|Camp Nou was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|Current status: Former good article nominee|
|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|To-do list for Camp Nou:|
|This article is written in American English (labor, traveled, realize, airplane), and some terms used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on September 24, 2011 and September 24, 2013.|
|WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|
Why does everyone call it "The Nou Camp"?
It is quite absurd, unnecessary and very widespread. First of all, where does the "The" come from? And secondly, why reverse the two words? It drives me absolutely crazy every time it's repeated on the radio and TV as "The Nou Camp"
It is actually called "Camp Nou"
It would be like calling Man U's stadium, "The Trafford Old" or Fulham's "The Cottage Craven"
- It is precisely this reason WHY we call it the "nou camp" - because camp and nou both when spoken are understood by english speakers (Nou sounds and means the same as new), it sounds like an english name with the noun-adjective order the wrong way round. Therefore Camp Nou sounds awkward and it is more natural for us to anglify it to Nou Camp. If the name was more foreign sounding we wouldn't have this problem. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 11:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- I have to agree with you on the Nou Camp mistake. The name of the stadium is Camp Nou. LaFuzion 20:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
- The source is simple. British television commentators. Such figures as Andy Grey and Martin Tyler, who have otherwise gained my hatred for their incessant and useless contribution to the FIFA video games, are also the source for this error. It is hard for them to grasp the grammatical eccentricities of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- The reason people continue to call it the Nou Camp is because when it was being built, and before it had a name, it was commonly referred to as the "nou camp", which simply means the "new ground". This was of course when Barça was still playing at Les Corts, the "old ground". Once it was opened it was officially named Camp Nou, which has a more formal ring to it (although the meaning is the same), but the old informal name has stuck, and not only among British television commentators. Rabascius (talk) 07:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC).
Actually, in Catalan, the adjective 'nou' can be used either before or after the noun, so both Camp Nou and Nou Camp were correct and used in Catalan, and this was not the official name of the stadium. People just called it the 'new ground' until it was officially maned Camp Nou a few years ago.
It's not a mistake in English (or in Spain). It was only officially renamed Camp Nou in 2000. Colloquially, it was called both Camp Nou and Nou Camp in Spain for decades, with the former being slightly more common. Therefore, I think it's hard to call it "incorrect." The same with the definite article. The stadium's name is preceded by the definite article "el" in both Catalan and Spanish. (And there are plenty of examples of English football stadiums with a definite article: the Dell, the Eremites, the Madjedski, the Brittania, etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
One of two is wrong!
seats ok. But Capacity only 98|787. I would guess the capacity is rSomething has to be wrong here. 112|000 ight. Then the 112|000 seats must wrong?
How is Camp Nou pronounced? That'd be helpful for English speakers.
- /'kam 'nɔw/
What is meant by "most atmospheric"?
- What it says, I imagine -- that the Camp Nou is a particularly well known venue in terms of the emotional impact on/of the supporters. It's slightly POV to say this, I suppose, but undoubtedly accurate. --Ngb 19:23, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Meaning of the name
Camp Nou means, literally, in English, New Field, not New Stadium. Therefore, it is correct to call it Camp Nou Stadium, as it means New Field Stadium. -- Mankawabi 12:01 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd say 'ground' is a more accurate translation of 'camp'.
correct capacity: 98787, as wrote on the offical site of Barcelona F.C.
The capacity listed by the team's official website is 98,772, not 98,787 OR the above mentioned 112,000. The capacity was probably much higher prior to FIFA regulations concerning crowds (the Hillsborough Disaster probably being a major factor). Perhaps we should create a section about prior capacities? -- Isaiahcambron 17:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed this sentence from the first paragraph of the article:
According to the list linked to, the stadium is certainly not the third largest by capacity. It is not even third largest in capacity on the List of football (soccer) stadiums by capacity. The claim of largest in Europe seems accurate at least. This needs to be sorted out further, though. —Ed Cormany 22:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Deletion in "Notable Games"
I deleted "*2007: FC Barcelona 6 - Atlético Madrid 0 (La Liga)" from the Notable Games section because this game was not played in the Camp Nou, but rather in the Estadio Vicente Calderon in Madrid. --Isaiahcambron 13:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Barcelona is a city
"UEFA 5-star rated stadium"
The article claims the stadium is a 5-star rated stadium, with a link to the EUFA Elite stadium page, which contains no reference to 5-star ratings. I'm guessing that 5-star is an older rating, and that the new rating would be EUFA Elite. Could someone who knows this fix this sentence? Rks13 (talk) 23:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
the nou camps capacity was reduced to around the current figure, dudesleeper reverted to 116,000 then referenced a link which doesn't confirm this. The capacity hasn't reduced since it was all seated. Check the 1999 champions league final for conformation. I'd appreciate it if Dudesleeper didn't revert it back to 116,000 even if s/he is certain that is the figure because it clearly isn't the number! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone else agree that the beginning of the article should be revised?
"The Camp Nou (Catalan for "new field"; Catalan pronunciation: [kam ˈnɔw]); often called Nou Camp in both Spanish and English) is a football stadium in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain."
I think it should read: "Camp Nou (Catalan for "New Field"; Catalan pronunciation: [kam ˈnɔw]); often erroneously called Nou Camp in English) is a football stadium in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.
I've personally never heard anyone in Spanish use the Nou Camp pronunciation in both media and person, plus I think it's somewhat misleading. Also it should be pointed out that it's an error to use that pronunciation. LaFuzion (talk) 14:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Removal of paragraph from "Future" section
I have removed the following paragraph from the "Future" section of the article:
- The current board Joan Laporta convened an international competition to perform a new redevelopment will achieve larger capacity of 15,000 seats of the field, reaching 113,000 seats. The works consist of raising the grandstand area to level it to the rest of the stadium. In turn, investments will also achieve a more secure and comfortable Camp Nou. After a jury's City CouncilThe Colegio de Arquitectos own club and chose 10 finalists from 79 projects submitted, the day September 18, 2007 was to inform the public that the winner was the project team of the British architect Norman Foster.
The above paragraph, along with several other unintelligible paragraphs from the History section, was added by Jim856796 on . It appears that he took , ran it through some web translator (probably Google), and then copy-pasted the results. Considering that his talk page shows that he is a person who can type comprehensibly, his incomprehensible changes to this article suggest as much. While these efforts are appreciated, there's a good reason we don't just Google Translate the entirety of en.wikipedia.org and port to other languages. While I believe that there is valuable information to be found in this paragraph, there doesn't seem to be much that isn't already stated, and there are some ambiguous parts that I wouldn't guess at "fixing" myself, not being an expert at Catalan and all.
The History section is also poorly translated, but its general meaning is understandable and can be fixed by an enterprising editor.
It's rather unfortunate that such a thing has happened, considering that in my efforts to locate the source of the translation, Google showed me dozens of websites that have quoted (word for word) the above terribly-translated paragraph. It's really amazing these days how much wikipedia content is copy and pasted throughout the web. -Jaardon (talk) 00:30, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Camp Nou's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "fcbarcelona6":
- From List of FC Barcelona managers: "Roma Forns". FC Barcelona. Retrieved 29 July 2010.
- From FC Barcelona: "Brief history of Camp Nou". FC Barcelona. Retrieved 30 July 2010.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Can Future Section
Hi, I read over the article and can't see any reason that the entire section called future can't be shrunk down into about three sentences and moved somewhere else. If anyone more involved wants to tackle this, I'd be happy to move aside, but something needs to be done. Sven Manguard Talk 22:06, 25 September 2010 (UTC)