Talk:Ohio Stadium

Looks Odd

This article looks odd, for some reason information on the opening, columbus crew, and present day is below the notes section. I don't have the wiki knowledge to fix it...but could someone try to fix it? --Scotsworth 03:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

In this article it says the Marble Cliff Quary Co. built the Horseshoe. I also edited the article for LeVeque Tower, which previously said that this company's labor was used in the construction of that structure. Neither of these structures are built from natural stone. The Horseshoe was revolutionary in that it was built with cement. In fact many people thought the building would not last very long because it was built with cement. Conversely, LeVeque tower has a granite footer at the base of the building, like many highrises, but is actually clad in terra-cotta which was used very frequently during that period because it looked like limestone. Could someone show me some citation for this company. Ntyler01mil 06:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The Buckeyes aren't a "tenant"--it's their stadium.--Buckboard 08:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Images for article

These images have been uploaded for use in this article and released into the Public Domain. Please feel free to use them where they are useful. If you remove them from the talk page without adding them to the article, please nominate them for deletion. ~ BigrTex 20:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

• 
  Image:Cinn99.jpg
• 
  Image:Minn981.jpg
• 
  Image:OSU vs. Illinois 2005 031.jpg
• 
  Image:Illinois1.jpg

GA Review

Good job on the article. It's complete and gives a good overview of the history of the stadium, and gives good coverage in particular to its use by the Columbus Crew. The pictures are useful and the infobox is well-constructed. That being said, I do have several suggestions for improvement for the article. They're not significant enough for me to deny a GA assessment, but I'd strongly recommend changing or fixing them:

• The flow of the article is a little awkward in places. The sections don't naturally lead from one to the next, particularly in the transition from the planning/construction section to the opening section. The article moves from discussing flowers inspired by the dedication game to the first game held in the stadium. To me, the first game would naturally be the dedication game, though that isn't the case. It creates a brief bit of confusion. In addition, there are awkward sentences such as "Instead of employing numerous columns like those at Harvard Stadium, Smith designed double columns that allow for more space between columns." The word 'columns' is used three times in that short sentence, and twice in rapid succession. I'd suggest reading it out loud in order to get a sense of where things should be rewritten.
• The article isn't proportional in its coverage. There's a lot of information about the Columbus Crew holding games in the facility, something that lasted for just three years. There's just as much space devoted to this three-year stint as there is to OSU's 85-year stay in the stadium. This needs to be greatly expanded.
• Very little is included about the physical characteristics of the facility -- the locker rooms, suites, press box, and other aspects the stadium shares with others in the Big Ten. How does it compare? Are these features better, worse, or about the same?
• Are there any major traditions held in the stadium? People knowledgable about college football will know about dotting the I, but readers outside the United States do not inherently know of this tradition. Are there any others that could be mentioned?
• The article has wikilinked names like Beano Cook and Mel Kiper without spelling out why they're important to the article. Include qualifiers with their names so a reader isn't forced to click the link to find out who they are.
• An inflation-adjusted construction cost would be useful, particularly in reference to the renovations section. It's always interesting to compare that amount to the amount spent on renovations.

Right now, the article is barely GA-worthy. Once these changes are made, however, it will be well on its way to becoming worthy of a FAC. JKBrooks85 20:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

In all due respect, this review sounds more like a GA failure. You didn't even mention the that the ref formatting is highly inconsistent. To the article writers--if this and the above issues aren't addressed in a few days, I'll submit for GA Review. Sumoeagle179 01:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This has been listed for GA Review at: Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment#Ohio_Stadium. Sumoeagle179 20:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

How can you say "a few days" and then put it up for review a day later?? makes no sense to me. Some people dont have hours to spend on fixing things like that and all you are doing is creating more of an issue by not giving it a few days because now there is no point in trying to fix it and debate in a GA Review. I will address the issues but I dont have all the time in the world like some people, so for now it looks like we will have to renominate it all over again once a few things are fixed.--Joebengo 00:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Renomination is clearly the right thing to do in this situation. The article should not have been taken to GAR because it should not have been passed in the first place. Fortunately, not too much time has been wasted on debate. Good luck with the work which really matters: improving the article. Geometry guy 20:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Sources

At least one of these sources (the one about the flower color in the rotunda) is hardly a reputable source. Note, he doesn't cite any sources in his article. It seems dangerously close to taking local legend and counting it as fact.

Attendance

The 5th highest attendance is dated 11-28-06, but there was no Ohio State football game on that date, and likely no event that would have an attendance above 100,000. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.230.191.52 (talk) 20:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Musco Lighting

The stadium does not have field lights and when night events do occur special lights must be temporarily installed usually by Musco Lighting (as happened in the 2005 game against Texas and the 2006 nationally televised game with Michigan).

I think we should remove the references to Musco Lighting, mentioning the stadium lacks lighting is fine, but this page isn't an advertisement for a mobile lighting company.

--Mattwolf7 (talk) 00:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Script image

What do you guys think of switching the script with either this or this. Both show the script better (you can read it), but the first one does have a head in it. I like the second one though. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 19:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I dunno. The head-in-the-pic shot is definitely out for me, and I don't like the slant of the second. The second is still better than what we have in there right now, though. And what's the deal with the night shots? (Blurry rotunda and a night-lighting peek of the stadium) I'd like to take out the night-lighting shot altogether (especially since it isn't placed well in the page - overlaps text) and replace the rotunda pic with a good daytime picture. --JaGa^talk 12:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Capacity

How can the record attendance be 4,000 higher than capacity? Isn't that kinda illegal? WFCforLife (talk) 04:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Night Games

Is it still necessary to list the night games? It seems irrelevant now that the stadium is properly equipped for night games and there are multiple per year. Maybe explaining the history at night games in narrative format and the lighting upgrade would be more appropriate. Thoughts? KD0710 (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. No longer something unusual, which was the case even before the renovation that added permanent lights. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ohio Stadium. 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/20110725033140/http://www.ohiostatebuckeyes.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=17300&KEY=&ATCLID=925256 to http://www.ohiostatebuckeyes.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=17300&KEY=&ATCLID=925256

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Newly public domain

This article and its photographs are now in the Public Domain. ɱ (talk) 15:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Field name

At this point, there are no consistent sources that use "Safelite Field at Ohio Stadium" for the full name. This seems to be more like the Oakland Coliseum, where the field is named, but it's not really considered part of an "official" name. The source currently in this article, which announced the deal, uses "Safelite Field at Ohio Stadium" ("Now fans can expect to be greeted by stadium announcers, as well as TV and radio voices to “Safelite Field at Ohio Stadium.”") but other game sources (ESPN, OSU, CBS Sports) and the university's own facilities page just uses "Ohio Stadium". The sponsorship should be mentioned, but at this point, doesn't appear to be appropriate for the infobox header. That could obviously change in the future. -- JonRidinger (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2023

Please add the two days Morgan Wallen will be at the stadium (August 11, 2023 and August 12, 2023) in concerts. Proof is here: 76.166.183.180 (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

References

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 19:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)