Talk:Alassane Ouattara Stadium

Requested move 28 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved. Pending a definite proposal. Mike Cline (talk) 13:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Stade National de la Côte d'Ivoire → ? – The article currently has 5 different names for the stadium:

• Stade National de la Côte d'Ivoire
• Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé
• Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara
• Ebimpé Stadium
• Olympic Stadium of Ebimpé

I'm not advocating for any specific name, but there's a good chance the article should be moved to something else. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 22:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. _{دَستخَط،} اِفلاق ^{(کَتھ باتھ)} 04:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 20:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support move to Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé? looks to be most widely used/official. GiantSnowman 12:25, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. The current name is recognisable, and there seems no stronger case for any of the alternatives given so far. The official name bears little weight unless it can be shown to be used in reliable secondary sources. Andrewa (talk) 15:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC) Withdrawing that !vote in view of discussion below. Andrewa (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Andrewa: Apparently, Stade National de la Côte d'Ivoire has 9 results on Google, Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé has 202 results, Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara has 127 results, Ebimpé Stadium has 2 results, and Olympic Stadium of Ebimpé has 1 result. I'd guess that one of either Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé or Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara is the WP:COMMONNAME, rather than the current title. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 15:53, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you! Good data. I'm still inclined to argue that the current name is more recognisable, as many who know where Côte d'Ivoire is would not associate Ebimpé (which appears to be a neighbourhood in the region of Anyama) or even Alassane Ouattara with that country. So maybe IAR. But striking my !vote in view of evidence now provided. Andrewa (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• Interestingly, FIFA, CAF and the Ivorian Government all call the stadium Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé. The Ivorian FA calls it "Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara d’Ebimpé-Anyama". The French Wikipedia seems to suggest that "stade olympique d'Ebimpé" is the official name, with "stade Alassane-Ouattara" being a nickname. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 22:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• I used to think it was Wikipedia policy that official names were irrelevant in RM discussions. This has lately been challenged and my efforts to clarify it on the relevant talk pages have failed. Sources that use the official name are arguably primary sources so far as the name is concerned, so it made sense to me that they should be disregarded. But it's apparently more complicated than that. Andrewa (talk) 04:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• @GiantSnowman: pinging following new comments. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 08:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I have amended my comment. GiantSnowman 09:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose (reinstating my original now struck !vote): I remain very suspicious of the attempts by Alassane Ouattara to name the stadium after himself. Of course if these are successful and it becomes the common name in English we just need to accept that. But we should be a bit wary of sources under his control. And the problem with titles containing Ebimpé is that it seems to be a very obscure locality and name. So of the five names nom found in the article, that leaves only one, the current one. And appeals to French-language sources including the French Wikipedia are I think completely irrelevant. So by all means have redirects from the other four proposed article names, but I can't see any justification for a move. Andrewa (talk) 13:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• The current title is not the common name, though. That's the point of this move discussion. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 18:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

• That's one of the claims. But the evidence for it is unconvincing so far. Andrewa (talk) 21:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

• I mean, the onus is on you to demonstrate that the current title is the common name. I have provided enough evidence to suggest otherwise. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 22:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

• I'm sorry but that is quite simply false, and I have no idea what can have suggested it to you.
• There is no onus on me or anyone else to justify the current title. Quite frankly, that idea is ridiculous.
• The onus is on the supporters of the move to justify one. Whether you have provided enough evidence to establish that the proposed new title is the common name is one thing that the closer will need to consider, because if you have done so then that is a strong argument in favour of the move. So they will probably form their own opinion on that, and will consider yours, but I think we already knew it.
• But my opinion remains that you have not yet done so. The sources that you have provided are too closely linked to the President himself and to people he controls.
• I hope that helps. Andrewa (talk) 03:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Claiming that the CIV President controls FIFA and the CAF is a bold claim. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 07:53, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• A straw man argument. Nobody is claiming that the CIV President controls FIFA and the CAF.
• FIFA and the CAF are not secondary sources with respect to the stadium name. They can be expected to use the official name. That is how they linked to the President himself and to people he controls. Are you denying this? Andrewa (talk) 12:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

If FIFA and the CAF use the official name, and the official name is the most widely-used name, it stands to reason that it's the common name, and the article title should reflect that. I still don't see any real argument for keeping the current title other than "it sounds good". Nehme₁₄₉₉ 19:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.