Talk:Stamford Bridge (stadium)
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Page move
- 2 Names
- 3 Move ?
- 4 Pics of East and West stand
- 5 West stand contradiction
- 6 Why wasn't the profile of the East stand retained for the new stands?
- 7 Fair use rationale for Image:Stamford Bridge.JPG
- 8 Capacity
- 9 Damn this stadium
- 10 Photos on Flickr
- 11 UEFA stadium categories
- 12 Bridge
- 13 Requested move
- 14 The North Stand
- 15 File:Middx v NZ 1905.jpg Nominated for Deletion
- 16 1066?
I have reverted the cut and paste move of this page to Stamford Bridge Stadium. Tot he anonymous user that moved it - please do not move pages by cut and paste as it causes the edit history to be lost. See Help:Renaming (moving) a page for instructions. If there is a problem with this, or if the move is controversial, then list the page on Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Vclaw 11:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Added clarification as to who "Abramovich" and "Mourinho" are. Also, links to surnames replaced with links to articles about each person respectively 22.214.171.124 10:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Pics of East and West stand
The layout of the two stand pics looks a bit clunky. It might just be my browser (firefox 1.5.05 on linux) rendering it in a weird way, but I doubt it. I had a go at fixing it, but that just made it worse. Anyone else want to have a go at improving it? --Apyule 12:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
West stand contradiction
The west stand section says that it has 3 tiers as well as saying that construction was stopped after only 1 was built. Can anyone clear this up? Thanks, --Apyule 13:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Even if the point about construction halting after the first tier was built because of planning difficulties is true (and no source has been given), the hiccup was only very brief, as the stand was complete in three tiers only a few seasons after work began. Even if true, this bit of information is of no current or continuing interest sufficient to justify a place in an encyclopaedia article. I have deleted it. Chelseaboy 14:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for clearing that up. --Apyule 10:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Why wasn't the profile of the East stand retained for the new stands?
This has concerned me for a while. The ground looks a bit disjointed, with tiers starting and finishing at different levels, and with little apparent attempt at harmonizing the overall look.
Is there a specific reason why the existing profile of the East stand could not have been continued all the way round the ground? Is it a strange or problematic tier formation? I appreciate the East Stand is HUGE and it may not have been practical to create such a large, three tiered "bowl", but surely things could have been made slightly more co-ordinated than they are?
- it was said in the last few months by Chelsea that modern safety standards would require any replacement stand built on the site to use a lower angle for the stepping than the current east stand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Stamford Bridge.JPG
Image:Stamford Bridge.JPG 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 00:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The page says it was the largest ground before Emirates - how is that possible with a capacity of around 42K only?
188.8.131.52 20:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Largest in London. SteveO 20:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
For some reason the capacity is listed as over 50,000 when it is in fact 42,055 (as cited here http://www.chelseafc.com/page/HistoryDetail/0,,10268~1328575,00.html). The West Stand seats around 13,500, not 20 odd thousand as listed. The overall capacity is also incorrectly stated here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_stadia_by_capacity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 00:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- The capacities are a mess. As are many stadiums on wikipedia, using sources that contradict each other, or no sources at all. Chelsea's official page on the present day stadium shows 41,623, the Premier League claim it's 41,798, this article uses 41,837 (no source) and if you add up the capacities listed for each stand on this article, you get over 64,000! No point editing it since having done that before, my edit to another stadium page got revert because the public sources all disagree. Bertcocaine (talk) 23:51, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Damn this stadium
Photos on Flickr
Just an inform: I went on tour to Stamford Bridge this summer and my photos are here on Flickr. If someone like one of them, he can upload it on Commons whit the respective Flickr license. Just let me know, please.--Andrea 93 (msg) 11:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
UEFA stadium categories
In this article, the UEFA stadium categorie of Stamford Bridge is not precised.
File:Middx v NZ 1905.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Middx v NZ 1905.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Middx v NZ 1905.jpg)
The stadium was built in 1066? Was this before of after the arrival of Billy I?