This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.
Well, although the way the article phrases that the roof of the stadium was controversial was such that I interpreted it incorrectly, there is in fact a source for the controversy claim (well, probably several sources). I located this one: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-93959285.html, so I'm putting it in the references. Unfortunately, I cannot verify if the article indeed originated in the Washington Post.
I also think that the word "controversial" might be unnecessary altogether, though I will not remove it. It seems to refer to something that is presently moot. Perhaps an entire section on the roof controversy might make it warranted, however - from the abundance of news coverage that shouldn't be hard to do. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I saw the reference too but it does not show the part of the reason why it is controversial here. I would like to see the reason why it is posted in the article instead of the current form which I feel is unencyclopedic. Anyway can we do better than just a Pay Per Link and only 1 word. Sawblade05(talk to me|my wiki life) 23:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I should like to raise a question over the "owner" section in the template; governments are usually not the owners of such venues, or owners of anything really. The "OAKA" in particular belongs to the Greek public sector and as such is owned by Greece as an entity. Bottom line, the wording needs to be amended. --Chrysalifourfour (talk) 22:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)