Talk:Johan Cruyff Arena

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL 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.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Football: Netherlands Mid‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Dutch football task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Move to "Amsterdam Arena"[edit]

Survey[edit]

Add Support or Oppose on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Support. Per WP:MOSTM, I suggest that this article be moved to Amsterdam Arena. While one could argue that the article for TNA Impact! made sense for not being changed, this is clearly different. The second capital A is in there purely for stylistic reasons. What I would like to do is start a move request. 70.111.73.9 22:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. {..::M@®©™ ::..} (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC) Everyone allways complains when stadiums lose their traditional names in favor for coorporate sponsership. The last capital A is in the official logo so it should stay[reply]

Capacity Expansion?[edit]

I haven't heard about any kind of capacity increasment in the ArenA, it is not in the future plans for the Amsterdam Arena in its official website so I am asking why there isn't a source about this thing? Johny1407 11:26, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Wdtdvd.jpg[edit]

The image File:Wdtdvd.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Skomorokh 12:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Amsterdam ArenA → Amsterdam Arena — As per previous request (trademarks, naming conventions and capitalisation), relisted to gain consensus. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 19:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Current name goes against WP:MOSTM as it's a stylized name only. TJ Spyke 22:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support as above; unless somebody can show it is (like eBay) usage. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support IAW WP:MOSTM.
— $V = I * R$ (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems uncontroversial. Jafeluv (talk) 10:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Agree Aaroncrick (talk) 10:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just like eBay, iPod and other uncommon spelled brands Amsterdam ArenA is a registered brand. The ArenA foundation doesn't use the spelling Arena in any way; instead the only use is ArenA in the logo, press work and on the official website. Therefore I ask for a move of the page to Amsterdam ArenA -just like the Dutch version of Wikipedia- because it's the only official name. --Ultras GE (talk) 23:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Cost of construction[edit]

The stadium was built from 1993 to 1996 at a cost of €140 million.

This statement is factually impossible, given that the euro did not then exist. We should put its cost in Dutch guilders, with the equivalent amount in euros (€140 million) in parentheses. Funnyhat (talk) 05:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (September 2012)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 13:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amsterdam Arena → Amsterdam ArenA – Per the precedent set by GelreDome, eBay and iPod, and the stadium's official website, Sky Sports and UEFA, this article should reflect the correct title of the stadium, which has a capital A at the end of "ArenA". – Pee Jay 14:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Neither eBay or GelreDome apply. The first follows a specific exception trademarks beginning with a one-letter lowercase prefix pronounced as a separate letter do not need to be capitalized if the second letter is capitalized, but should otherwise follow normal capitalization rules: however this is not the case here. The second example is camelCase which is two separate words compounded together with the letter that makes up the Second word capitalized. Neither of these exceptions apply here. I not even sure if GerleDome technically is camelCase since Gerle is not a word but it is a lot closer to cammelcase than this. The only way I would support this would be if it is shown that ArenA is actually pronounced Aran eh (the A pronounced as an upper case letter) and not aran ah otherwise the uppercase A at the end is decorative and none of the exceptions we have allow for this.--174.93.171.108 (talk) 21:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not an example of camelcase but rather a stylistic choice. I oppose on basis of MOS:TM--Labattblueboy (talk) 15:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Giant Snowman 10:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and COMMONNAME. Giant Snowman 10:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The official name is not determined by the way that a name is styled in a logo. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 01:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Labattblueboy and 174.93.171.108. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:59, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Amsterdam Arena. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 01:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed to Johan Cruijff Arena[edit]

Since April 25, all Dutch media call this stadium Johan Cruijff ArenA. This is in line with what director Henk Markerink said. https://soundcloud.com/allsportsradio/henk-markerink-in-de-bv-sport-bv-sport So we should do the same. http://www.parool.nl/sport/aja x-in-uitverkochte-johan-cruijff-arena-tegen-lyon~a4492277/ http://www.hartvannederland.nl/nieuws/2017/groot-feest-en-rondom-johan-cruijff-arena-na-winst-ajax-europa-league/ http://www.volkskrant.nl/sport/ajax-zet-enorme-stap-naar-finale-europa-league-met-4-1-zege-op-lyon~a4492328/ Gretzs Gretzs 5:30, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@Gretzs: Please see WP:RMUM, after a WP:BOLD page move is reverted, please discuss on the talk page or start a WP:RM. Moving the page again is disruptive. S.A. Julio (talk) 04:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gretzs: There has only been a declaration of intent to rename the stadium. I'm afraid you will have to wait for another six months or so. Please stop trying to impose your will on other people across wikis. ErikvanB (talk) 12:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a year has passed and the arena is still officially known as the Amsterdam ArenA, if the stadium will eventually be renamed remains unclear. In any case renaming this Wikipedia article was premature and does not represent the existing state of things but attempts to predict future. -2001:14BA:1FFE:6900:C4E:B628:9E0B:C98 (talk) 01:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 February 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Declining to revert, per the discussion. Dekimasuよ! 18:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Johan Cruyff Arena → Amsterdam Arena – In official website(http://www.amsterdamarena.nl) Stadium name is still Amsterdam Arena and Dutch wiki is also Amsterdam Arena Footwiks (talk) 12:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the official website URL/the Dutch Wikipedia entry are not indicative - the official name is the 'Johan Cruyff Arena', see this and this (both already sourced in the article). Giant Snowman 13:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know the article about name change, I also don't the reason. I think official stadium name didn't change. Where is the Johan Cruyff Arena Crest? Stadium Crest is still Amsterdam Arena. Maybe change project was cancled. And I think my sources are more reliable than yours.

See Stadium Official Homepage, Stadium Official Facebook , Europa League Match Report, AFC Ajax Homepge - Stadium Secton Footwiks (talk)

Oppose: News sources/online publications are now referring to the stadium by the new name, including the official Amsterdam government website. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain about my sources. I know Some sources about Johan Cruyff Arena. If It was changed in April 2017, Why do Stadium official site and Ajax Official site use old name?

Do you think that they are just lazy? Now Febtuary 2018, I don't think so. See Stadium Official Homepage, Stadium Official Facebook , Europa League Match Report, AFC Ajax Homepge - Stadium Secton Footwiks (talk)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Officialy, it really is still called Amsterdam Arena...[edit]

...but if we wait long enough, the article's current name will eventually be the right one (apart from "Cruijff").

So just FYI:

[1] (21 February 2018) – "Terwijl de Amsterdam Arena officieel nog altijd niet de naam draagt van Johan Cruijff ..." – "While the Amsterdam Arena officially still doesn't bear the name of Johan Cruijff ..."
[2] (21 February 2018) – "Het voornemen is ook de Amsterdam Arena naar Cruijff te vernoemen, maar de naamsverandering is er officieel nog niet door." – "The intention is also to name the Amsterdam Arena after Cruijff, but officially the name change is not complete yet."
[3] (21 February 2018) – "Die andere naamswijzing van de Amsterdam Arena naar de Johan Cruijff Arena heeft heel wat meer voeten in de aarde. Dat het gaat gebeuren staat vast, maar de datum is nog steeds onbekend." – "That other name change of the Amsterdam Arena to the Johan Cruijff Arena costs a lot more effort. It is certain that it is going to happen, but the date is still unknown."

Thayts ••• 11:05, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New development! The stadium will officially have its new name from the new football season onwards (starting August this year) [4]. The official name will also be written in part as "Cruijff" [5]. Thayts ••• 16:42, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 April 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested; the editors who objected to the previous proposal are now supporting this request. Dekimasuよ! 01:13, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Johan Cruyff Arena → Amsterdam Arena – On 5 April 2018 it was revealed that the name change will occur only in August 2018. It is clear now that renaming the article was premature. I took the liberty to add the relevant information around the name change to the article with references to news articles describing why the original name change was actually postponed. See also the section directly above this one. Thayts ••• 19:48, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also this news article on the official Amsterdam ArenA website. Caudex Rax ツ (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. I've put that one in the article already. :) Thayts ••• 07:16, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:25, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose pre previous discussion and nominator's own admission that this is not the name. Come back in August when/if the name has actually changed. Giant Snowman 09:58, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @GiantSnowman: I'm not sure what you're saying here. "Johan Cruyff Arena" is indeed not the right name, that's why I'd like to stick to the facts and move to the current name. Keeping a wrong name until August is simply misleading (and indeed wrong) and is not something that should be in an encyclopedia. The previous discussion did not include references to all developments such as the postponed name change, so it was closed based on incomplete information. All the information is now in the article and the clear conclusion is that the name is still "Amsterdam Arena". Thayts ••• 12:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you for clarifying. You should have made it clearer that the current name is 'Amsterdam Arena' and it will not change to 'Johan Cruyff Arena' until August 2018. I would support a move back to Amsterdam Arena as that is the current name. Giant Snowman 13:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support move for now, under the understanding that the article will be re-moved in August. The initial move was premature. ONR (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support temporary move for now until the new season begins. I had moved the article based off the sources given, though now it is clear the name has not yet officially changed (though organisations have already begun to refer to the stadium by the new name). Also, given that the English WP:COMMONNAME is "Cruyff", I'd think in August the article should be moved back to "Johan Cruyff Arena" (and not "Johan Cruijff Arena")? S.A. Julio (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Per [6] and [7] the official spelling will be "Cruijff". From that second source, under the header "Schrijfwijze" ("Notation"), I also quote:
  Besides, for the name of the stadium the correct Dutch notation will be maintained: 'Cruijff' with 'ij' instead of 'y'. This in contrast to the Cruyff Foundation and the Cruyff Courts.
  "In an international context, maybe it will be called Cruyff Arena, but for the official name it was chosen to stay close to the Dutch Johan", says Thate.
  Thate is a spokeswoman for the Cruijff family. That said, I'm not sure if Wikipedia policy applies here to write an official name differently. Thayts ••• 07:43, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - The official name of the Dutch super cup is the "Johan Cruijff Schaal", but the article is titled "Johan Cruyff Shield". There are many cases where stadium names are translated, but not sure if in this situation it should also apply. I'll maybe bring this up at WP:FOOTY later this year. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name change discussion notification[edit]

A discussion is being held about the upcoming name change and what the spelling of the article title should be at WT:FOOTY#Johan Cruijff Arena. Consensus is desired before 4 August. Thayts ••• 06:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 August 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved. See sufficient recent reliable sources and significant support below for the Anglicized name, Johan Cruyff Arena. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 18:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amsterdam Arena → ? – The stadium has been officially renamed as the "Johan Cruijff Arena" (stylised as "ArenA", though per MOS:TMCAPS/MOS:TM most independent sources do not follow this). The official name of the stadium (1, 2, 3) uses the Dutch spelling (Cruijff), which is used on UEFA's match page, though many English language articles (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) use the anglicised version (Cruyff). Therefore I propose two options: Option 1: Johan Cruijff Arena (official name/Dutch spelling), or Option 2: Johan Cruyff Arena (anglicised version). S.A. Julio (talk) 07:03, 1 August 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 16:12, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Giant Snowman 12:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Option 2 to match established Anglicised spelling of Johan Cruyff. Giant Snowman 12:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think we should move the article today. Since there is a slight tendency towards option 2, maybe that should be the choice. It can be discussed later again if so desired, of course. Thayts ••• 10:25, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support option 2. Also does this move put on hold because we wait for the start of the Eredivisie? – Flix11 (talk) 02:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Option 2 Blue Wiki (talk) 16:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC) Like GiantSnowman stated, the Anglicised spelling is much established.[reply]
Oppose. I get more than two million ghits for "Amsterdam Arena" -Wikipedia and only 50,400 for "Johan Cruyff Arena" -Wikipedia. The new name may become common and may not, it's a hard call and we don't make it anyway. The citing of a few individual sources doesn't prove anything when this is such a common topic of discussion in English. Andrewa (talk) 20:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - You're opposing the move altogether? Well of course it is not common yet, the name change has just recently happened. But is is official and I think Wikipedia should reflect the actual situation. Thayts ••• 23:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, I'm afraid I'm opposing the move altogether. We use the common name in preference to the official name. This policy is not without its critics, but there are reasons for it. Andrewa (talk) 00:05, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - The stadium has been named the "Amsterdam Arena" for 22 years, naturally that will garner more search results at the moment. That does not change the fact that now Johan Cruijff/Cruyff Arena is the common name, as can be seen in various news articles (examples from the last month ~~here~~, here, here, here, here, and here). S.A. Julio (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - We do give more weight to recent sources, see WP:NAMECHANGES. But no change of !vote. This change is as you say a recent change to a long-standing name, and I get ten pages of ghits in the last month, [8] so lots of people still use the old name. And they may for some time... as well as being a former name, it's also a descriptive phrase, which the official name is not. I get about the same for the proposed name, but many of them are primary sources, which will all use the official name of course. But it may catch on, and unlike a sponsorship renaming, it's unlikely to change in the future. Andrewa (talk) 02:28, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        For me, that search result shows travel websites, concert tickets and YouTube videos (all the results aren't even matches), none of which are reliable or should be used to make a judgement. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        For me, it shows all of those, but some reliable and relevant secondary sources as well. Andrewa (talk) 00:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Do you have an example? I've gone through all the pages of the web and news results from the last month, and of the English language sources (excluding travel/ticket sites) the only reliable source I've found is an article from the Irish Examiner. On the other hand, I've found a variety of reputable sources using the new name, WP:NAMECHANGES seems to apply. S.A. Julio (talk) 01:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        WP:NAMECHANGES certainly applies (several of us have said that, and that's why the date restriction was on my web search below). But it's a bit tricky to measure general acceptance, and the onus of proof is on those supporting the move.
        
        There's a lot of chaff in the google searches, but on the second page of the one I gave above I got https://www.destinationtips.com/about-us/ as the first good hit. Did you look at that one, or didn't it come up in your search? Andrewa (talk) 02:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        I didn't see it (again the Google searches are inconsistent), where on the site is it mentioned? The recent sources I've mentioned give enough proof that the name is now being routinely used, much more often than the previous name. S.A. Julio (talk) 03:48, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        See #Discussion below. And I confess the reference is gone! It's a fairly dynamic site, didn't even think to check that, the phrase Amsterdam Arena was in https://www.destinationtips.com/destinations/15-things-not-to-do-in-amsterdam/ but it's gone. Andrewa (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support either option following my preceding comment. Thayts ••• 23:40, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I previously was undecided, but now support option 2 as nominator. S.A. Julio (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andrewa and WP:NAMECHANGES. Until it is clear that usage has changed, there is no good reason to make this change, and it is a solution looking for a problem. Particularly given how often we reject sponsor names for stadiums. This is little different, except the "sponsor" is a tribute to a former player rather than a company. As and when reliable sources are shown to have changed usage, we'll follow suit. — Amakuru (talk) 09:31, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You can't compare this to a sponsorship name change. This name change is more permanent and the stadium owners were well aware that it would be hard to add a sponsor to the name after renaming it to Johan Cruijff Arena. Also, Dutch sources have consistently been calling the stadium like that since April, but I suppose Dutch sources don't count here. Thayts ••• 10:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Correct. Dutch sources don't count, and nor do primary sources even if in English, unless English sources didn't exist, and they do. So we need evidence that English secondary sources are using the new name, and all the evidence so far is that they mostly are not. Andrewa (talk) 13:51, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Like I said, it just happened recently so just give it some time I guess. Also, Google doesn't seem to be fully reliable when it comes to recently published pages (e.g. I've found [9] from September 2017 while filtering on pages from past month). Thayts ••• 15:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - So we need evidence that English secondary sources are using the new name, and all the evidence so far is that they mostly are not How about the English secondary sources I provided, ~~here~~ and here, as well as other articles here, here, here, here, here, and here? I have not seen any sources/clear evidence provided to show the old name is still commonly used, the usage clearly has changed in reliable sources. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Disagree. Google is a blunt instrument admittedly, but citing individual sources tells us nothing about general acceptance.
        
        Especially as when I checked the first source you cited in that last post, it appears to be a blog post, see https://www.90min.com/writers and if so you are completely wasting my time by citing it as a reliable secondary source. The writer, Joel Stewart, describes himself as CelticFC Season Ticket Holder. Football fan. No evidence that he is a professional writer, see WP:NEWSBLOG for why that matters.
        
        Note that I have spent some time on this, and it appears to have been wasted. Andrewa (talk) 00:24, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Alright, I mistakenly included that link (I was more familiar with their statistics pages), but surely sources such as ESPN, Sky Sports, The Guardian and Sport are reliable to show the new name is now routinely used. S.A. Julio (talk) 01:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        The mistake was, you didn't check it. Or I hope that was the mistake. The mistake might have been, you thought that nobody else would check it. But we assume good faith.
        
        So, you've now checked the other ones you give above? And they're all OK? You were just unlucky that the very first one was the only dud?
        
        But even if you have, what do they prove? We can I think assume that some people are using the new name. We need to try to measure whether this acceptance is general. Andrewa (talk) 01:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        ESPN, Sky Sports, The Guardian, FourFourTwo and Sport are all reputable sources which have been checked, and I'd say them using the name shows general acceptance. I've also found another reliable source from beIn Sports. Even before the new season, sources already began using the new name (BBC, The Guardian, Reuters and beIN sports). S.A. Julio (talk) 03:48, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        See #Discussion. Andrewa (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Just to understand how this ought to work: how many reliable sources do we need to prove general acceptance in your eyes? Or what events should we be waiting for? Thayts ••• 10:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        We need to try to measure how popular the new name has been recently. It's impractical to just cite the sources one by one, and of little use just to blandly assert that it's become common. Yes, it's a challenge! And to meet this, I'd suggest taking a step back. Frankly (and as I already said below) I'm suspicious that at least some of the motivation for this move request is admiration for the player who is honoured by the renaming. Please understand, that's not what we're here for. Andrewa (talk) 08:27, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Well yes, the renaming itself is due to admiration for the player of course! I didn't decide to rename the stadium myself though and frankly I don't care whom it has been named after. But the fact is that it happened and if we are here to build an encyclopedia indeed, then this encyclopedia should describe what the "Johan Cruijff Arena" actually is. You said we need evidence that English secondary sources are using the new name and S.A. Julio made some effort to come up with evidence, but if it is not enough then please tell us what is, because if nothing is enough then I reckon this move can never happen. Thayts ••• 08:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        It's difficult for me to say how to prove something when I don't think it's true! But it's not my decision. What will happen is that an uninvolved editor (probably another administrator) will assess the arguments and make a decision based on them. Andrewa (talk) 13:56, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Avoiding the question. But yes, let's close this up. Thayts ••• 09:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse to Johan Cruyff Arena I prefer the Dutch name myself and would prefer to wait a bit per Andrewa but the Anglicanization is already used in major English sources. SportingFlyer talk 15:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

A chemist, a mathematician and a philosopher crossed the border from England to Scotland. The first thing they saw was a sheep on a hillside, and it was black. The chemist remarked "Look at that! Scottish sheep are black." The mathematician corrected him, "One Scottish sheep is black, anyway." The philosopher corrected them both, "One Scottish sheep is black on one side."

The point is, neither the chemist nor the philosopher were making very good use of the data. But either might have been right.

I confess I failed Chemistry (but graduated with both Mathematics and Philosophy majors). But I still feel qualified to say, the chemist's approach is wrong here. Nobody is questioning that some sites use the new name. IMO that does not make for general acceptance, unless we individually examine an impossibly large number of sites... comparable to the two million of my first search.

But we may need to agree to disagree on that. Andrewa (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well the first search doesn't really take into account NAMECHANGES though to give extra weight to recent sources? I get more pages of search results using "Johan Cruyff Arena" in the last month than the old name. I've also found a decent number of reliable, secondary sources from well known publishers, all of which routinely use the new name, compared to 1 which used "Amsterdam Arena". Unless there are more recent sources shown which use the old name, I'd say this would be enough proof to justify a move. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So you have said. Just one point... we don't favour well known publishers. Any acceptable reliable secondary source is considered, well, reliable. This is one thing that makes Wikipedia different from a conventional encyclopedia with an editorial board. Andrewa (talk) 07:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, just emphasising the name has gained acceptance in English-language media (not just English versions of Dutch websites). I've looked through pages of recent search results for "Amsterdam Arena" but have found very little compared to the new name, and little counterevidence has been provided. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So you say. And I disagree.

It's not a big deal for me. I think I can see that many would want to honour the memory of Johan Cruyff, and there would be a redirect anyway. But I can't see the justification for this move yet. It may well happen before too long, or not. English usage can be fickle, and we don't try to predict or influence it. Andrewa (talk) 09:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.