital letter. Just because the overpaid brand management company comes up with something they imagine is "kewl" is not a good reason for us to use it obsessively and illiterately.  --Concrete Cowboy 17:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been fixing the redirects from Denbigh Stadium.  Mostly I've used capital S and where I haven't, I wish I had.  In English, proper nouns have capital letters.  In my view, we shouldn't be seduced by the branding, we should use Stadium:mk in all references.  What does anybody else think? --Concrete Cowboy 17:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter what we think: easyJet, occam (programming language), dinnerladies, lovehatetragedy and iTunes are all examples where the branding has been to start the proper noun with a lowercase letter. (For a full list see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Lowercase.) However, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) indicates that a capital letter should be used (as it currently is). The uniqueness of the :mk section of the name is not covered so is a judgement call I feel. SeveroTC 18:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, that settles it.  All textual use in wikipedia is Stadium:mk, but the infobox can use "stadium:mk" in the title. --Concrete Cowboy 12:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stadium:mk or stadium:mk (or even Stadium:MK)

message: I see the club home page is calling it stadiummk now. Is it time to move the article to that name?--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: ''stadium''mk again

message: It would be good to include a para on the construction (timetable, budget, etc) - and it would provide a good hook to hang that nice helicopter view of the roof under construction.  Or we could just add a gallery? --Concrete Cowboy 17:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that sort of info can just be added to the first section for the time being. Perhaps have a seperate 'construction' section when the stadium is completed. I like the idea of a gallery for additional pics though, perhaps before the 'References' section. It would tidy the article up.  --Zorro77 13:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit that put thumbnails down the left seems to have improved the layout so looks fine to me now.  As you say, as more details emerge about the construction, they can be added until there is enough info to make a separate section. --Concrete Cowboy 18:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction info 

message: I am still confused about the capacity. Is the "upper tier" the second tier that is already in place? A few weeks ago it had no seats, and I thought that perhaps they weren't going to install them yet. But the lower tier doesn't look like it seats 22,000 and the latest pictures show seats on the upper tier. Also recents items on the club's site refer to a 30,000 capacity as if that is what it will be at the start of next season. AshbyJnr 23:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The current configuration seats 22,000.  There is space for another 8,000 seats to be added "up in the gods". --Concrete Cowboy 22:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Capacity confusion

message: I seriously doubt that the majority of the Wikipedia community would class that as appropriate for an encyclopediac article such as this one. I suggest it is changed or replaced with a more suitable nickname actually used by some of the fans at MK. Jazza5 17:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's arguable.  As far as I could tell, "Moocamp" was invented by MK News and has never been taken up by the much larger circulation MK Gazette.  But there is a fan site called moocamp.com, so it has some foundation.  Do a google search - not a lot of sites but more than a few.  But I think think there needs to be more evidence of general acceptance for it to feature as fact - most people would regard it as just too silly. --John Maynard Friedman 17:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moocamp... 

message: Please note that the copyright of the above image is not owned by "mkdonsrus.com" and therefore the permission they have given is invalid.  The image was taken by my father as part of a photographic shoot for Buckingham Construction, but the copyright of the photo was not transferred and remains with my father.
I am loathed to remove the photograph at this stage until I hear further comment from those with an interest in this page, and am not an expert in how copyright of images is treated within wikipedia, but I would suggest the alternatives are a) remove the image, or b) modify the details attached to the photograph within commons and assign credit to my father (not sure if he is happy for this to happen at the moment, but will ask if this is the preferred option among editors).
Your views? ColourSarge (talk) 09:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The image has to be removed immediately, since the declaration that it was freely donated without any reservations whatever has proved to be false. This is a real pity but I can see why your father would not wish to give away his rights.  The only compromise I can think of is that he might consider putting a 300 pixel image into the public domain and retaining his rights to the hi-res version (he could put a note to that effect on the image record. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi JMF, I've had a message from the user who initially uploaded the pic as well along similar lines and I'll be speaking to my father about doing just that.  If it would be useful and by way of a show of good faith I will also ask if there are any other images he would be willing to release, as he documented construction from greenfield to complete (well as far as complete currently goes!) ColourSarge (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation : Image:Denbigh_stadium_aerial_july_06.jpeg 

message: I've just seen a TV interview from the stadium, and there are now seats in the upper tier on at least one side. Luwilt (talk) 13:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on pictures on Flickr, it's just the central section of the main stand, between two sets of corporate boxes, and the new seats - just  a couple of hundred of them - were installed between August and October. Luwilt (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Some upper tier seats installed

message: An anon editor keeps changing the 44,000 figure quoted in the Times article to "45,000 to 55,000". If he/she has a more reliable source for this figure, then please produce it. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capacity increase needed if World Cup 2018 bid succeeds 

message: The name of this article needs to be changed, because the stadium is no longer called stadium:mk. The club site uses :Image:stadiummk logo.svg
which could be rendered as stadiummk, but the article would be called Stadiummk. 
However, given that the logotype has a very clear break between the word 'stadium' and the acronym 'mk', in background as well as typeface, it seems to me that Stadium mk would be a far more appropriate way to render the logo.  For what it is worth, the local road signs use this style.
Comments? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go for Stadium mk, having it all as one word is frankly confusing for people without the necessary background. —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 16:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As there have been no further comments, I'll do the move to Stadium MK. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:58, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Please move the page to Stadium MK as this form appears to be in use most widely eg http://www.arenamk.com/about/about-stadium-mk/.John a s (talk) 19:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to change the name of the article now 

message: In fact I moved it then to 'Stadium mk'! It now seems that the name is being changed agsin, this time to 'Stadium MK'. Does anybody have a firm statement [well, press release] for this, before I do it? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:21, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please move the page to Stadium MK as this form appears to be in use most widely eg http://www.arenamk.com/about/about-stadium-mk/.John a s (talk) 19:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Stadium MK

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Stadium mk. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320014714/http://www.saracens.com/news/view.php?Id=4593 to http://www.saracens.com/news/view.php?Id=4593
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131111042123/http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/mm/Document/Tournament/Mediazone/02/06/65/07/rwc-2015-match-schedule.pdf to http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/mm/Document/Tournament/Mediazone/02/06/65/07/rwc-2015-match-schedule.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150429112358/http://www.premiershiprugby.com/matchcentre/fixtures/35675.php to http://www.premiershiprugby.com/matchcentre/fixtures/35675.php
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/my_club/northampton/8949306.stm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The stadium nickname inside the infobox is still listed as "Moo Camp". As previously discussed, this appears to be a nickname coined by a local paper and mentioned once or twice by other press over the past decade or so (by The Sun in 2018..). A google search for 'Moo Camp' returns this wiki page, an abandoned Facebook page and a couple of minor forum posts as well as The Sun article. All in all, there is no strong evidence or source that backs this nickname being in frequent or widespread use. Indeed, as a supporter of the club myself, there is no widespread usage as far as I am aware and I have never heard another supporter or the club itself refer to the stadium as the "Moo Camp". I suggest the nick name is removed from the page for the time being. FilthyDon (talk) 03:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Support per nom. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:30, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moo camp (2019)