Talk:Gonzaga Stadium

year of construction
This citation says "The new Gonzaga Stadium was constructed in 1921 on the site of what is now the Foley Library and the surrounding area."

Template:Infobox venue gives us: built	Insert a date range of when the venue was under construction

That appears to clearly support "|built = 1921." using the provided citation.

You've removed this material 3 times. ,, Please explain. UW Dawgs (talk) 06:24, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


 * You've again entirely commented out the "built" parameter, rather than associating the two(?) citations which you believe support your view on the years(s). If there is contradictory info, perhaps Template:Contradict-inline is appropropriate. Right now all I can say is you've removed content and citation four times. Please explain. UW Dawgs (talk) 11:45, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Please respond. UW Dawgs (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Multiple sources indicate construction and opening in 1922, with ground broken on May 16 and first game on Oct 14 (cited newspapers of 1922 and 1965 (Bernard Duffy), GU history web site (external link), and Mr. Reed's GU alumni article of Sep 2016). "Built" parameter is viewed as superfluous, as all three parameters are in same year (1922). In the May 2003 GU alumni magazine article, Mr. Burgarino's "1921" has no supporting references. (Glacier109 (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC))
 * Great. If you're now comfortable with your sources, please re-enable the "| built" value with your preferred citation(s), as it has been commented out, twice. . UW Dawgs (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You've now removed (your) inline comments associated with the parameter via this edit. As you've repeatedly removed (my original) text with citations for this parameter, and now apparently refuse to add your text and citation, I am at a loss.  There is ample and ongoing evidence of WP:OWN behavior.  To be clear, I'm asking you to ADD your preferred text and citation(s) to the "built" parameter. While I believe your presumed citations are likely accurate, they seem to conflict with the original citation. The solution isn't to blank the original content and citations which you appear to believe inaccurate, it is to improve the article via your preferred content and citations to facilitate review and collaboration with other editors. Please do populate the "built" parameter. UW Dawgs (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I see your motivation re superfluous now. strike above . UW Dawgs (talk) 23:47, 8 November 2016 (UTC)