Talk:List of South American stadiums by capacity

Latest comment: 1 year ago by 162 etc. in topic How long do we want this list to be?

Isidro Romero Carbo official capacity

edit

This article and the List of football (soccer) stadiums by capacity say that the capacity of the Isidro Romero Carbo is 75,000 but the articles Barcelona Sporting Club and Estadio Monumental Isidro Romero Carbo say that the capacity is 89,932. Which one is true? MicroX 01:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of South American stadiums by capacity. 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, 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) 10:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

How long do we want this list to be?

edit

Recently, User:77.169.189.99 has made some good-faith edits to this list article, adding a number of links to stadia with capacity < 30,000. This is the cutoff number that has been used for many years, and although arbitrary, it seems like a good fit here. However, with these new additions, the article has nearly tripled in size The result is a list that is much too long and a less useful article. Discussion welcome - is this expanded size what's best for the article? 162 etc. (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply