What is the source for the outlines you have traced here?
It certainly is not the Bing aerial imagery that you indicate above.
You need to always give a source for the changes you make or the data you add to OSM, particularly in a case like this where you have added crude outlines without any details, some 20 metres away from their actual positions.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/62454781 where the changeset comment is: *THE CONTENTS OF THIS COMMENTARY HAVE BEEN FLAGGED BY THE MANDATORY EU UPLOAD FILTER AS A POTENTIAL VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT HELD BY A THIRD PARTY AND AS AN INFRINGEMENT MAY NOT LEGALLY BE DISTRIBUTED*

I suspect, based on listening in on your conversation with muralito elsewhere, that you should not make the stadium way into a multipolygon -- if anything, it maybe should refer to the entire area outside, and not only the building.
The building however has an obvious hole.
From the two legal aerial imageries, I cannot tell for sure if it is a roof that has a sunlight flare in the DigitalGlobe-sourced imageries nor what appears to cast shadows on it, but it seems to be a roof, rather than open-air stands.
Here, you have reverted this correctly, as to cut a hole out of the stadium area here is obviously an error (based on the above conversation, I know otherwise nowt about tagging as stadium).

as seen on the ESRI aerial imagery, the pitch does not exactly correspond to the inner of the building=yes.
However it was a start, even though you reverted it since, and in the map data I see no further additions.
Hey, me kezboard is finally working normally again. Wonder how long...

hallo stadiaarcadia,
unfortunately, with this 2415th edit of yours in a few short weeks, you continue to make beginners' mistakes to add low-quality mapping.
that is worse when i wrote a lengthy reply with tips in
note/1516258
which you chose to ignore, making me feel i wasted all that effort for nothing, when i find you have mapped the footie pitch overlapping the actual stands location, nearly 7 metres from its true position.
.
i specifically gave you those tips in paragraph 5 of my reply, trying to avoid the sort of feedback you have received around the world from other people with far less patience than i used to have, among the 77 changesets of yours that have attracted a response so far of the relatively few that have been reviewed.
.
further, you continue to use the iD editor which is intended for beginners and has some serious flaws which have come into play here, while a serious mapper should have graduated to josm by now.
specifically you have glued the west end of the stands to the well-aligned boundary, when in reality the roof overlaps it several metres southwest of where you joined it.
that also means if i wanted to shift the stands to their correct location, i would damage the correctness of the overall area without taking the extra effort to detach it (not trivial in my editor).
.
you have also hastily drawn the outline without attention to detail, as can be seen in both the north where there is no building where you have drawn a coarse outline, or in the south where you drew the building over what is obviously grass.
.
osm is fortunate to have access to quality resources in the us that are sadly lacking in the rest of the world, and it is a shame not to exploit them to the full, rather than sinking to an overall level of mediocrity.
that might mean it will take you twice as long to trace the building. or five times as long. and not be able to accomplish so many changesets in such a short time.
but most mappers would rather see you do better quality work, and take the time to learn things properly, than needing to correct your work after-the-fact where it is lacking, making extra unproductive work for everyone.
.
if my lengthy comments are too long that you ignore their contents, let me know here and i will keep them short or more likely, not bother.
i hope sometime in the future you will review your changesets with an eye towards quality, because the impression i have taken away from others is that quantity has taken priority for this dump of some stadium database into osm, without learning all the nuances and details, getting it done as quickly as possible.
.
sorry if i come across as bitter, but i was hoping by now you would have come up with more accurate mapping here after my encouragement and tips.
.
i really need a life somewhere else.
.
p.s., please keep replies, comments, and questions public, whether in notes, changeset comments, forum posts, or wherever. that way someone else can comment. i hate discovering a personal message days after i've already made a public comment about that matter, plus, i regularly go days or weeks without internet access, as i am planning for most of the next two months. thanks.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/62378257 where the changeset comment is: restore kentuckery avenida to its advert-free former state in kentuckia

hi stadiaarcadia,
what do you know about the arena mapped just east?
it was added to osm from streetlevel imagery exactly a year ago this coming sunday.
however none of the available imageries show that area as anything more than a car park, so as i feared, they are too out-of-date to be of any mapping help. therefore i will have to just guess how to tag this area, as your changes so far have not had the desired rendering results i was expecting to see.
however, i see there are two overlapping building outlines, presumably iD only presented one to you to modify.
.
as i read that construction is expected through 2020, and i won't make disparaging remarks about if that is realistic, i will fabricate a bit of fiction to represent this fact, adding a FIXME to ask local mappers to correct as needed.

thanks.
comparing the geometry here against the mediocre available background imagery, there are a few niggling hints i can come up with, that you are free to reject as too petty.
.
the shape of the footie pitch and the stands looked to be slightly off of rectangular. i selected the pitch in my editor and applied the quadrilateralise() function to give it right angles, and saw a slight change in geometry. not much, but if you strive for perfection, you might want to get in the habit of applying the equivalent function in your editor (if not `q' then probably `s') to anything that should have right angles.
.
the same probably applies to the stands/roof. although i cannot tell from the imagery if they are truly rectangular.
again, this is more icing-on-the-cake here than an actual visibly bad outline - plenty of other mappers are guilty of those.
.
now about the track outline, again a trivial detail, but by taking a bit more time to trace with additional points will result in smoother curves. not a problem, just something that over time has increased my own satisfaction with my mapping.
.
you refer elsewhere in public that you have not wrapped your brane around the concept of a multipolygon relation yet.
once you do, the imagery makes it clear what is the track, and while here you have two overlapping pitches, ideally you would trace the inner track outline, then cut it out of the track outer, giving you the sort of result like, well, not nearby, but find a random mapped highschool in the urban us and many of them have a track multipolygon, surrounding a footie pitch.
.
how to tag the remaining green half-circles, well, i dunno, as i have a place in california i need to investigate, one mapped as pitch but the other not.

i know your default editor, iD, has problems managing some types of relations (try searching that), but i am unclear if the multipolygon is one of them.
.
there is a very active dutch forum available; you may be able to get the best advice for you there in what i assume your Muttersprache, from mappers who may miss your questions on the mailing lists. otherwise the site help.osm that was suggested earlier may be helpful, though personally i have not found it worth bookmarking.
.
i am afraid with the editor i use, i cannot give advice on how to create a multipolygon that you would find useful. and again, i can"t say anything about josm and if work there is easier.
.
a sports field can be overlapped by a building, but strictly, it would be overlapped by a roof, or a level=1-or-greater building part. however the details are part of advanced mapping far beyond what i have bothered with. if the arena is entirely enclosed, then it is legit to have no more than the building outline.
.
the duke university field you left a bug-report at is a good example of where - were the track to still be intact - the upper level of stands would overlap the original track, so those stands would be useless for following the activity on the track directly below, but not for the presumably better-attended footie skirmishes.

however, osm does not follow, nor respect, the so-called `official' writing styles, otherwise the map will become filled with marketers trying to out-shout one another, as that is all this is.
this was made pretty clear in a recent (one or two month old) discussion in the german forum - long disappeared from the first page - in which creative types chose to uppercase parts of words, which the community declined to accept as valid for inclusion.
i do not know if there is a policy docuented elsewhere outside of discussions, but if not, be aware that many osm conventions are not documented outside of informal discussions.
the vast majority of search result references are in mixed case, as those page style guidelines rule out the use of all-uppercase for normal words or names, which this is.
again, osm is not intended as a mirror collection blindly scraped from official sites and reflecting their personal perceived self-importance.

Dobrý večer,
How did you come up with an all-uppercase name for Letná, opposed to the previous mixed-case?
Unlike EA, I have never seen Generali, which is not an acronym, written in all-caps. In fact, none of the references I've found for the firm, this field, or the similarly-named field in Wien, list it in other than mixed-case, which is what is preferred in OSM, apart from acronyms.
(Yes, I know about exceptions like a mass-edit to ALDI)

Be careful with the name you changed.
I am not familiar enough with turkish to know where to expect them, but the i-without-dot and I-with-dot, İ, see common use.
Here the Balıkesir is the city name and already is present in the address data as ı without a dot, but you have typed it instead as US-ASCII i.
It is my guess your spelling is inadvertently wrong, as a quick google fuzzy-match text search gives lots of the expected spelling.
I cannot otherwise vouch for your name change hours after the stadium had been edited by another, as i said, I don't know any turkish grammar whatsoever.

hallo stadiaarcadia,
I just got around to reading your private message to me about this area.
I am taking the liberty to reply in public, so this is visible to others who can contribute and correct me as needed. I prefer keeping useful info as public as possible.
.
The problem you described here has been taken care of by muralito in what appears to be a wide-ranging changeset.
.
What you want/need to learn, is the concept of a multipolygon, with an outer member, and an inner ring.
That will allow you to punch holes in buildings like here, or to cut out the inner part of an athletics track, for example.
.
I think that is what you want to know, and also may help you with the one note somewhere in the US - Atlanta maybe? - that I marked as resolved without analysing the aerial imageries.
.
If you need further explanation, a followup here is probably as good as any - I read Notes and changeset comments far more than I bother with non-public messages.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/62341760 where the changeset comment is: things that no longer exist and do not exist, do not get added to OSM. there are historical maps for that purpose. also, please use a meaningful changeset description, thanks.

why have you added the contents of name:en to the name field in parentheses? i would not expect this to be the real and actual name in china.

which building is that described by the many search hits i get for the terms palais national omnisports (including references to an earlier variant, de pekin with eEé - having mouse/kezboard problems here) ?

FAKE ACCOUNT1!!1! SOCKPUPPET!!!@!
.
Negreheb

* Edits 154
* Map Notes
* Traces 8
* Send Message
* Diary 2
* Comments
* Add Friend

Mapper since: July 18, 2013
.
I wish i had had the foresight to stock up on sockpuppet fake accounts to carry out my expansive witchhunts, back when i first registered.
my hat is off to you.
FAKE NEWS! FAKE ACCOUNT!! REVERT!!! NUNS! REVERSE! REVERT!!! POKÉMON!!! SAD!!!!!!!!!

Also, you write: »By the way, I’m almost ready with all the stadium updates. My estimate is that I will be ready this tuesday with every update.«
I substitute `finished' for `ready' as you have written in other comments.
Are you certain of that? Half a year ago I suspect it was you who anonymously opened hundreds of bug-report Notes worldwide to ask for name changes. More recently you opened many more such notes (if it was you ;-) asking for mapping improvements adding stands and such.
I was wondering where it would end. Just over a week ago I saw you resolved a bug-report with contents approximating ``Blow goo!!1!'' to be found at note/1464870 -- but more importantly, that stadium is mapped with more detail than you have been adding, including the stairways -- steps that along with the other footpaths are missing from most of the other stadiums that are mapped.
Will there come a point where you would have asked through notes to add this detail, had you not in effect been forced to make the edits yourself (for which i am grateful), in which case i would expect you to be adding such detail yourself now.
.
also, I would urge you to take paul johnson's changeset advice and look into josm for editing. plus i do not recall seeing you use any other imagery than the default mostly offered by bing, which is generally pretty bad to really bad, particularly in the us of a where it appears as default despite better imagery for details often offered by mapbox.
just some helpful hints, i hope.

I do not see that way/582980867
has any tagging apart from a name and description, which imply at the above, but i do not know what needs to be added so that whatever it is gets rendered.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/62219111 where the changeset comment is: personal walking paths do not belong in osm