Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

FAC-bound article needs a copyeditor

I was hoping to take Ice hockey at the Olympic Games to FAC by the end of the month, but I think the language is rather simplistic and repetitive, so it needs to be copyedited first. Could anyone here please take a look at it? Or alternatively, does anyone know a copyeditor who would have time to take a look? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 12:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Paralympic taskforce proposal

Just thought I should draw more editors towards the proposal for a paralympic task force, as the articles on the paralympics could use a bit more attention. You can support and discuss the proposal here. ExamRevision 15:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Olympics (disambiguation)

Huh? Not quite sure what this is, but it's definitely not a disambiguation page. Can someone take a look? -- Jonel (Speak to me) 15:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Scratching my head on this one. I tried to follow up on the sources but since the editor does not use in-line citations it's difficult to track down where these sources support the assertions in the article. At best the article should be renamed, it is not the Ancient Olympics and shouldn't be confused as the article for the Ancient Olympics. H1nkles (talk) 23:28, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Diving at the 2012 Summer Olympics

Just found this article: Diving at the 2012 Summer Olympics. Has there been previous concensus on how early prior to the Games these articles should be created? I.e. should we delete it, or expand it? Yboy83 (talk) 19:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It looks like editors are trying to fill in each of the sports at Template:EventsAt2012SummerOlympics. Of those stubs, only Football at the 2012 Summer Olympics is worthy to be kept at this date, in my opinion. But what is really needed, perhaps, is a more complete description of the program (number of events per sport, changes since 2008, etc.) in the 2012 Summer Olympics#Sports section, but I'm not sure that has been confirmed yet. I would support deletion of those 8 articles plus the template until the time comes when sourced details of each sport's program of events can be listed. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Slightly related: I've been considering making an Ice hockey at the 2014 Winter Olympics article because there has been a controversy over whether the NHL will be involved and I think I could make a decent little page (with sources). Does anyone object to that? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:01, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Is a distinct article really needed for that, or just additional text at Ice hockey at the Olympic Games? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Personally it would seem that adding it to the already-created page would be a better idea at this point. It's a bit far off to be addressing issues in 2014. H1nkles (talk) 21:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

There is already a large section about it at Ice hockey at the Olympic Games, but I thought it was getting into undue weight territory, which is why the 2014 page would help. However, I can wait before creating it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Ironically, my first thought about a distinct article on the subject was that that would be undue weight! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 05:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps adding a section to 2014 Winter Olympics instead of Ice hockey at the Olympic Games would be a more suitable idea? I see no reason to save any of 2012 sports articles other than football, which has a few fits of information beyond the fact that it will take place, and maybe sailing, which details some changes in the events. Basement12 (T.C) 11:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

World record progression move proposal

After updating the Marathon world record progression name I realised that the article title flows much more naturally with the event stated first instead of the current usage (e.g. World record progression 100 metres men). I propose a complete migration to event first titles (with the previous titles of "World record" first as redirects). Also, I further this proposal to change topics split by gender to the title of, for example, 100 metres world record progression – men. Not highly linkable in prose but preferable to the current strange wording or "100 metres men world record progression" (or even worse "100 metres world record progression men"!). What does everyone else think? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 01:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Men's 100 metres world record progression? That's the order we typically use for naming events. Definitely support a move, though, as the current naming is not great. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 02:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep. That's definitely better. Mass move to those names then (alternate redirects inclusive). Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 03:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that is a better way to name the articles. H1nkles (talk) 04:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the middle of making a records template so I should be migrating the articles to that naming convention shortly. No one seemed to be against the idea so I hope it's not premature decision. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 00:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You have my support. Parutakupiu (talk) 00:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

All done. Can I ask for comments regarding the new records template? I've kind of gone for an all-encompassing approach mixed with a simple basic interface. As you can see, there is a lot hidden away there with plenty of redlinks. There is little reason why nearly all those articles can't be created at some point in the future. The countries list still needs much expansion however. I've avoided any indoor links as it's cluttered enough as it is. Also, I'm slightly dubious about the area event records as I've only just discovered that the IOC runs continental competitions (e.g. Pan American Games, Asian Games etc) so I'm not sure which ones are more important. All comments welcome. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 05:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Current sport

I've started a discussion on the guidelines of Template:Current sport and their application here, for those who are interested. --Conti|✉ 15:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

New article suggestion

As many of you know, I have been working on Ice hockey at the Olympic Games for the last few months. At the moment, I am worried about its size. It is currently over 7000 words, which makes it longer than our articles on Canada, Obama and Shakespeare. I think the problem is the "Rules" section. There is no branch article for that section, so I thought that maybe making one would allow me to both shorten the main page and add more detail. I was thinking about an article called either "The National Hockey League and the Olympic Games" or "Professional athletes in ice hockey at the Olympic Games". Under either title, it would cover the history of the long conflict over the use of pros as well as the NHL's recent involvement. This would also give me a place to add more detail about the NHL and the 2014 games without creating an "Ice hockey at the 2014 Winter Olympics" page. Thoughts? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Creating a sub-article (so to speak) is a great way to move information that is too detailed from the article in question and shorten it down. I had to do this twice in my work on the Olympic Games article. I like your first article title best, I like titles to be shorter rather than longer, but I can't think of a better wording for the title so I'll go with that one. Don't forget to reword the section in the "Ice hockey at the Olympic Games" article so that it is not a verbatim copy from one article to the other. The FAC reviewers will catch that. H1nkles (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I was planning on trimming that. A lot of the background info on amateurism, Canada's withdrawal, and 2014 would be moved. The biggest problem with using the title "NHL and the Olympics" is that it could limit how much can be added about professional athlete debates not relating to the NHL. For example, the 1948 American team controversy (although it could be added as part of a background section). But, like you said, I can't think of a better wording for a title. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point, you'd have to keep it pretty specific to the NHL issues w/ the Olympic Games. That would still probably accomplish your primary goal of reducing the size of the main article. The 1948 issue might be hard to squeeze in since it dealt more with which team was officially recognized as representing the U.S. (as I recall). I'm sure you can massage it in there somehow though. H1nkles (talk) 22:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The 1948 issue was about which team would represent the US, but the catalyst was the fact that all of the players were from a professional league, so it does fit in. The bigger issue might be Canada's withdrawal, which was about professionalism, but not specifically the NHL (again, it would probably fit in a background section). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

De-orphan

I just discovered a "Records at the 200X Summer Olympics" group of lists which are a pretty much a poorly developed walled garden. I created a navigation template and made Olympic records at the 2008 Summer Olympics but they're pretty much fenced in. Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions abut where to link them? I think they could develop into a bunch of useful lists (especially the Olympic record ones) but they're languishing in obscurity at the moment. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 01:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move

This isn't entirely Olympics related but seeing as there is no WikiProject Track and field athletics, I propose that we move all European Championships in Athletics named articles to European Athletics Championships. This is not only the official name, but also the common usage. God knows how many of the google results for the current Wikipedia usage are just results leading to Wikipedia articles and all its sorry mirrors. I think this naming has stemmed from the IAAF's World Championships in Athletics and not from any real world standard. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 23:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not see any authority of this WikiProject over those article series. Still, I'd say: go ahead. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, no authority for this group to determine it so if you get a hassle from someone they won't see much weight in pointing to this conversation, but for what it's worth the move seems reasonable. H1nkles (talk) 02:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm painfully aware of the gap for an athletics wikiproject. The fact that articles like the above one, numerous non-Olympian bios, and athletics record lists come under no WikiProject is quite odd. I've been putting it off for a while now, but I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that I am perhaps the only one who is going to go ahead and get an athletics project set up. In fact, thinking about it, this is now on my serious "to do" list. I can instantly think of about 5 editors who will certainly sign up as they are already involved in this article group and I'm sure plenty of people here will be interested too. I'll be drafting up a proposal in user space soon. I'll keep people here at WP:Olympics posted. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 02:40, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

A tentative proposal has been outlined here. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 03:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Does your WikiProject care about talk pages of redirects?

Does your project care about what happens to the talk pages of articles that have been replaced with redirects? If so, please provide your input at User:Mikaey/Request for Input/ListasBot 3. Thanks, Matt (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Combining Russia and Soviet Union's medals

Just a heads up, a user thinks that the medal counts of the two nations (but apparantly not the Czech Republic and Czechoslovakia) should be combined at Ice hockey at the Olympic Games (see debate). There was recently a very heated debate about this at Ice Hockey World Championships and List of IIHF World Championship medalists (in which it was decided to combine them since the IIHF did it), and now the user has decided to try his luck with that page. I was going to try a FAC for it today, and now I have to wait until this is settled, so it's pretty annoying. Either way, I wanted to make the project aware of it, since keeping totals seperate is a project convention. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

For Olympic articles, absolutely not. No reliable source we use combines medal totals that way. For example, the sports-reference.com Olympics pages (written by members of the International Society of Olympic Historians), do not combine medals that way. I personally don't agree with the IIHF's position on this (especially the case combining TCH with CZE, leaving SVK out), but they are a reliable source for the world championships. But for the Olympics, none of the best references present totals that way. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. We should follow the conventions of the sporting body. Regardless of whether we disagree with (or can pick holes in) any decision to redistribute or not, if the IIHF has redistributed then we should do the same. If the Olympics has not, then we should not. We've just got to put our own opinions aside on this matter. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 01:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Sillyfolkboy, I totally agree with you. Indeed we should follow the conventions of the sporting body. I've contacted the IOC for this purpose, everything will depend on their official stance on this. Our opinion doesn't count. Andreyx109 (talk) 15:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The IOC does not support or publish medal tables that span multiple Games, so if we decide to follow the IOC exclusively on this, we would have to remove all the summary medal tables from every "Sport at the Olympics" and "Nation at the Olympics" article. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, we shouldn’t argue right now, lets wait and see what IOC has to say. They don't publish the medal count - fact, however, they keep a statistics, including medals won by a country , Olympic records and so the question we need to ask them is whether Russia/Czech Republic has inherited the achievements of Soviet Team/Czechoslovakia or Russia/Czech Republic got new membership and don't have any relationship with USSR. But again, we should not guess here or make any assumptions; we need to have an evidence of sporting body stance on it. I just want to note, that I am not here to make any bad, I just want to make sure that the information in the table is correct and agrees with official PoV. Finally I want to thank all the editors who did a great job creating such an interesting project and made tons of information available to general public. Andreyx109 (talk)

The statistics that you'll find from the IOC are per-Games only. There are no "inherited achievements". Olympic records refer to performances in individual events, and only in a small number of sports for which records can be maintained. There are no "most medals" records. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Andrwsc we can make assumptions, however our assumptions are not always correct, the only one who will give the correct IOC stance on this is IOC officials. We shall wait until they respond.Andreyx109 (talk) 17:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

What assumptions do you think I am making? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

One example is: There are no "inherited achievements" .Andreyx109 (talk)

Until there is a clear statement from IOC that the medals should be combined, we don't make any changes. Period. Simple as that ;-) --Tone 17:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, Tone. There are should not be any changes untill IOC response. Andreyx109 (talk) 17:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

2006 Winter Olympics official report is out

FYI. The official report of the 2006 Winter Olympics has been released. Go to http://www.la84foundation.org to access it via the digital library if anyone is interested. Chris (talk) 02:50, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, these are always useful for editing the "Year Winter/Summer Olympic Games" articles. H1nkles (talk) 05:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Whistler

How come Whistler, British Columbia is listed as a host of the 2010 Olympics in Template:Infobox Olympic games/Host city? How does its status differ from other, more remotely located, cities where Olympic events have been held, such as Hong Kong (2008), Kiel (1936 and 1972), Tallinn (1980), Ocoee River and Savannah (1996), etc? It doesn't even list Stockholm (1956), which had its own opening and closing ceremony, but it lists Whistler? —JAO • T • C 13:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted the addition. Some events are held in Whistler, but it is in no way a host city. Reywas92^Talk 14:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe you can have other events in other towns, (i.e. all those examples and Park City and Salt Lake in 2002) but this is just a paraphrase of the rules, but the Opening and Closing Ceremonies have to be in the same city. That city hosting both ceremonies is well, the host city. Other cities helping out the games, like Hong Kong and Savannah and Park City, are generally referred to as "Olympic Cities". This is an interesting precedent set, that may effect a possible rule change, if a joint-city bid like Seattle-Vancouver is toying with according to some sources. The 1956 Melbourne-Stockholm games confuses it more. So we'll just have to see what 2018 bids shape into. Good obersvation Jao T C.Moonraker0022 (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Athletics

This is a call for all contributors who are interested in improving athletics and track and field articles! Any one interested in joining WikiProject Athletics would be very welcome! Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 12:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you expecting to secure more members before submitting the proposal to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals? I don't have any problems in becoming a member, I just fear that I might noy have the time I'd like to put my efforts into its development. But contributor shortage shouldn't be an obstacle for its creation. I'm in. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to support what you're doing here. As a T&F enthusiast I think it's a great idea. I'll sign up, but my involvement will be limited to reviewing articles for quality improvement. If you'd like me to provide peer reviews just shoot me a note on my talk page and I'll be happy to take a look at the article. Unfortunately time doesn't permit me to do more than that at this point. H1nkles (talk) 14:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I'm not looking to hassle editors to write chunks of difficult articles, merely combine editors in a work area to work out editor opinions and ways of writing etc. So far I've just been throwing those sorts of move proposal/styles at this WikiProject which wasn't really the most accurate forum for those discussions. I shall look to move WikiProject Athletics into Project space shortly, after another recommendation at the proposal page (just to be sure). Thanks for signing up. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 20:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Medal tables for early Games

The topic of separate medal table lists for early Games (at which the table may duplicate the top-ten table in the main article due to a low number of medal-winning nations) has arisen at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1904 Summer Olympics medal table/archive1. I thought the issue could probably use more attention, so I'm mentioning it here. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 00:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I see the nominator has decided to withdraw its nomination. In fact, I was about to comment in that way - that there's no need for separate medal count articles for the early Games, as they're little more than content duplication and could be used to improve the parent article. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

The question is where the cutoff is. We'll need some standard for what to merge and what not to. For example, 1896 and 1904 seem pretty obvious, and 10 seems like a good number to cutoff at (would require merges of 1896 and 1904 summer, 1924 and 1932 winter), but what about the 1928 winter games, where there are twelve NOCs on the list but the last five were tied for 8th place in the medal count? Should the cutoff be 10 unless there are only a few more than 10 tied for a place less than 10? Geraldk (talk) 21:59, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I would support merging those five, since the tables on the main articles typically go to the top ten places. Though, heck, the Winter Olympics don't even get past 15 medalling nations until 1972. Maybe we should merge many of those as well, raising the number to include on some main articles to avoid spinoffs. That's fine to only merge the smallest though, if others agree. Reywas92^Talk 23:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I would strongly disagree with a merge for a partial subset of articles in the Category:Summer Olympics medal counts, Category:Winter Olympics medal tables and Category:Winter Olympics medal counts series (categories ought to be merged though!!), since these articles can (and are) browsed independently of the main articles. Either they should all be merged into their parent articles, or none should be merged. I'll draw an analogy: one could make the argument that all five articles in Category:Nauru at the Olympics could be merged into one article, but splitting those results into small per-Games articles plus one summary article helps facilitate browsing from multiple directions. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a tricky issue, but I support all of the medal tables having their own page both for consistancy and the fact that they are notable enough to warrant individual pages. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Not trying to point out flaws in your argument, but List of awards and nominations received by Justice is notable (the awards and nominations received are covered in published third-party sources), and it is "consistent" with other awards lists; yet, we don't see anyone clamoring for it to be kept an FL or even a separate list. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how merges will hinder browsing; the template can simply link to the section. I see absolutely no reason why the table in 1924 Winter Olympics medal table should be an exact copy of 1924 Winter Olympics#Medal count. This isn't just a problem of length, like for Nauru, but of redundancy. In the main article, people will follow the link to the the table, only to find the exact same thing again. For these first games with very few countries, the separate article is simply excessive duplication. All the prose that isn't also redundant could also be easily combined. There's no reason to simply duplicate the info solely for the sake of having an article. We can still be consistent within the table section of the early articles. Although they may technically be notable enough for a separate page, does that really mean they need a separate page? Reywas92^Talk 20:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Not everybody browses by navigation boxes; I often browse by category, and an "incomplete" category prevents that. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

As for the duplication of information, we had started to expand several of the medal tables pages, including commentary on why the number of medals was unequal, explanation of mixed or other non-NOC teams, discussion of changes due to doping violations or other reason, discussion of first-time medal winning NOCs, multiple medal winners, etc. If we expand even minimal tables such as 1924 Winter Olympics medal table, it seems to me that we would easily justify the sub-article's existence. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I think maybe Rey's answer to that, and the answer the FL reviewers who have been shooting down my nominations left and right would give as well, is that even that lead text could be combined into the article. We're on the horns of a dilemma here, because on the one hand there seems to be opposition to merging them here, and on the other hand the new FL standards sort of suggest that these early medal count lists shouldn't exist. I tried to propose a compromise which was flawed, so either one side has to give, or the other does. Geraldk (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

On a slightly different note, if we do end up merging some of the smaller medal tables, Template:Olympic games medal table can be preserved by using section links. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Naming

This may have already been discussed, I tried finding it in the archives but couldn't but I have a question about the article naming system. If this was a heated debated, I'm not trying to re-open it, I am purely looking for someone to explain the ruling. I've just noticed that if you type in 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics it is redirected to 1996 Summer Olympics. Why is the City-name left off the official article title? Since there was only one City accredited for the summer olympics in 1904, St. Louis. If this hasn't been I'll be surprised, but if it has, then please enlighten me. Thanks ya'll for reading this! Moonraker0022 (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm. I'm not sure I understand why you'd want this. We don't include cities in article titles for sporting events like world championships either. The year is enough to unambiguously identify the right article per the WP:NC wording ("Name an article as precisely as is necessary to indicate accurately its topical scope; avoid over-precision"), so why should we add additional words to the title? —JAO • T • C 08:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

(Comment copied from my talk page —JAO • T • C) There's just several ways to say the same thing ya know. WP:NC usually uses Okham's (spelled right?) Razor. The Olympic Website lists them by city name and year, Like Turin 2006, Atlanta 1996. http://www.olympic.org/uk/games/index_uk.asp list of names. I was just thinking wiki would align more towards that naming, rather than a generic Summer Olympic 2020.Moonraker0022 (talk) 21:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

That's true, but when you go to the Olympic website you're already expecting to see pages on Olympic events. On Wikipedia, Atlanta 1996 could refer to any event, including other sporting events. --Jh12 (talk) 18:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Olympic Park, London

The Olympic Park, London article is shameful, and I see has been ranked as 'low importance' by this wikiproject. Surely a re-reanking is in order? Or at the very least an effort to bring this article up to some sort of useful level; it currently is little more than a stub. Grunners (talk) 13:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Popular pages

You may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Popular pages, which will now be generated monthly by User:Mr.Z-bot. It lists the top 1000 articles belonging to WP:OLY by their popularity of the last month, along with their quality rating. It can be a guide for the articles that are most important to bring to FA/FL/GA status. Also, could someone please add a link to this in the main Project page? Cheers, Reywas92^Talk 21:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Very cool report, I think this is a great way to see what people are interested in as it relates to the Olympics. Some of the articles are a bit of a stretch to connect them to the Olympics but nonetheless I think this is fantastic. H1nkles (talk) 22:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Good finding, Reywas92. I've already added a link to it on the main page. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I stumbled upon the bot and put in a request for it to do that for some of my Wikiprojects. I agree with H1nkles that many articles are less integral to the project and clutter the page, so don't automatically tag everything as OLY. It seems that two thirds of the list for WP:Indiana is just people. The best thing is that we know what articles to concentrate on and what not to bother with as much. Reywas92^Talk 00:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

If it points us towards the most productive collaboration, this could be a great tool. Who's up for working 2008 Summer Olympics towards GA and FA? Geraldk (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm in! H1nkles (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm always willing to contribute what I can. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 02:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

You know, it may actually be possible to make this a featured topic if we did a concerted effort around it. 2008 Summer Olympics venues and 2008 Summer Olympics medal count are already FL's. Not having ever done a featured topic, though, I have no idea how many articles would need to be included in the topic. i mean, we can't do every article about every event. Geraldk (talk) 18:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Here is the Featured Topic criteria. There needs to be at least three articles. Certainly attainable. There is also the Good Topic attempt as a run up to Featured Topic. H1nkles (talk) 19:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd be willing to pitch in where I could on the 2008 article. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, Ice hockey at the Olympic Games is ranked 78th. I'm surprised it's that high (it might have something to do with the World Championships being held in May, which got people interested in the Olympics). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

It's all you Canadians. And Minnesota. But that's almost part of Canada anyway. Geraldk (talk) 19:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, recentism plays into the report. Stadio Olimpico certainly isn't 8th on the list because it hosted the 1960 Olympics, but for a different reason altogether. Still, very cool list. —JAO • T • C 19:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

FYI, based on input from the featured topics questions page, I've created a sample topic box here. Geraldk (talk) 02:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Impressive list there. The job is frightfully challenging but also attractive. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic! Felipe Menegaz 17:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Olympics to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. I can also get provide the full data for any project covered by the bot if requested, though I normally don't keep it for much longer than a couple weeks after the list is generated. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 04:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

A medal table idea

Some users believe that the earliest medal table years should be merged into their main Olympics page as there is little content. However, most members of this project argue that the tables have enough notability and follow an established guideline. While working on List of 2008 Summer Olympics medal winners, I had an idea. Why not combine the early medal tables with a medal winners list (just the first few Summer Olympics, and maybe the first 10 Winters, although the problem would be that you could easily argue that all of the Winter tables would be mergeable. But, would that be such a bad thing?)? It would expand the content of the page, and the two do go hand in hand. For simplicity, I think "[Insert Olympics] medal winners" would be the best title, and the medal table could be used as a summary at the very top. Would this work, or am I just crazy? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea if the early medal tables continue to be excluded because of overzealous application of criterion 3b. Geraldk (talk) 17:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

MOSFLAG in template

I think {{FlagIOCathlete}} might fail WP:MOSFLAG – see here. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

We've been using that template for a long time before MOSFLAG appeared, with no complaints yet. (And a few featured lists to boot.) The use of three letter country codes—and flags—is so pervasive in Olympic results (i.e. our reliable sources outside this wiki) that it has never seemed to be a problem that we use them for our pages here as well. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The Olympics infobox

I have been looking at the Olympics infobox see here, and I have also been looking at the IOC Official Website for the Sydney Olympics see here, and I was wondering if 'volunters' should be added to the infobox? De Mattia (talk) 07:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

FAC

Just for your info, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Women's road race/archive2 is nominated for a FAC again. Feel free to contribute. --Tone 13:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Bahamas Flag 1952-1972 at the Olympics

The pages on The Bahamas from the 1952 Olympics to the 1972 games don't have the flag of that country during those periods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlefatboy (talk • contribs) 18:05, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Trinidad as well from 1948 to 1956. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlefatboy (talk • contribs) 18:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Good catch. There are several more articles affected by this, probably through templates; see the file links at File:Missing Blue Ensign.svg. As for Trinidad, there actually is a File:Trinidad & Tobago Blue Ensign 1889.PNG. Is it a problem that it's a PNG or can it just be added? The Flag of the Bahamas article, on the other hand, completely lacks pre-1973 history... —JAO • T • C 19:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, found it. It was in commons:Category:Bahamas, not in the expected commons:Category:Flags of the Bahamas. But it's also a PNG, and the file name suggests that it wasn't used for the entire period: File:Bahamas Blue Ensign 1964.PNG. —JAO • T • C 19:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

2010 Winter Olympics book will be out in October

I just looked on Amazon.com and the new Winter Olympics book (up to the 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin) is scheduled to be out in October.[1] I plan on ordering mine within the next couple of weeks. Chris (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Issue with Template:FlagPASO not using IOC country names

I noticed an issue today related to the Template:FlagPASO and the country pages it creates. The template is not using the IOC country names, consequently countries that have different sport names than their actual country name are showing up with their actual name. For example: the U.S. Virgin Islands shows up as "U.S. Virgin Islands" instead of "Virgin Islands" (e.g. {{flagPASO|ISV|1999}} produces  Virgin Islands; {{flagIOC|ISV|2000 Summer}} produces  Virgin Islands). Consequently, the connected pages to the PASO template all start "U.S. Virgin Islands at..." instead of "Virgin Islands at...". I'm not sure if there are other, similar issues with other flag templates related to other Continental Associations/events. I'm also not sure how to correct the template (but have noted this issue, and another on the Template's documentation page). Can someone help? Hooperswim (talk) 00:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Andrwsc is the flag/Olympics template guru around here. Leave him a message. ;) Parutakupiu (talk) 01:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Have done so: thank you. Hooperswim (talk) 07:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Results pages - How much detail?

I've been working on results pages for the various 2006 Winter Olympics events, and I've come a cross a couple of sports that make me wonder what, if any, standard we have for how much detail goes into these pages. For example, there seems to me to be a bit too much data in tables like those in Figure skating at the 2006 Winter Olympics – Men's singles and Biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics – Men's individual, but I'm interested to see if others agree.

Also, I'm wondering if there is an accepted standard for result pages., and if not, whether we can possibly come to agreement on one, similar to WP:OLYMOSNAT :) Edged (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

That is a long-term goal: to create similar layout and style guidelines for the "Sport at the Games" and "Sport at the Games – Event" pages. I was hoping some generous soul would make the first step on making a basic draft of a MoS so that we all could build upon and improve it to make it as inclusive as possible for all articles under its scope. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I've started working on such a draft, as a sub-page of my user-page User:Edged/Manual of Style (Sport at the Games – Event). It's fairly disorganized now, but I'm working on completing and pulling it together. I've tried to identify the different 'classes' of events, to try to establish general rules for each class, but I'm not sure if that will just end up being more confusing in the end. AT least for now, I'm doing it to keep my own approach regimented. I've tried to include the results of the discussions here, but I've likely made some oversightsEdged (talk) 21:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Athlete medal leaders tables

Examples of these Athlete medal leaders tables are in List of Olympic medalists in snowboarding and List of Olympic medalists in ice hockey. There are three ways we can rank these:

1. Ranking them by total medals, with a note. (the two articles above)

2. Ranking them by golds, with a note.

3. Any of the two above, without the "Rank" column. (List of Olympic medalists in badminton)

I was just wondering which way are we going to rank these. Though Scorpion0422 and I are the only ones to have nominated these Olympic medalists by sport lists for featured list promotion, I was hoping to get some more opinions. So, any comments? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer consistency with the general idea of sorting by golds first; I don't really think we need a "rank" column. Just my opinion, not a huge deal as far as I'm concerned. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 00:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I was actually going to ask Scorpion0422 personally instead of asking this whole WikiProject. Thought there would be more opinions, but it's was pretty obvious this subject is barely a deal. Hope Scorpion0422 can comment...o, and my preferred one would be the third option. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the 3rd option is best, where the sorting options in each column would allow the reader to rank athletes by whichever criteria he/she feels like. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I see the problem mostly as being one of selection criteria, unless we're going to put every medal winner in the table. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 00:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't be against losing the rankings, but it does help sorting out athletes who have won the same total number of medals. However, if the ranking column remains, we should rank by total. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

And why is that? The IOC ranks countries by gold... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

True, but when I compile these lists, the number of included athletes is based on the number of medals, rather than just the "top 10" (because there are usually ties). For example, with List of Olympic medalists in short track speed skating, I included every athlete with three or more golds or four or more total medals, which gave 12 athletes. If you ranked by gold (and used ranking numbers), then there would be obvious jumps. Li Jiajun, who has not won a single gold, would certainly not be in the top 12 in terms of gold medals. However, if one ranks by total medals, there is much better progression because if you ranked by total (then gold, then silver, then bronze), those would be the top 12. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

See, my thing is this: would we rather have Li Jiajun (0/2/3) or Annie Perreault (2/0/1 - and not on the current list)? If we were selecting countries for a top medal list, the 2/0/1 would be present before a 0/2/3 would. As it is, I think there is an obvious jump from those who have won 2 golds to those who have won 0 when the reader sorts by gold. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 00:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, the official IOC fact sheet ranks the medalists by sport by total medals...now, I think we should rank them by total medals... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

If you take a second look on that facsheet, besides presenting athletes that won most medals, it also has them ranked by each medal color, giving a completely different ranking. That is not a statement that the IOC does rank by total medals or not. I still believe we should drop the rank and let the reader decide that by making use of the sorting function. "Athlete medal leaders" could point to total medal leaders, but its sufficiently ambiguous to be interpreted as <choose any color> medal leaders. Parutakupiu (talk) 12:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

So I'm guessing consensus here is to remove the "Rank" column, and sort the tables by total medals? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Good enough. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 00:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Finished removing the rank column, and sorting all by total. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Changes to popular pages lists

There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:

• The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
• The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
• I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - tools:~alexz/pop/.
  • This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
  • This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
  • There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
• The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
• The data is now retained indefinitely.
• The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
• Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" - [2]

-- Mr.Z-man 00:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Naming practices: "FYR" Macedonia

In a centralised discussion that created a new naming guideline for Macedonia-related issues, now at WP:MOSMAC2, it was determined that the Republic of Macedonia should generally not be referred to as "former Yugoslav Republic of..." or "FYR ...", even in articles about organisations where such an appellation is officially used. This affects a lot of Olympics-related articles, where up to now "FYR Macedonia" has been used.

The discussion was advertised at Talk:FYR Macedonia at the Olympics, and we had some input from an active Wikiproject member, User:Andrwsc, who assured us that a change towards plain "Macedonia" would likely meet with consensus in this project too [3].

To implement the change, I would like to edit the template {{country_IOC_alias_MKD}}, which transcludes the country name into the various flag and infobox templates used in result tables etc., changing "FYR Macedonia" to "Macedonia". Please advise if there should be any objections, or technical complications I may have overlooked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

No objections here. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 16:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

You have my thumbs up. Parutakupiu (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, great. I've gone ahead and made the change now. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, looks like you've handled all the article renames and navbox changes as well! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics

I have nominated the article Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics for Peer review. Is someone interested in review it? Regards; Felipe Menegaz 01:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Women's road race

For those who have not noticed, this article was nominated in the past for FA, but failed to be promoted because there was no quorum, despite having reached a stage where (IMO) it became FA material. It's been nominated once again and is awaiting for more people to take a look at it and express their opinion. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

This one's been FA'ed. Thanks, guys! Parutakupiu (talk) 01:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Too many flags!

Hi. A discussion about cutting back on some of the flags in Olypmics related articles is taking place at Talk:2004_Summer_Olympics#Too_many_flags.21. Please contribute. Note that the suggestion is not to remove all flags, far from it, but to cut back on places where the number of flags is excessive and causing accessibility issues without any noticeable benefit, ie in the list of all participating countries/NOCs. GDallimore (Talk) 10:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Australia at the Winter Olympics FAR

I have nominated Australia at the Winter Olympics for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Giants2008 (17–14) 14:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Ideas needed on the article strucutre YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of the Olympics?

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Nations tables in some Olympic sport articles

Someone has proposed removing the nations tables from certain Sport at the Olympics articles, namely Swimming at the Summer Olympics and Gymnastics at the Summer Olympics. Thoughts? -- Jonel (Speak to me) 23:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The tables that list the number of participants from each country? I see no problem with them, and I think it's really good information. Reywas92^Talk 14:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got mixed feelings about these. I agree that they are useful, but for some sports, will be totally overwhelming for the article. Specifically, qualifying standards do not need to be met for entries in athletics and swimming, to allow even the smallest countries to have one or two participants per Games. Therefore, the tables on those pages would have a couple of hundred rows each (roughly duplicating the list of participating nations for that entire Games), with thousands of table cells to complete. So practically speaking, I'm not sure the benefit is worth the effort, and I also don't want to see those articles remain mostly sets of large tables with little room for prose text. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 14:38, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

If the nations table stays then it should at least be labelled. Nowhere does it say that the figures represent number of participants per country. Personally, I'd rather see the whole table deleted. Mbiyetifono (talk • contribs) 23:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Olympic sport infobox?

I saw this at the French Wikipedia and I thought it might be worthy of translating/transferring over here, perhaps with a few more additional options taken from {{infobox sport}}. What do people think? I think it would brighten up the top of some of the more dull sport articles. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 04:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The idea is interesting, yes. I don't think we have a set of infoboxes for the "Sport at the Season Olympics" article series. I'll how we could adapt it to our articles. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Medal per year tables in "List of Olympic medalists of..."

The lack of consistency in the format of the "medal per year" tables present in the "List of Olympic medalists in sport" page series is being raised as a pertinent issue in some FLCs. We should discuss what is the most appropriate table format so it can be applied to all similar tables:

• Sortable or unsortable table?
  • If sortable – remove boldface from highest medal count?
  • If unsortable – keep boldface as a way of highlighting the highest medal count (despite not following WP guidelines)? Switch to italics? Other?
• En-dash (–) or "0" (zero) to fill empty cells? Or leave cells empty?
  • If en-dash – use {{sort}} to sort it as "0" (e.g. {{sort|0|–}}) so that it does not mess with the table sorting.
• Repeat year row at the bottom? Or display total medal-winning nations per year, instead?

Please, comment. If we could reach a consensus in the shortest time possible, it would be great. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

No one? :( Parutakupiu (talk) 11:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the en-dash instead of 0 (sorted as 0, of course). I'd prefer sortable tables, without boldface, and with the year row repeated at the bottom (I think that's more useful than number of medal-winning nations). -- Jonel (Speak to me) 14:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I prefer sortable tables, empty cells, and years repeated. Reywas92^Talk 15:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't think these tables are a good idea. It seems to me that they were added to the first of those "List of Olympic medalists" articles as they were cherry-picked for the FLC process, perhaps to pad them out because shorter lists were selected first. But there is no way this can scale to every Olympic medalist list. Athletics, for example, would have a table of about three thousand entries! That would be several pages of table data to scroll through, on top of a list that has already been split into two parts because of size. It's one thing to add these tables to snowboarding or table tennis lists, but another to make this a standard component of all articles in this category. For these lists, the only summary table I like is the list of top medal winners (individual people, not NOCs). After all, these lists are primarily about the people, not about nations. Large tables of statistical data will overwhelm many of these lists. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Then the question being asked is How should these be standardized for Sport at the Summer Olympics articles? I think it's nice to have them on the medalist lists because it's still a summary of the same information on those pages - number of medalists by country by year. The participation tables are what belong on the main articles. Reywas92^Talk 18:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree in that these tables would fit perfectly in the "Sport at the Season Olympics" articles as a complement to a ranking table by medal types. Like Andrwsc rightfully said, such tables would become too massive for older Olympic sports with plenty of events, overloading a page that does not require these tables afterall. The downside of removing these tables altogether is that more recent sports with less events would become short of content besides the medalist list. But I guess we shouldn't add content just for the sake of adding it...

To conclude, I don't mind if they are taken out, but if anyone has a better approach, please step forward. I have a feeling this will take "some" time to decide. Parutakupiu (talk) 23:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

My preferred method is sorting with the bold faces, using {{sort}}, en dashes, and no repetition of the years. This isn't going anywhere... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 19:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be two standards, depending on the length of the list? Dabomb87 (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Since it is very easy to assume that empty cells mean there's incomplete data, we should avoid it; en-dashes are acceptable. Per WP:BOLD, we should not use boldface to indicate something, so boldface should be avoided, as well. That's why, we need sortable tables to find out who has the highest number of medals. As for the repetition of the years row should depend on how long the table is.--Crzycheetah 02:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Would everyone support on this proposal by Crzycheetah? I think it's the best one out of all... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 20:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

This has taken far more time than it is worth, actually, and it's staling a few processes. For now, I think we should keep the tables and, for this, I support Crzycheetah's proposal (it is my opinion as well) — sortable tables, no boldface, en-dashes (sorted as 0) for empty cells, and repeating the year row at the bottom provided there are over 10 rows. Parutakupiu (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

As an FLC regular, I also support Crzy's suggestion since it promotes adherence to Wikipedia style guidelines. Giants2008 (17–14) 23:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to go ahead and change the medals by year tables on the ones I nominated for FL. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Support this. Would an editor change a medalist table to the proposed format so that we can see what it would look like? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I already did. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

(→)I hope you guys still watch this page. I just looked at the table in the figure skating list and noticed that those grayed out cells don't sort well (if you click on the sort arrow the third time, you'll see what I mean), I think those cells should have some negative number for sorting, for example {{sort|-1| }}. Also, I didn't notice any notes explaining what the difference between grayed out cells and cells with en-dashes is.--Crzycheetah 02:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I was going to fix it exactly the way you suggest, but AWB wasn't collaborating with me and it was getting too late so I call it for the day. I will complete the changes today. I'll add those notes now. Thanks! Parutakupiu (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Will this ever end? — Another reviewer pointed out that the gray-shaded cells, indicating NOCs that did not participate that year, should display something else besides the color. I was thinking adding "×" (multiplying character). Parutakupiu (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Bold titles

I have recently noticed that within this project, descriptive titles such as "Country X at the XXXX Olympics" (for example) are in bold in the first sentence of the article. This practice, which I see has been implemented project-wide, does not conform to the Manual of Style, as outlined in WP:MOSBOLD. If the project believes that the current standard is fine the way it is, I don't have a problem. I just thought I would bring it to everyone's attention. Thanks. Jujutacular ^talk_contribs 18:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of that, and no, it's not a project standard. I think this situation was due to a misinterpretation of that rule, whereby editors probably thought that they should boldface the first instance of every word present in the article title. This is something that will be corrected when someone specifically copy-edits those articles or performs a massive bot-assisted change. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I took to this style believing that was the right thing to do. I'm still not 100% against it, as I find it a little unusual when the stated main topic is not bolded in the first sentence. Essentially it's doing the exact same thing as all other articles, just that the words don't all come together in an uninterrupted sequence. The bolding in all articles is to identify the primary topic, why should it not be done just because the words aren't next to each other? (i.e. the Country competed at the Year's Olympics) Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 01:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Turn red links blue?

Another concern raised at this FLC, is the fact that many of the "details" links are red when they could become blue by pointing to results subsections of to-be-revamped "Figure skating at year Winter Olympics" articles. What should I do? Create loads of redirect pages (with {{R to section}}) to the appropriate sections, like suggested, even if the links [[Figure skating at the YYYY Winter Olympics|YYYY Host]] already point to those articles? Should I keep the opinion that these red links are useful to see which articles need to be created in a near future? Parutakupiu (talk) 20:34, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

From an editor's point of view, I'd say that turning them blue in this way does make it harder to find out what's missing. However, it does direct the reader to the pertinent information that they would except on a fully fledged article. Perhaps you should draw up a "to do" list of the event results that need to be moved to their own article first, then create redirects. I did something similar at Athletics at the Commonwealth Games. The true issue is presentation and readability, not that the information shouldn't be linked to even if it's just part of a section, so you may as well do redirects if you believe it's necessary. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 01:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

New peer review section

Hey all. Lately, this project has seen many of its pages being recognized as worthy contributions to this online encyclopedia. I thought that it would be a good time to open our own review department. Who else besides us could be better indicated to review Olympics-related content? Of course, this does not imply that all articles on this topic would compulsorily have to pass through our own peer review. But I believe that we could address better the specificities of the theme than the general reviewing process would.

Also, I've created a multi-page header that will improve our navigation within the project pages. Hope these new tools will please you and help this project to grow even more. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I've made some edits and now when one opens a review page through the project banner, it is automatically loaded with the heading (bearing the article name), and some useful links. Parutakupiu (talk) 17:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Pentathlon

I've overhauled the main pentathlon page and created the new Ancient Olympic pentathlon. Any help fixing what links should point to is most appreciated! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 20:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks very nice, but Ancient Olympic pentathlon isn't very long, and neither is pentathlon. They could easily be merged, and some of the information duplicates already anyway. Reywas92^Talk 18:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review request for the Winter Olympic Games

Hello my friends, it has been a while. I am back at editing and I have listed the Winter Olympic Games at our new, and very cool, Peer Review page. Thank you to Parutakupiu for adding this service. My goal is to advance the article to FA in one attempt. If you have a few minutes and could provide a critical review I would sincerely appreciate it. H1nkles (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, H1nkles. Thanks for being the first to use our new service :) For this, I'll surely be taking a look at that article this weekend. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry H1nkles. I couldn't make it this weekend afterall, but I'll do my best in the following days to give you my comments. Parutakupiu (talk) 23:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries I'm not in a hurry, I appreciate the time you can give it. H1nkles (talk) 14:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Improved infobox for "Sport at the Summer/Winter Olympics" pages

Following a suggestion made by Sillyfolkboy, I've created {{Infobox Olympic sport}}, which is a reformulated/expanded version of an old infobox (former {{OlympicSportHeader}}), that was sparingly used for this effect. It's a pretty complex template, but I've made it so that a single string can display the majority of the infobox content. After loads of tests and fixes, I think the template is now stable and works well. I've already added it to almost all the target pages (apart from some of the one-time past sports). Any suggestions for improvements are welcome! Parutakupiu (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks like some smart work there Parutakupiu. I'm glad you've implemented the idea so well. It provides useful links, without being link heavy, and gives an organized, aesthetically pleasing look to the articles. I wish I had you talent for code! My attempts are merely hacking others work into many pieces until I approach something half-decent! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 04:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:BANNER time!

Hey guys, so I was asked by a user to make an ad for the project. Seemed like a fun thing to do, so I did. Resulted in this: File:Qxz-ad187.gif
Since it represents your project, I was wondering if you'd like anything changed about it. I'm open to all suggestions. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :D} 22:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, awesome MoP! Thanks for this very cool gift. Where can it be used? Parutakupiu (talk) 22:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea, but you seem to have used elements of the non-free 2010 logo (see File:Vancouver 2010 logo.svg for example), which violates WP:Non-free content criteria, I would think. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I did. See the image's page for non-free-use rationale. Mainly, the committee organizing the games this year will see it as infringement only if it is used in a commercial setting that misrepresents the committee. They pass over the harmless usages (such as this one). Master of Puppets - _{Call me MoP! :D} 23:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, all content uploaded to this Wikipedia needs to be licensed by cc-sa-3.0 and GFDL, or have a valid fair-use rationale—not just for Wikipedia itself, but for all downstream users as well. We don't know if any hypothetical downstream user will mis-use the image, so that's why images uploaded to en.wiki need restrictive licensing. I think you ought to ask the experts at WP:Media copyright questions for their opinion. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. We'll see, cheers! Master of Puppets - _{Call me MoP! :D} 02:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of London bid for the 2012 Summer Olympics

London bid for the 2012 Summer Olympics has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi there

Surely Kerren Stewart stepped out of lane in the womens' 100 metres final near the finish - I thought that was an automatic disqualification????

Dave Wilson Fort William, Scotland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.167.120 (talk) 13:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation

As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Finnish flag for 1908 & 1912

I don't think too many editors have Template talk:Country flag IOC alias FIN on their watchlist, but there is a discussion going on there that will be of interest. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Links blocked

It appears that all references linking to the domain http://results.beijing2008.cn/ have been blocked and now require authorisation to view. This creates blocked links on over 1000 articles on en.wikipedia. I'd recommend keeping them and only deleting the references when a suitable and available alternative ref is given. Most of the information they actually supported has alternate sources elsewhere so it's not a major deal, more a widespread annoyance. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 13:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

American football at the 1932 Summer Olympics

This is obviously not a traditional Olympic sport, however, please stop by if you are interested in helping the article make it to DYK: American football at the 1932 Summer Olympics. Thanks! Location (talk) 17:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Query on article naming conventions

Could someone point me in the direction of the discussion deciding upon the naming convention for articles such as Swimming at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metre freestyle, particularly regarding the use of endash, lowercase event names and the full spelling of metres. The reason I ask is that there are many many articles under the WP:SWIMMING banner which use a huge range of different naming conventions (e.g. "100<nospace>m Freestyle", with hyphen or double hyphen between the meet and event), and would like to get these corrected by a bot. It would be useful for me to point to one place where the convention used by this group was decided upon when placing this bot request. Yboy83 (talk) 12:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It's probably in one of this page's archives, but I missed it looking through them. I'm glad you want to take the initiative to standardize elsewhere. However, here or there, I still think it's dumb to use the endash, which is only accessible by a redirect. I prefer just a spaced hyphen, which is typable, and absolutely not the double hyphen, which is just wrong. Reywas92^Talk 19:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You can type Alt+0150 on a Windows keyboard to enter the en dash. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The other discussion you'll find buried in the archives somewhere is with respect to the event names (i.e. all the text after the en dash or hyphen). Our consensus was that the first word (usually "Men's" or "Women's") would be in upper case, following the style of article names in general. The opinion was that these article titles really have "two halves", and that the second half ought to have a leading upper case character as well. But for the remainder of the event name, the only upper case ought to be for true proper nouns/adjectives and that event names by themselves are not proper nouns (e.g. "Greco-Roman", "long jump", "freestyle"). The one exception seems to be the tennis articles, where the WP:TENNIS editors absolutely insist that "Singles" and "Doubles" must have leading upper case, and have been renaming Olympic tennis articles accordingly. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I found some discussions at Archive 7#Page name, Archive 7#2008 event names, and Archive 8#Event article titles: dashes.2C not hyphens. I also went ahead and activated an archive index at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/Archive index, which may or may not help future searches. Feel free to change the link placement on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/header. Thanks, --Jh12 (talk) 07:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Jeux de la Francophonie vs Francophone Games

In respect of the 2009 Francophone Games, it's becoming obviously that the English-speaking press are largely adopting the term Francophone Games, something that was unclear previously. (see here and here for example). Should the whole article set now be moved from Jeux de la Francophonie to Francophone Games? Bear in mind that a sysop will be needed to complete the main topic move. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 02:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

IOC has overhauled their website

FYI. The IOC has overhauled their website. It is lot more user friendly than the previous editions. Chris (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move

I have proposed that Use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport be moved back to Doping in sport. See here for more information. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 18:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Deprecating Template:Sports result table

I have proposed that Template:Sports result table (a template used on around 600 articles) be deprecated in favour of Template:MedalistTable. I believe the latter template to be more versatile and aesthetically pleasing, and it is already in use on a greater number of articles. See discussion here. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 18:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Prep for the 2010 Games

So a question as we approach the 2010 games. What articles should we be working on bringing up to GA, FA, FL, etc. to get ready for the influx of interest in the games early next year? It also might be cool to have some DYK's ready so that we have at least one for each day of the games. That means we would need at least 16 DYK's - fairly doable between now and February 12th when the games open. Geraldk (talk) 12:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Merger question

Hello everyone! I am not a member of the Olympics Wikiproject, but I am a member of the Equine Wikiproject, and recently I was looking through some of the articles that deal with the equestrian sports at the summer olympics. I found that all of the polo articles (Polo at the Summer Olympics, List of Olympic medalists in polo, etc) are completely separate from the rest of the equestrian articles (Equestrian at the Summer Olympics, List of Olympic medalists in equestrian, etc). Is there a reason for the separation, or was this just a mistake? If no one objects, I would like to merge these articles together, so that all of the equestrian sports are on one set of pages. Thanks in advance for the comments! Dana boomer (talk) 00:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Please do not merge them. Polo and equestrian are recognized as separate by the International Olympic Committee, and that's why they are separate articles. Geraldk (talk) 02:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response. Your rationale makes complete sense, and I will of course not merge the articles. Dana boomer (talk) 22:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Question about succession boxes and infoboxes

I was wondering if you make "Infobox Olympic event" do you delete the "medalists" part of the article? I started to make succession boxes but then I noticed the Other way but I was concerned that I would be duplicating info so I kept doing the succession boxes. Qwerty786 (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

We have consensus for the style of results pages created for the 2008 Games (e.g. Athletics at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metres and Swimming at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metre butterfly). There are hundreds (thousands?) of pre-2008 results pages that need to be updated to this same style. We no longer use the "Medalists" section, and we have never used succession boxes. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

This clears a lot of things up! Thank you. I was very interested in connecting all the event articles and now that I know this info I will redo all the ones I did with this official style. Qwerty786 (talk) 21:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Which flags to use?

Which flags should be shown in the respective templates and consecutively in the pages? The flag considered as "the" national flag of the time? Or the flag really used at the relevant Olympics? I am just browsing through a few books about the 1936 Summer Olympics at Berlin and I found 11 (or 12) nations using a different flag (version) than shown here: Australia (red ensign), Bermuda, Colombia (civil ensign), Costa Rica (flag with arms), Greece (striped flag like current national flag), Hungary (flag with arms), Italy (state flag with arms), Malta, New Zealand (red ensign), Peru (without arms), Switzerland (2:3 version), and probably Argentina (without sun).--88.217.48.180 (talk) 21:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I moved this message from Category talk:Country flag IOC alias templates, as I doubt many people have that on their watchlists.

In general, I would say that our consensus is to use the flags actually used at the Games in question, which is why we have the flags that we do for South Africa at the 1992 Summer Olympics, New Zealand at the 1980 Summer Olympics, etc. Of course, prior to 1908 (I think), flags weren't used at the Games so our consensus is to use the national flags at the time. So if you have a reliable source with photos of what was used in 1936, we ought to use them on the respective articles. What is the ISBN for your book; I'd like to see that! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe that Switzerland uses the civil flag at every Olympics. Here it is at Beijing: [4] Orange Tuesday (talk) 20:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Although come to think of it every country flies a 2:3 flag at the Olympics nowadays (since 1996 at least), so that may just be Switzerland flying its regular flag but at a 2:3 ratio, and not its civil flag which just so happens to be at a 2:3 ratio. If that makes sense. Orange Tuesday (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

My main source (I am the IP that opened the thread) is: Walter Richter et al. (1936) Die Olympischen Spiele 1936 in Berlin und Garmisch-Partenkirchen Band 1 und 2. Cigaretten-Bilderdienst Altona-Bahrenfeld.

The other question would be: what are the sources for the flags currently shown? I do understand, that a few rather difficult cases (which South American country used the flag with arms and which without) are not easy to figure out, but I was not surprised by the use of the Australian and New Zealandese red ensigns. At least for Australia I'd suggest that until 1953 (i.e. including the 1952 Olympics) the red ensign was the rule. The photos of the flags of Malta and Bermuda are not really clear, so I can't give a definitive answer.

And probably yes: all flags should be in 2:3, I guess, including Switzerland and (for later years) excluding Nepal. The Swiss flag in 1936 was just the Swiss national flag in 2:3 ratio, and not the civil ensign (merchant flag), as this was only legally established in 1941.--Mevsfotw (talk) 20:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

New Winter Olympics book published

FYI. The Complete Book of the Winter Olympics: 2010 Edition has been published. You can get it on amazon.com if anyone is interested. I got mine in the mail yesterday. It is a good book though I have noticed a few errors, but it seems like every book has that these days. Chris (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I ordered mine yesterday! Qwerty786 (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Flags of participants in 1980 Summer Olympics

I decided to write here after I saw images of Italian medalists in the Official report. They wore uniforms with Flag of Italy even in medal ceremonies, see Official report, page 246. And not only Italian, but British medalists did so (see p. 467 of the report), maybe other countries as well, I didn't check more. But in 1980 Summer Olympics related articles we have Olympic flags associated with these athletes and with Italy, for instance. Even if during medal ceremonies Olympic flag was raised and Olympic anthem was played instead of their country's national anthem (although I don't see any sources for this mentioned for Italy), I believe this doesn't mean, that they were always competing under Olympic flag. Associating Olympic flag with them everywhere looks at least strange to me. Cmapm (talk) 19:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

We have typically gone by the flag used at the opening ceremonies in the parade of nations, and also used in medal ceremonies, but not a uniform badge. But I agree it sometimes looks a bit obscure on our results pages, especially for 1980. Should we seek a new consensus here? I can see good arguments both ways. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

How about the uniforms could have been designed and manufactured before the boycott was announced? Therefore the flag they marched in with and did medal ceremonies could be more accurate because they could do that during the olympics? Qwerty786 (talk) 21:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Event naming

This was also posted in the Talk:Nordic combined at the 2010 Winter Olympics article.

With the nordic combined format changing for this Olympics, how do we want to call the events? I have heard the event formerly known as the 15 km Individual Gundersen be referred either as the 10 km individual normal hill or the Normal hill Gundersen while I have heard the event formerly known as the 7.5 km sprint be referred either as the 10 km individual large hill or the Large hill Gundersen. Vancouver's website([5]) has it listed as Individual NH/ 10 km CC and Individual LH/ 10 km CC for both events, respectively.

When I did the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 2009 stuff for Nordic combined events last year, I referred to them as the 10 km individual large hill (7.5 km sprint) and the 10 km individual normal hill (15 km Gundersen). Do we want stay this way? A little help here. Chris (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

This was also posted in the Talk:Nordic combined at the 2010 Winter Olympics article.

I sent an e-mail out to John Aalberg, Whistler Olympic Park and Director of Nordic Sports yesterday afternoon, and he told me VANOC had used the names listed as suggested by the FIS. Aalberg told me they will remain so. Chris (talk) 18:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Use of Turin in 2006 Winter Olympics

Should the name of the city within articles related to the 2006 Olympics be Torino istead of Turin. Note that, on wikipedia, other cities are given different names for different contexts. [[6]] shows that when refering to German people, Gdansk is always Danzig, even in periods of history when the city is otherwise refered to as Gdansk.--James Fahringer (talk) 17:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

We've had consensus for four years to use Turin. We also do not use Roma for 1960, München for 1972, Москва for 1980, or 北京 for 2008. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Featured picture listings needed

FYI. We just a got a featured picture yesterday with . When are we going to do a list of these? Chris (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

A list would be good. FYI: I asked Durova to work on a FP that could appear on the mainpage on the first day of the 2010 winter games, which is where the above FP nom came from. I have also been toying with the idea of working an article up to FA for the opening day, perhaps Pierre de Coubertin, if anyone is interested in helping. Geraldk (talk) 23:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Miracle on Ice images

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 November 9, a triplet of images for the Miracle on Ice have been nominated for deletion. 65.94.252.195 (talk) 06:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Navboxes

At the suggestion of a reviewer at FLC, I created a navbox for the 1928 Games here. I am thinking of creating one for each Olympic Games, including moving the page-side templates in use for the more recent Games to the bottom of the page in this form. Input on format, what articles to include, etc? Thoughts? Geraldk (talk) 14:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

What about collapsible navboxes, especially if we get to later Olympics with a lot of different sports and competitions such as the 2008 Summer Olympics or the 2010 Winter Olympics? Something to think about. Good idea though. Chris (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Just a note, we've already got {{EventsAt1928WinterOlympics}} and similar (which are collapsible) for all the Games. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 16:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Chris - I'm new at this navbox thing. Could you point me to a sample of a collapsible navbox so I have a better idea of what you're talking about. Jonel - I was thinking these could incorporate and supersede those events navboxes. Geraldk (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Figured out how to make collapsible groups within the navbox. This would supersede a number of existing templates, including the 'Events at xxxx Olympics', 'Nations at xxxx Olympics', and 'xxxx Olympics venues' navbox templates. Geraldk (talk) 18:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I like them, but where would they be used? Which set of articles do you have in mind? What problem are you trying to solve? The long-standard navigation structure we've always had (and if it ain't broke, don't fix it!) is that you can navigate in two directions from all the main articles, as they could each be considered part of two different series. On a "Sport at the Year Olympics" page, you can navigate to that same sport for any other Games, and you can navigate to each of the other sports at the same Games. For example, we have {{EventsAt2008SummerOlympics}} and {{Olympic Games Athletics}} at the bottom of Athletics at the 2008 Summer Olympics. Similarly, on a "Nation at the Year Olympics" page (such as China at the 2008 Summer Olympics), you can go to any other nation at these same Games (e.g. via {{NOCin2008SummerOlympics}}) and you can get to the page for this nation at any other Games (e.g. via the {{Infobox Olympics China}} infobox). I am usually very leery of navboxes, as they are tremendously over-used in many parts of Wikipedia, so I adhere by the thought of "where would the reader most likely want to go next". With what we have now, I think we do a good job of not over-loading each article with navigation links. If we combine everything into a per-Games all-inclusive navbox, I think you end up with a lot of superfluous links on each article. For example, would you need all the sports links in every nation article, or vice-versa? Would you need every venue link in either of those article types? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

My tendency would be to err on the side of providing maximum flexibility for the reader. It is impossible for us to predict exactly where a surfing reader may want to go next, and I would rather have a flexible system of navboxes that might meet any need. Why wouldn't they want to surf from a sport article to one about a nation who participated, or to a venue? I think you're right to be leery of over navboxing, as was I in my original response to the FLC reviewer, but I'm convinced that the collapsible navbox adequately prevents the box from being too linky, if you will. Geraldk (talk) 22:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, let's see some other opinions on this talkpage first. I do concede that the current system was implemented before "collapsibility", which certainly helps the situation now, as you point out. But I'm envisioning the navbox for a contemporary Summer Games, which would have >200 links in the Nations section, ~31 links in the Sports section, and 30–40 links in the Venues section. Most of those would be quite superfluous for any given page. And to answer your (rhetorical?) question, we already have in-article links "from a sport article to one about a nation who participated", through templates such as {{flagIOCathlete}} and {{flagIOCteam}} which are copiously used in all our results pages. The venue link by itself (in the navbox) has no context at all (what events were held there?), but once you get to a results page (e.g. Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's individual pursuit), the {{Infobox Olympic event}} infobox has an in-context link to the venue article. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I think what we've got now is perfectly fine, though I'm not completely opposed to full navboxes like the example one. If you do want to convert to that, I would want them to be completely made before implementing them so we don't have a job half-done. Reywas92^Talk 23:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

And depending on the scope of this (hence my question of where would they be used above), we're talking about a few thousand articles... — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine taking on the responsibility for the conversion, if that's the decision, and AWB will help. Another option would be to create smaller navboxes like the current Template:2008 Summer Olympics, only hitting the major articles. These would be pretty small for the early Olympics, though. Geraldk (talk) 23:32, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

And another option is to keep things as they are. Using 2008 as an example, I don't see the need to replace the set of exisiting navigation templates with a very large all-inclusive one. {{2008 Summer Olympics}}, {{EventsAt2008SummerOlympics}}, {{NOCin2008SummerOlympics}}, and {{2008 Summer Olympics venues}} are all located on the most appropriate article set for each topic. I believe that unifying them together under one umbrella is a solution in seach of a problem. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand that, you've already stated it quite vehemently. What I'm saying is that there is currently no template like {{2008 Summer Olympics}} for the early Olympic games that links together some of the basic articles like the medals tables and medal winners lists. That is what is missing, and what convinced me that the reviewer may have a point. Geraldk (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Time to restart the Templates discussion and provide an efficient template network for Olympic-related articles? Felipe Menegaz 01:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

2010 Planning

I've created a page to coordinate planning for the 2010 Games at Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/2010Planning. Everyone cool if I put a link to it on the main wikiproject website? Geraldk (talk) 13:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

List of venues articles

Is there a standard for titles of articles about Olympics' venues? From a quick search, I notice that there are two different formats used: 2000 Summer Olympics venues on one hand, and List of 2008 Summer Olympics venues, List of 2010 Winter Olympics venues, and List of 2012 Summer Olympics venues on the other. Also note that there is a discussion at Talk:List of 2010 Winter Olympics venues about moving to Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics (or 2010 Winter Olympics venues per 2000), as the article has more prose than a 'list' would. -M.Nelson (talk) 22:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Note that List of 2012 Summer Olympics venues is not in "list" format whatsoever. -M.Nelson (talk) 22:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

List of 2010 Winter Olympics venues moved to Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics. I support this use as a standard. Felipe Menegaz 22:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver

		WikiProject Vancouver
		You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.

- The article Vancouver, the host city of the 2010 Winter Olympics was once a featured article. We're working to have it restored to featured article status in time for the Olympics if you're available. Mkdw^talk 22:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Synchronized swimming at the 1996 Summer Olympics

Should there be a seperate page for the team event or because there was only one event (the team event) everything should go on one page? Qwerty786 (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

One page is fine. It doesn't make any sense to split it into two pieces. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Singapore 2010 Medal Competition

Dear friends. Vote for my brother design of the Olympic medals for Singapore 2010 here. Thank you! Felipe Menegaz 19:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Sidebars

The sidebars used in Olympic-related articles (2008 Summer Olympics, 2010 Winter Olympics, 2012 Summer Olympics) are really necessary? They steal precious spaces in several articles, are not functional, and are "ugly".

• {{2008 Summer Olympics}}
• {{2010 Winter Olympics}}
• {{2012 Summer Olympics}}

They will be much better in the form of a navbox. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 15:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Naming of Hong Kong articles

Following a brief discussion here, I have a question which might be best answered by participants in this project. All of the articles on Hong Kong's participation in the Olympics since its return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 use the format "Hong Kong, China" in the title. I suggest that this is unnecessary per WP:COMMONNAME and since there is only one Hong Kong. The articles concerned are:

• Hong Kong, China at the 2000 Summer Olympics
• Hong Kong, China at the 2004 Summer Olympics
• Hong Kong, China at the 2008 Summer Olympics

• Hong Kong, China at the 2002 Winter Olympics
• Hong Kong, China at the 2006 Winter Olympics
• Hong Kong, China, at the 2010 Winter Olympics

Your thoughts on this would be appreciated. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I had thought the very same when I saw this. The IOC just calls them Hong Kong, and adding China is excessive. Reywas92^Talk 17:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I've now requested a move here. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

TFAs during the 2010 Winter Olympics

For the last year, my goal has been to have Ice hockey at the Olympic Games run as a TFA at some point during the Olympics. However, I thought I would get comments from project members as there are other articles that would fit. Olympic Games is a FA as well, but I think it would be nice to run an article that has more to do with the Winter Olympics, rather than the Olympics as a whole and it would fit in quite well (and for the record, Yao Ming was TFA on the opening day of the 2008 Summer games). I suppose one could question the stability of the page, but if it ran on Fenruary 12 (the opening day) I see no reason why there would be stability issues as very little of the page would change until after the completion of the hockey tournaments. The other issue with the TFA might be that it shows favourtism towards one sport. However, hockey is one of most (if not the most) high profile events at the Olympics, and the games are being held in Canada. It fits in with both the event and the location (similar to Yao Ming being TFA during the 2008 games). Also, the Olympic Games article could be used as a TFA for a number of other events - the Summer Olympics, youth Olympics, Olympic congresses, etc. The rest of the current Olympics FAs relate to the Summer games (well, except Australia at the Winter Olympics, but it was TFA on September 4, 2007) and don't fit in quite as well. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

2008 BEIJING OLYMPIC GAMES FLAG MANUAL

I just bought this document, so I hope I can work with you to pull information from this book to our project. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:28, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Nice! They even give PMS colors for the Portuguese flag, which does not have constitutionally defined colors. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I have regulations saying otherwise. However, I will try and do what I can. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

You're so right! I totally forgot about that reference... well, mostly because it didn't always have that data. In any case it's said that those colors are the ones used in the image they have on that site, not the official or legal ones. Anyways, you made a very useful purchase. It will enlighten us on what concerns Olympic protocols of flag use and display. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

And colors, construction, ratios and who knows what else. Hopefully, Olympic flag can become a standalone article now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I got the book today. According to page A1, the Olympic flag has the Pantone colors of black, 192 for red, 355 for green, 137 for yellow, and 3005 for blue. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 21:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

FAC - Apolo Anton Ohno

I listed Apolo Anton Ohno, an Olympic athlete, over on featured article candidates. If anyone is interested in leaving their input or reviewing, they are more than welcome. Thanks, oncamera^(t) 02:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Cultural Olympiad redirect - pathetic

Not surprisingly, I guess, this is all there is, which is a small section on the Olympiad page:

Cultural Olympiad

A celebration known as the Cultural Olympiad was established to include all cultural events of the Olympic Movement. This Olympiad is a period most recently held in Athens from 2001–2004, where artists from around the world came and exhibited their art.

Considering the hype that culture is supposed to be as important a part of the Olympic movement, and that the Cultural Olympiads are supposed to be equal in stature and recognition to the athletic games, it's rather pathetic that this is all there is in Wikipedia, don't you think? I know popular conception and media obsessions focus only on the sports (oh, and sometimes the politics... and the swag), but for all the effort put into the Cultural Olympiad it's really sad that it gets shoved aside like this (including the misconception that it's just about artists "exhibiting" their art, which is a poor verb to use for dancers, musicians etc). I don't have much more to say about it just now, just fielding the issue for development/discussion; came to mind tonight because of a "fresh" commercial for the 2010 Cultural Olympiad I just saw; this is the link for it that was on the commercial. Seems to me at the very least that major/significant performers/oerformances/programs for each Olympiad should be assembled and made into articles.....crossover with Arts WPs is obviously needed......the Baron de Coubertin conceived that the modern Olympiad should be as much about culture as about sport....guess that got lost in the shuffle, along with so much else huh?Skookum1 (talk) 05:11, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Templates for standard IOC links

The IOC site has changed, resulting in a lot of links now just going to their home page rather than to a specific games. I would like to create a set of templates to handle this. The templates would all take city= and year= as parameters. If a city is not provided, the template would default to an appropriate higher level page. I have identified at least the following templates as necessary at this time:

• "Template:IOC gamecode" would get the game code used by the search engine. This would just be a big #switch statement. This template is for use in the other templates.
• "Template:IOC games" would show a link to the IOC page for the specified games.
• "Template:IOC medals" would show a link to the list of medals from their database.
• "Template:IOC media" would show a link to the list of photos and videos in their database.
• "Template:IOC external links" would include any IOC links we think are important, and would be for use at the top of the "External Links" section of the main article (or perhaps just under a link to the organizing NOC?). Right now I'm guessing that it should include at least "commonscat", "IOC games", and "IOC media".

If anyone here has done templates like this before, I could probably use some advice (these would be my first). Mainly I'm hoping to avoid someone having to go through the hundreds of pages that use one or more of these links the next time the IOC changes their Web site (also, a lot of the links still need to be fixed in this round).Donlammers (talk) 15:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Could you show some specific examples of where these would be used? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

"IOC medals" would replace the link to the IOC medals page (which is now a database lookup on IOC) that is currently used in the "reference" section of all of the articles that have medals tables (see for instance, 1964 Summer Olympics medal table#References, which is currently broken). "IOC games" would replace the link to the IOC that is currently used in all of the main articles as the first item in the "External Links" section (see for instance 1964_Summer_Olympics#External Links). "IOC media" would point to the media on the IOC site (right under the games link). "IOC external links" would just combine a few templates so that we have a standardized "External links" section that can be easily updated. You can see what it would look like by going to 1964_Summer_Olympics#External Links, which doesn't use templates, but has the proposed links.

Ah, ok, I understand. The really good thing is that the IOC medal database now has the search criteria as part of the URL, so specific references can be generated (e.g. [7] could be used on Swimming at the 1964 Summer Olympics; [8] could be used on Australia at the 1964 Summer Olympics, etc.), and a template like {{IOC medals}} could handle this easily. I've just created that one; is that what you had in mind? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. I think it would be better to have a more specific title if possible rather than just "All the medals since". I realize that technically that's what the database is named, but people might think they are getting them all. Could we do "Medals for sportX at the 1986 Summer Olympics" or something like that? Your template is much simpler than what I've been working on, but does more. I guess I will need to study it a bit to see how it's all done before I try to do much more. Thanks.Donlammers (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

So far I've only looked at the medal database links, of which there are thousands that need updating. The "All the medals since 1896" title is what the page is called, so it is the most accurate parameter to {{cite web}}. I'll think about adding something extra to make it clearer. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Commonwealth Games WikiProject Proposal

I invite WikiProject Olympics members to signup to support a Proposed Commonwealth Games WikiProject. The Commonwealth Games series of articles are much in need of attention. The first task of this project would be to standardise article, template and category naming and to format all existing results and medal tables using Template:MedalistTable and Template:RankedMedalTable for example. Additionally an audit of the results is needed - as an example many of the swimming results show mm:ss and should show mm:ss.00 in the time column. Add your support here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Commonwealth Games. Yboy83 (talk) 11:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Recognition of horses used in equestrian events

Would it be appropriate to add a horse used to win an Olympic medal in the respective category? For example, a horse is used to win a gold medal by a rider representing the U.S. Should the horse be added along with the rider to the category Olympic gold medalists for the United States? I asked this on the wikiproject equine page, and unsurprisingly the consensus was in support of this, but I was told wikiproject Olympics would probably have more say in the matter. Angrysockhop ^{(talk to me)} 07:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. See List of Olympic medalists in equestrian. Reywas92^Talk 21:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

TFAs during the 2010 Winter Olympics?

This is just a heads up that users have been discussing articles that could potentially run as TFA during the 2010 Olympics here. I think there's a good chance Ice hockey at the Olympic Games will run on February 28 (date of the men's gold medal game), but there's the possiblity that another will run on February 12 - the opening day. The main Olympic Games article has been mentioned, as have athlete articles like Martin Brodeur or Jarome Iginla (both of whom have won gold medals and are on the 2010 team, but neither article is part of this project). If anyone would like to comment, their input is more than welcome. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Rules and tactis for 800m indoor event (200m track)

Hi,

Can anyone share the rules for the 800m indoor event? More specifically, I'm wondering when athletes are allowed to cut in on a 200m indoor track. Outdoors, runners cut in after the first curve, but cutting in after the first curve would be bedlam on a short 200m track. Also, can anyone offer some suggestions for tactics on an indoor track? I'm a rookie, who will be competing in my first-ever 800m indoor event and I don't have a coach. Thanks for your help!

Tim216.251.133.154 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC).

2008 Summer Olympics medal table

I raised a concern a few months ago on the article's talk page that it was possibly being updated out of step with reliable sources. This is now definitely the case. The article shows Fabian Cancellara and Alexandr Kolobnev being awarded medals which they have not been awarded. Officially, this event has only a gold and a bronze medalist. The article needs to be updated to be in line with reliable sources. I'd love to just do it myself, but I have a long history of breaking wiki-tables when I try to edit them.... Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 02:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review-Evangelis Zappas

I've listed this article for peer review here Wikipedia:Peer_review/Evangelis_Zappas/archive1, perhaps it can be further improved to GA status. Any input would be appreciated! Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexikoua (talk • contribs) 04:23, October 7, 2009

New rugby and golf venues for the 2016 Olympics

Hi all. Given the inclusion of golf and rugby sevens as official Olympic sports and their inclusion into 2016 programme, the Rio 2016 Organizing Committee announced that it found a venue for Rugby Sevens - the Estádio São Januário - which is located within the Maracanã zone. As for golf, the venue has yet to be decided, as the Rio 2016 Organizing Committee is awaiting word from the IGF as to which of the two proposed golf clubs to use: the Gávea Golf Club (located close to Ipanema between the Copacabana and Barra zones) and the Itanhangá Golf Club (located just outside the Barra zone). I've included the link to the press release from the Rio 2016 Organizing Committee regarding these venues: [9] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.123.252 (talk) 06:27, October 11, 2009

Future bids and sourcing

Someone (72.228.55.52) is going through future Olympics and adding what I would consider rumor to the bids section. For the 2020 Olympics, ThomasAndrewNimmo reverted all of these as unreliable sources. I have not done so yet for 2024, but basically these all seem to be statements like "someone is thinking about maybe bidding", which doesn't seem to me like what should be in this section. I'm just a newbie here, but shouldn't this be actual bids only, and not rumor about possibilities? I note that this person (or at least the IP address) has also already been warned several times about unreliable sources and rumor in other articles (see User talk:72.228.55.52). Some guidance or discussion here would be appreciated. Donlammers (talk) 11:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Upcoming TFA

Ice hockey at the Olympic Games, which I think is the best article I have ever contributed to, will be the TFA on February 12 - the opening day of the Olympics. I'm surprised it got that day, I figured it would probably run on February 28 (gold medal game). Also, I think WP:DYK is considering having an Olympics-themed day at some point (I brought up the topic here). If anyone is working on any articles that could be potential DYKs, then please nominate them. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Olympic Centenarians

Hello all. I was working on a list of Olympians who have reached the age of 100 for my own personal use, and I thought perhaps it might make a suitable list for the mainspace with a few modifications. After reviewing WP:SAL, I'm not too certain anymore, so I thought I'd drop a message here and see what you all think. Obviously a better lead would be in order, among other things. Cheers, CP 05:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

How is it notable? It's an extremely arbitrary list. How about Olympians who reached age 95? Politicians who reached age 100? Authors who reached age 100? Nobel Prize winners who reached age 100? These people are notable because they were Olympians, not because they got really old. Sorry, but this is merely trivia and would likely be deleted. Reywas92^Talk 13:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

You know, there are plenty of arguably trivial lists in Category:Lists of people by age, so it's not like my idea was completely out of left field. A simple "Personally I don't feel that it meets the criteria, it's probably too trivial" or even "No, I don't really think that it's suitable for Wikipedia, it's not a notable crossing of events" would have sufficed. There was no need for the rude response. Cheers, CP 23:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I apologize sincerely. I will try to be more accomodating in the future. The other lists in that category, though, either list all people in a group to show comparison or are also trivial. Reywas92^Talk 00:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Once I had someone take something from my user space and post it into the main space without giving me any credit, so now that I know that that's not likely to happen with page (a combination of me drawing attention to it and being told that it's probably not suitable for the main space), I'm satisfied. By the way, I do agree about that category... I think I might have even nominated one or two of those for deletion, unsuccessfully of course. Cheers, CP 17:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

"Country at the Year Olympics" navboxes

I have nominated Template:Denmark at the 2010 Winter Olympics for deletion here. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

90% font size in tables

Copying a comment I posted in talk:Canada at the 2010 Winter Olympics, becuse this is widespread and seems to be the standard: Is there a reason to have important information in a table as "font-size:90%"? It may look pretty, I suppose, but it's harder for me to read. Adjusting my browser's zoom would mean that I would have to keep adjusting it up and down between tables and paragraphs. Is there some kind of MOS reason for this font size change?

If not, can we please remove all of these? I don't see any value-additive reason for them. Kolindigo (talk) 00:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

It was necessary for some sports on the 2008 pages, and has therefore become a standard style for this WikiProject. I suppose we could only use the smaller font only when necessary, if that inconsistency was acceptable. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

(more) But that might also mean several hundred pages need updating... — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 01:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

What was it necessary for? Could it be resolved by splitting tables or forcing table width to be 90% instead of the font size? I don't want to put more work this close to the Olympics. For now, is it possible to just put a moritorium on it for 2010, remove it from country pages, and after the Olympics, go back and see if it can be removed from 2008 articles? Kolindigo (talk) 01:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

There hasn't been any additional comments or discussion here for a week, so if there's no objection within a day or so, I'm going to go remove all of the font-size:90% on 2010 Olympic articles. Kolindigo (talk) 03:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Those of us who are chronologically challenged applaud you. Donlammers (talk) 10:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The small font size is not used to make it "look pretty", it's used because some users (includng me) have small screen sizes, and since some of the tables are rather large, they make the page much harder to view. 90% is usually the standard when it becomes necessary to shrink text because it's small enough to make a difference, but still reasonably easy for most users to read. Perhaps the size could be increased to 95? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

What's your screen size and resolution? The tables I removed it from aren't very big, and 90% font size didn't make them that much smaller, and I wonder what they look like to you. Are the tables forcing a horizontal scroll or becoming unreadable? How much difference would 5% font make in terms of horizontal space? And I apologize if I was too flippant about small sizing = pretty; I hear it often from people who think that small font sizes are more aesthetically pleasing than the default size. Kolindigo (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

My resolution is 1152x864 (yes, I need a better computer), and some have smaller than that. Some of the tables looked very cramped in, though I admit, most of the tables that you removed weren't too bad, but that's largely because they haven't been filled in yet. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 05:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I looked at all the tables in the United States at the 2008 Summer Olympicsin 1024x768 and the only tables that looked cramped were the ones with images floated next to them. It didn't scroll the page. As is, the page did scroll in 800x600. With font-sizes removed, in 1024x768, the page did scroll. The offender was the Equestrian section's "Individual jumping" table, which has 17 columns, not including the bronze medal jump-off, which gets its own table, and the page didn't scroll without that 17-column table.

I think a lot of potential cramping issues can be easily removed by doing things like not floating images next to tables or not putting two tables next to each other. But I think potential problems with table readability aren't solved by shrinking the fonts, they're solved by doing tables differently. Kolindigo (talk) 05:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

2010 Olympics vandalism

Vandalism has been picking up at 2010 Winter Olympics and similar articles, and will likely get much worse in the weeks to come. If anyone wants to help out, I'd recommend keeping an eye on Special:RecentChangesLinked/2010 Winter Olympics, which tracks changes to most if not all related articles. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 22:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator

Do you guys have a coordinator? I'm with the Signpost and we're doing the WikiProject Report on you guys. Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 15:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No, we don't. All our decisions are reached by membership consensus after previous discussion, so we haven't had the need for such a position. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Who would you say is the most active member?? Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 19:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Andrwsc (talk · contribs), Scorpion0422 (talk · contribs), Donlammers (talk · contribs), and Geraldk (talk · contribs) seem to be most active here, among others. Reywas92^Talk 19:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 19:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Signpost Interview

Today we interview *users*

So, how do you feel about how busy the project is this time of this year, with the Olympics starting in four days??

Reply:

When did you guys join the project??

Reply:

How many Olympic Games has the project seen?

Reply:

Just how busy does the project get during the Olympics??

Reply:

Interesting. So, anything you’d like to add?

Reply:

This'll go to press in tomorrow's issue. Belugaboy535136 ^contribs 19:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

There is a major crusade these days to delete unsourced biographic articles, and this would include hundreds (if not thousands) of Olympic athlete articles, as we have a lot of stubs. Fortunately, we have a great WP:reliable source for these articles, and it is easy to cite them as a reference. For example, I "saved" Rozalia Şoş today by adding something like:

*{{cite web
|author=Kubatko, Justin
|title=Rozalia Şoş Biography and Olympic Results
|url=http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/so/rozalia-sos-1.html
|work=Olympics at Sports-Reference.com
|publisher=Sports Reference LLC
|accessdate={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTDAY}}, {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}

You can cut and paste this into BLP articles (obviously the url and title parameters need to be edited slightly). This is the preferred citation style for the Olympics at Sports-Reference.com website, per here. Also, if any of your articles were deleted before you fixed them up, let me know and I can undelete the page to restore the content—it would not be permanently lost. Hope this helps — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 03:19, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I've started browsing through articles in Category:Olympic competitors for Great Britain. Will report back when done. If each of the project contributors did the same for one country or one sport then we can make a dent into the backlog in no time.

To assist I've built this template: Template:SR-Olympic-Ref which can be subst'ed to produce a ref in the format described by Andrwsc above.

*{{subst:SR-Olympic-Ref |Name |URL |Accessdate }}

Yboy83 (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind if I move the template to {{Sports-reference}} or {{Sports-reference olympic ref}} or similar? Kolindigo (talk) 19:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

No probs, however perhaps it should be {{Sports-reference bio}} or similar to distinguish between the biographies and other content on the site? Yboy83 (talk) 20:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

How about {{cite sports-reference}}? Kolindigo (talk) 04:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

With no objection, I have moved it to {{cite sports-reference}}. If someone thinks of a better name, please move it there. :) Kolindigo (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps {{sports-reference olympic bio}}? I know that's a bit lengthy, but I think there are lots of other sports-reference pages that we need a citation template for, so we need to at least include "bio" in the name. Maybe remove the "cite" part, as most of the external link templates don't have "cite" in the name. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay. My only objection to the first title was that it was hard to remember. Kolindigo (talk) 19:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright concerns related to your project

This notice is to advise interested editors that a Contributor copyright investigation has been opened which may impact this project. Such investigations are launched when contributors have been found to have placed copyrighted content on Wikipedia on multiple occasions. It may result in the deletion of images or text and possibly articles in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. The specific investigation which may impact this project is located here.

All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to CCI clean up. There are instructions for participating on that page. Additional information may be requested from the user who placed this notice, at the process board talkpage, or from an active CCI clerk. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Numbering of the Games

Hello, sorry I've been absent for a while and I'm slowly getting back into the swing of things. I wanted to bring an emerging issue up for community consideration. Here [10] is an edit made to the Olympic Games article refiguring the numbering of the Games. It removes the missed Olympics due to WWI and WWII (3 Games in total). The result is that the Beijing Games were the 26th summer Olympics rather than the 29th. Now personally when I read the official title of the Beijing Olympics (or any Games for that matter) it reads, "The Games of the XXIX Olympiad". This is not saying that the Beijing Games were the 29th Summer Olympics, it is saying that these are the Games of the 29th Olympiad, using the Olympiad to mean a time frame of four years. Hence the 2008 Games were the 29th four year time frame since the 1896 Games. In taking a literal reading of the name it is correct to call it the XXIX Olympiad. I would also argue that every media outlet and the IOC [11] also hold to this naming convention. Since this is a significant change that was done probably without fully considering the consequences, I would like to bring this to the attention of the community and get consensus on a course of action. Personally I think revert with a message on the talk page addressing this issue. Thoughts? H1nkles (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You are correct. That IP is wrong and did not have any idea what he was doing. I doubt further discussion is even worth it. Reywas92^Talk 02:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

DYKs for 2010 Games

I've been nominating some articles from the Games for Did you know (towards the bottom of the page in the special occasion holding area) as they've been expanded by myself and others. Please keep in mind that if you are working on articles related to the ongoing 2010 Games, they may be eligible for DYK and you should consider nominating them. The most basic requirement is that they have 1500 characters of text (not including tables or charts) and be either new or 5x expanded in the last five days. Please also remember that if other editors have contributed significantly to the article you are nominating, you should make sure your nomination credits them as well. Happy to walk anyone through it if they need help. Marylanderz (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Manual of style

As the link at the top of this page had remained red for such a long time I have created the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Manual of Style; that page then links to the manual of style for nations we created during the 2008 games and has red links for the as yet uncreated guides for sports and events. Hopefully it will help at least a little with people updating the 2010 articles. Basement12 (T.C) 11:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Basement. That was quite simple to do but I never got around to actually create it. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Chronological summary of the 2010 Winter Olympics

Feb 16 is over and the results box still hasn't been added. If no one is working on this article maybe it should be simplified - or empty boxes preloaded onto the page for each day. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, the page belongs to everyone, so go ahead. I think it's practical to have tables for each day already laid out, but commented until that day's results are known and it can be filled. Parutakupiu (talk) 15:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Your WikiProject has a page linked from the Main Page and you don't even keep it updated? Nothing has been added today. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you'll find that many of the members of the wikiproject are working pretty hard to keeping hundreds of articles as up to date as possible right now. You're welcome to help. Marylanderz (talk) 02:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Rugby union at the Summer Olympics GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed your project's oldest Good Article, Rugby union at the Summer Olympics, for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a GA. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Events at the XXXX Games Navboxes

... such as Template:EventsAt2010WinterOlympics. Anyway, I was trying to actually use it to find similarly grouped events, which proved to be more effort than I expected, since there are no groupings. Trying at a Summer Olympics article, such as Template:EventsAt2008SummerOlympics, is even more arduous. As such, I'm proposing to group them using official-ish designations, of which I've found two here on WP.

You can see my proposed Navboxes at User:Schmloof/2010navbox. You can see that I've also included a medal count for these; I think it's a nice touch that doesn't detract from the main idea, but I can see how people may think it doesn't really fit the purpose of the navboxes. Thoughts? Schmloof (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to mention that these semi-official designations are counter-intuitive at times (luge not with bobsleigh and skeleton, for example), and propose another option in which common sense dictates the groups, not governing bodies (luge, bobsleigh, and skeleton would then all fall under "sliding sports", for example. Schmloof (talk) 10:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Cultural Olympiad again

As of a news item in this blogpost, wherein the director of the Sydney Cultural Olympiad implores VANOC to remove a political-control clause from the contracts for Vancouver Cultural Olympiad participants, it's time to expand/break off and update the brief Cultural Olympiad section on the Olympiad article. See also Talk:Olympiad#Modern_Cultural_Olympiad. No doubt this will be branded by the "positive" editors at 2010 Winter Olympics as not controversial enough, or too controversial, to be in the main article and should instead be hidden within Concerns and controversies over the 2010 Winter Olympics, but it still belongs in Wikipedia; see next section about POV forking.Skookum1 (talk) 18:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

POV fork at Concerns and controversies over the 2010 Winter Olympics

An AfD for this article's predecessor Controversies and concerns failed, partly because it was a clear POV fork. Nonetheless it was re-established under the proper full title (which was the other reason it got deleted originally) and has since become a dumping ground for "negative coverage" and "excessive controversy" which "positive" and "common sense" editors have removed ENTIRELY from the main article, and also buried in humble-jumble sequence within the new article. To me it's clearly a POV fork, at least until a proper summary of ALL its major contents is re-placed in the main article, and not a selective culling of stuff that VANOC and its happy-faced supporters are comfortable with. One editor actually claimed to me that Amy Goodman's harrassment by Olympics-paranoid border officers was not Olympics-related, or that the funding controversy over the Athlete's Vilalge was similarly not of sufficient interest and was "extraneous" to the Olympics. Rather than launch an AfD on the POV fork, I urge editors here to review what was removed and to come up with suitable, and cohesive (not jumbled and fudged), shorter versions to be re-placed in teh controversies section of hte main article; which now reads so euhemerized, and only about during-events athletics controversies, that it's uncrecognizable from what was there only a few weeks ago. there's been a lot of censoring going on, in my opinion.....I'd hope WP:Olympics editors are not all adherents to the religion of the "positive" and realize that claiming WP:Undue weight on anything they don't like is not sufficient reason to esclude such material from main articles; or to allow it to be sequestered off, and hidden within, articles that were created expressly to be POV forks. There must be a POV bulletin board somewhere, if there was I think this is a major current POV crisis in Wikipedia - which shouldn't allow itself to be so blithely used by p.r. agency soap.....Skookum1 (talk) 18:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The section in the main article does now seem awfully short, but previously the concerns took up literally half the article. Either there will have to be a POV fork, or much of the information will have to be removed altogether. I would actually support the latter, as most is either outdated or has nothing do with the games themselves and are only minor incidents. Plus, WP editors including myself often have a very bad habit of including every darn fact about an event. Perhaps other users were censoring certain subsections, but my actions were simply to keep the main article about the Games, not every tidbit of criticism. Reywas92^Talk 20:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Totally agreed. It is clearly WP:UNDUE covering minor incidents, which are not notable at all, unrelated or not covered by normal media at all. I think it should be nominated for deletion. - Darwinek (talk) 23:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Great Britain at the Olympics

It would appear that the above article has been moved to the title Great Britain and Northern Ireland at the Olympics based on a talk page discussion featuring only three voters and no input for this project. I think the move is incorrect, the IOC does not refer to the UK's Olympic team as GB & NI but as just GB. What does anyone else think? Basement12 (T.C) 09:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

From the FAQ page of the BOA

http://www.olympics.org.uk/faqs.aspx

"What is Team GB?

Team GB is the Great Britain and Northern Ireland Olympic Team.

Every two years the Team represents Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the summer or winter Olympic Games. The Team is selected by the British Olympic Association, in conjunction with the governing bodies, from the best sportsmen and women to compete in 26 summer and 7 winter Olympic sports at the greatest sporting event in the world.

The sportsmen and women who are selected to participate for GB at the Olympic Games become members of the Great Britain Olympic Team, Team GB.

There is only one Olympic team from Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Team GB. There is not an Olympic swimming team or Olympic rowing team. The individual sports join to become Team GB, the Great Britain and Northern Ireland Olympic Team." - Topcardi (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

What you've quoted there is a bit ambigous but the key parts are "the Team represents Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the summer or winter Olympic Games." and "...members of the Great Britain Olympic Team". i.e. whilst representing GB & NI that isn't the team's name. Basement12 (T.C) 16:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

My argument is that the fact that the team is "Team GB" is irrelevent and the country represented i.e Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the only important factor here. The reason the Northern Ireland part is usually downplayed is because of an agreement between the British and Irish NOC's to avoid a political contrversy over this. Topcardi (talk) 16:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The article is about the team, i.e. Great Britain, not the country which it represents. Basement12 (T.C) 16:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Not everyone who has represented GBR in an Olympic Games was part of an official team. If you use that definition then most country at X games article can not include 1896-1904 as most of the competitors were private entrants and not part of an official national team. Topcardi (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with Topcardi. The BOA source is pretty clear: "Team GB is the Great Britain and Northern Ireland Olympic Team." It's easy to use shorthand, which is why the shorter version appears in so many sources, just as we might refer to the U.S. team (rather than United States) or the Bosnian Olympic Team (rather than the Bosnia and Herzegovina Olympic Team). But that doesn't make the shorthand the real name of the team. Marylanderz (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

In that case surely WP:COMMONNAME applies. Or every other Olympic article mentioning the team on Wikipedia needs to be changed. Not to mention every official Olympic/IOcCdocument and webpage. Basement12 (T.C) 23:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

There is no way that move discussion should have resulted the way it did. It certainly looks like "no consensus" to me, which should have resulted in a re-listing to collect more comments. I would certainly support a relisting at RM for that. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I've asked the user who closed the discussion to take a second look and to reopen it. I'm not sure what the process is for relisting? Basement12 (T.C) 00:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

User suggested that I relist it and I have done so. Discussion may be found here Basement12 (T.C) 00:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Special award

I've come across a lot of editors who have been doing some amazing grunt work to keep the articles up to date while the 2010 Games are ongoing, and I created a special award for these games to recognize them (got the idea from an award I saw on someone's userpage from the 2008 Games). Please feel free to use it, original at Template:2010 Olympics Barnstar:

		The 2010 Winter Olympics Award
		insert message here

• Marylanderz (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Date format for Olympic rosters

There is confusion over which date format to use for birthdates appearing in Template:2010 Winter Olympics United States men's ice hockey team roster. Since it is about a United States team, User:Nosleep changed the format to "Month DD, YYYY". Since this template appears on Ice hockey at the 2010 Winter Olympics – Men's team rosters, where all other teams use the format "DD Month YYYY", I changed it back. Please comment at the template talk page. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This issue has been resolved. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 18:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Medal Rankings

Hey everyone. I'm sure I'm the x-thousandth person to ask this, but I'm sure the rest of the discussions are buried in the archives: why the decision to rank according to number of golds? The standard ranking by the media, as well as by the official Vancouver 2010 website (http://www.vancouver2010.com/) seems to be by the total number of medals. Thanks. The Fwanksta (talk) 21:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

See Olympic medal table. Parutakupiu (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. The Fwanksta (talk) 22:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Password-protected references

http://results.beijing2008.cn/* seems to be password-protected. I've seen the site referenced many times and I don't know how this should be dealt with, but I assume they should be replaced with freely accessible reference. --Kamasutra (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Ideally those references should be replaced. This could be done using the official report, its not yet been released but when it is you can download it here. In the meantime sports-reference.com has all the standings if not every result. Basement12 (T.C) 10:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

2010 Winter Olympics images on Commons

For those who weren't aware the Commons has growing selection of images relating to the Games that can be used to illustrate articles, they can be found here - Basement12 (T.C) 14:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Could be a bit bigger if you know who's that ski jumper. --Sporti (talk) 15:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Judging from the images on the official site I'd say it was a Slovenian, so one of Robert Kranjec, Mitja Mežnar, Primož Pikl, Peter Prevc. Looks like bib number is in the 20s, possibly 23 or 29. Looking at Ski jumping at the 2010 Winter Olympics – Normal hill individual Prevc was 29 so that'd be my guess. Basement12 (T.C) 15:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Scrap that. I think it's Vincent Descombes Sevoie. He wore 23 in the events and is pictured with similar uniform and skis here. Basement12 (T.C) 16:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not Slovenian for sure, don't know about Sevoie, he looks way smaller then 173 cm. Did they have different numbers for training? If the date is right (22th), its from training for teams event. --Sporti (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

According to Ski jumping at the 2010 Winter Olympics – Large hill team bib numbers were all 1 to 12 for the team event. Looking at the large version of the image i'm almost sure its number 23 which was Sevoie in the individual events, I doubt they numbered the bibs consistently in events just to change them in training. Basement12 (T.C) 16:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is 23, stil not sure though, maybe someone can confirm this? --Sporti (talk) 17:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually I think it's Stefan Hula, Jr., he had number 23 at trainings. --Sporti (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Competitors that can't compete due to injury

If a competitor which has been selected for the games is injured before the games start (or even during the gmes, but before their first competition) and unable to compete, should their name be removed completely from the "Country at the 2010 Olympics", and that country's competitor count be reduced by one? Or should the name stay, with a strike-through and an explanation?

... and now that 30 competitors has been expelled from the games due to doping, I guess the same question applies here.

I'm leaning towards complete removal, but I just want to make sure I'm doing it right.

TrondM (talk) 20:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I think your question should be broken down into two categories: people who don't compete due to injury (or other event outside of their control - death in the family, illness) and athletes who don't compete because they break rules - doping, or violating any rule that disqualifies them prior to competition. In the first case, I would say that they earned the right to compete and should remain on the team, especially if they are not replaced by another competitor. I would not even strike through their name, they are a member of the team in good standing. If a footnote is needed then fine but injury or other event outside their control should not preclude their official inclusion in the Games. If they violate rules that is a different matter. The problem is that these are really case by case situations. There have been athletes, Andreea Raducan, who were stripped of their medals post competition after testing positive for a banned substance, which turned out to be found in cough syrup she took just prior to competition. Do we remove all record of her appearance at the Games as a result of an obviously inadvertant mistake? I think we should consider carefully any decision to remove or strike through the names of any athletes for any reason. Granted this is a post-competition example and your question is specifically related to pre-competition disqualifications. Which is why I would consider striking names of athletes who qualified for the Olympics on false pretenses (doping) and were then disqualified. But other than that I would not support any decision that would summarily remove or strike names of athletes without giving lee way for a look at their individual situations. H1nkles (talk) 21:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

My thoughts on this, which I generally tried to follow with the 2006 pages, were that athletes that don't appear in the official results shouldn't be listed in the results tables, but that they should definitely, if possible, be mentioned in the prose lead-up to the section for their sport. This would included competitors selected before the Games, but who were unable to compete. A good example of this from 2006 would be Michelle Kwan. Those who do appear in the official results, I put in the tables, even if their result was a "Did Not Start", which is somewhat iffy to me. Athletes banned for doping are in the tables with their results, but the disqualification is clearly noted, and again, noted in prose at the top of the section. An '06 example here would be Olga Pyleva. I really dislike using a strike-through, especially in a table. To summarize, I think that being named to a team, at any point, is enough to earn a mention in the 'Country at the xxxx Season Olympics' pages, but only those that are officially listed should be in the results tables, regardless of whatever the reason for non-competition is. Edged (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit late (just a bit?) to the discussion, but I agree almost word for word with Edged. That's how I handled Dylan Ferguson, who was told a few days before his event that he would not be allowed to leave the hospital due to a post-operative infection following an emergency appendectomy. For right now, I left him in the table as a DNS, with the intention of adding him in the prose section above. Once the prose is written and his situation (and that of Scotty Bahrke) is explained, Ferguson can be removed from the table since, officially speaking, he withdrew before his event. Wine Guy~Talk 07:18, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone in this WikiProject

I want to say thank you to all of you who have been working so hard to provide complete information about the athletes, events, and Olympic-related activities for the 2010 Winter Olympics. I have been referring to many of the articles you have worked so hard on, and have been keeping up to date. You are all doing an excellent job - take a bow! Risker (talk) 03:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Aerials

I noticed that there's no Aerial freestyle skiing/Freestyle aerial skiing/Freestyle skiing - aerials/Aerial skiing article... but the other Olympic disciplines (Ski cross, Mogul skiing) have individual articles... perhaps someone could start one up?

70.29.210.242 (talk) 10:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I had noticed that as well at some point but it fell off my radar. The stand-alone article that should exist is Aerial skiing, which currently redirects to Freestyle Skiing#Aerial skiing. Wine Guy~Talk 10:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

suggest you recruit help/collaboration at Wikipedia:WikiProject Skiing and Snowboarding....Skookum1 (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Alpine skiing template

I've just come across the template {{AlpineSkiingAt2010WinterOlympics}}. I propose adding links to the various disciplines: Alpine skiing combined, Downhill, Giant slalom skiing, Slalom skiing and Super Giant Slalom skiing. 83.80.18.68 (talk) 06:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, that would overlink the template, unnecessarily, because there's already a link to the discipline in the introduction section of both men and women's event pages. Parutakupiu (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Canada has only hosted the winter games twice..

The article incorrectly states that Canada has hosted the winter games 3 times in the introductory paragraph. Canada has hosted the Olympics 3 times -- only two were winter contests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben.barnes3 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

To which article are you referring? 2010 Winter Olympics states: "The 2010 Winter Olympics are the third Olympics hosted by Canada ... Previously, Canada was home to the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, Quebec and the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary, Alberta"; it's been worded that way for quite some time. Is there an article where this is not clear? Wine Guy~Talk 05:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Netherlands at the Olympics

The article Netherlands at the Olympics appears to contradict itself. It says that the Netherlands has won 71 gold medals at the Summer Games and 30 gold medals at the Winter Games, but somehow that adds up to 100 gold medals overall. Same with the bronze medals: 96 at the Summer Games and 26 at the Winter Games would make 122 bronze medals overall, but the article lists only 120. I can't find the error. It might have something to do with the Rowing gold at the 1900 Summer Olympics (which afaik hasn't been awarded to the Netherlands yet, because the cox is unknown) and with the two Art golds at the 1928 Summer Olympics. But that still doesn't explain the bronze medal error. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 14:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Olympic Hockey Players

Hello, I have been updating and creating Player profiles for USA Olympic hockey players, from the past (30's-40's) and I am planing on continuing on with some more, I was wandering if you at WikiProject:Olympics would like me to add your banner to these players (I did it for one already)? These are essentially just C-level articles, since finding information on the players has been difficult. With that in mind and the fact that they are of low importance to your project, and most likely won't be updated further I would like to know if you would want me to add your banner to these pages or if I should just leave it off. Thanks--Leech44 (talk) 15:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know we don't have any policy on whether athlete articles should be tagged with our banner. We already have lots of Olympic competitors articles tagged but it's very inconsistent. Personally I don't think it does any harm - Basement12 (T.C) 15:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In particular, I would suggest tagging Olympic hockey players from the all-amateur teams, there are likely many of those amateurs (especially from the 30s and 40s) for whom their Olympic participation is their only claim to notability. Wine Guy~Talk 19:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Japanese flag bearer not first female

Okazaki was not the first Japanese female flag bearer in the winter games. She was just the first female flag bearer to appear in 2010 opening parade procession. The first Japanese female flag bearer for the winter games was Seiko Hashimoto in Calgary 1988. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipsig (talk • contribs) 22:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

US Network NBC Questioning GBR Curling Team Manhood

While watching US TV coverage of Olympics, I believe I saw and heard during US televised coverage of the Men's Curling Draw One, Great Britain (Murdoch) vs. Sweden (Edin), NBC commentator questioned testosterone level of team Great Britain. The questioning was wrt withstanding the competition (if I understood correctly).

 Commentator was definitely NOT questioning the sex hormone (IMO), but strictly the manhood of the GBR team for the Olympics.
 Other commentators (2) were silent.
 Testosterone level / manhood was questioned while Murdoch was on-screen.

I hope this observation was misunderstood. Don (talk) 03:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Closing ceremony flag bearers

Is there a place where we can find the flag bearers at the closing ceremony at the 2010 Winter Olympics? And to what article should they be added? 2010 Winter Olympics national flag bearers, 2010 Winter Olympics closing ceremony or both? 94.212.31.237 (talk) 23:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

2010 Winter Olympics national flag bearers would be the logical choice; just add columns and info as necessary to distinguish the two. I don't know where you can find the info, though. You may have to look for each country's individually. I only know Joannie Rochette and Bill Demong. Good luck! Schmloof (talk) 06:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Here you can find the official IOC press release with the full list of flag bearers. - Darwinek (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sortable tables

I was parsing through the articles United States at the 2006 Winter Olympics (and for other years). I noticed that the tables for medalist are sortable. However, this is not the case for United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics (and for other years also). Is there a reason for this? Should I go through and correct this for the countries and years? --Chrismiceli (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

That would help! Many of those articles were created long before sortable tables were supported, and many still have a bulleted list format instead of table format. Updating them to use a consistent format is a lot of work, but worth it. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Style question

I'm currently working on List of Olympic medalists in baseball in my sandbox to bring it to FLC. One of the things I'm adding is a statistics section on individual and nation medals similar to List of Olympic medalists in skeleton. I have a question about the national table, however. Some lists, such as List of Olympic medalists in figure skating have entries on these tables marked "NOC did not participate at these Games". Now, does this refer to just participating in the games at all (explains why, for example, the USSR is blanked out this way once the USSR was gone), or does it refer to participating in that event specifically? I ask because, for example, the US baseball team did not qualify in 2004 but the US was certainly at the 2004 games. Staxringold _talk^contribs 20:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that kind of table is necessary on the baseball list. Our approach for team sports is to show medals (and full placement) on tables such as Baseball at the Summer Olympics#Participating nations. See also Ice hockey at the Olympic Games (featured article) and List of Olympic medalists in ice hockey (featured list) for our "best practices" for Olympic team sports. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

• It's still a work in progress (a bit more lead text, some alphabetizing in the table to do), but what do you think so far? Staxringold _talk^contribs 22:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

  Yeah, looks like it's progressing nicely. Would be nice (but perhaps difficult) to get photos of players in their national team uniforms instead of MLB uniforms. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I've scoured Flickr but can't really find anything freely licensed. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Paralympics Task Force

Made a Paralympics task force: Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Paralympics. Please edit and or join. Bib (talk) 10:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Very good idea. And perhaps the project page of Project Olympics could give some prominence at least to the Paralympics? (For the time being, I'm going to be more involved in the Paralympics articles than in the Olympics ones, because there's so much more work to be done there.) Aridd (talk) 15:01, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Interesting timing, a few days ago I posted a Reward Board request to get the Paralympics and Youth Olympic Games articles to either GA or FA. I'm working on other Olympics articles right now but the reward stands if anyone is up to the challenge. H1nkles (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Heads up on IOC website change

This is a heads up, I noticed that the IOC recently revamped their website, olympic.org. This is a site heavily used in our articles. The upshot is that many of our old links are now dead and will need to be repaired. Just an FYI as you maintain these articles. H1nkles (talk) 18:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sub articles naming

I have made a comment about article naming on the talkpage of the 2010 Olympics. Maybe I should have put it here instead. Anyway, go there, and have your say. LarRan (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

There was a brief discussion about this before (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/Archive 7#2008 event names). I would prefer guidance from Wikipedia talk:Article titles and/or Wikipedia talk:Summary style before this project decides on something in a vacuum, and it most certainly shouldn't be discussed on the 2010 talk page, as this is a decision that affects several thousand articles across 47 Games. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Allright, I'm moving my comments here:

Why is the word "men's" in the name of the article "Ice hockey at the 2010 Winter Olympics – Men's tournament" spelled with a capital M? The same goes for several other pages about 2010 WO results, like men's and women's slalom, men's and women's 10 km classic, etc. It's not the beginning of a new sentence, and "men's" and "women's" are not proper names. I propose we make an effort, and move these pages. LarRan (talk) 09:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible GAs

I've been working on Great Britain at the 1992 Winter Paralympics in order to get it up to good article status but before I nominate it I'd be grateful is someone from this project could take a quick look and point out/correct any glaring errors so I don't look like so much of a muppet in the review process. If anyone has the time the same applies to Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics though that still needs a bit of work. Cheers - Basement12 (T.C) 17:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

My review of the paralympics article is on the article's talk page. H1nkles (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

My review of the Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics is on the article's talk page. H1nkles (talk) 23:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, some good suggestions for me to work on there - Basement12 (T.C) 10:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Both articles are now nominated at Wikipedia:Good article nominations#Sports and recreation - Basement12 (T.C) 15:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Historical flags

As mentioned before by another user (link) Canada used the British flag in the opening ceremony of the 1912 Olympics, as shown on the photograph in Canada at the 1912 Summer Olympics. Therefore the flag should at least be changed for 1912, but I don't know which flag they used in the other Games before gaining full independence. List of Canadian flags says the British flag was the de jure flag until 1965.

Another point I wanted to mention is a problem with the country "IOC alias code" template. As this template is both used in the flagIOC (Olympics) and flagIPC (Paralympics) template it always displays the same flag for the same year. So for West Germany at the 1968 Summer Paralympics it displays the German flag with the Olympic rings used at the 1968 Summer Olympics. Although I have no sources about the 1968 Paralympics I can hardly imagine they would have used the flag with the Olympic rings as that flag was used by the FRG and GDR teams at the Olympics before and the GDR only participated in the Paralympics once in 1984. For the summer games of 1980 this problems concerns all nations that competed under the Olympic flag (or another one like New Zealand) as it shows this flag instead of the national flag in the 1980 Summer Paralympics article. For the 1992 Summer Paralympics I don't know under which flag South Africa competed. But as the flag used in the 1992 Summer Olympics displays the Olympic Rings and the Paralympics have their own symbol it could be that they used another flag. The only nation where this problem has been solved is Chinese Taipei which uses different flags for the Olympics and Paralympics. Aleph Kaph (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

See the comments on my talk page. The Paralympic templates mostly "piggyback" onto the Olympic ones, but need to be distinct (like TPE is). — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I fixed all the issues regarding Paralympic flags that you mentioned, Aleph. I assumed that West Germany in 1968 and South Africa in 1992 competed under their national flags. Not sure about that, but I couldn't find any references stating one way or the other. — jwillbur 02:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Jwillbur. Now there is still the point about Canada's flag in the early Olympic Games. In 1912 they used the Union Flag, so that should be changed, but I don't know if the flag should also be changed for the Games before. I think, when they used the British flag in 1912 they most probably used it before as well and maybe they continued to do so in the 1920s, but I don't have any reference for this. Another thing about this photo I just noticed is the Australian flag in the background followed by what seems to be another British one. The Official Olympic Report where this photo is taken from labels it "Canada, Australasia, South Africa" which means Australasia used the Australian flag in the opening ceremony and South Africa probably used the British one, at least I think the flag on the photo looks more similar to the Union Flag than to the Red Ensign that we currently use for South Africa at the 1912 Summer Olympics (while for the games before we display the Union Flag).Aleph Kaph (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

1956 Winter Olympics Peer Review Request

Hello, I've listed 1956 Winter Olympics at the Olympics Peer Review. I'm trying to get this article to FAC this month and your help would be appreciated. Please see the peer review page for specifics about the review. I appreciate your help. User:H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 16:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I've made a few suggestions on the review page - Basement12 (T.C) 17:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. User:H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 17:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Ongoing FLCs

This project has currently the following four lists undergoing FLC review:

• List of Olympic medalists in skeleton (FLC page)
• List of Olympic medalists in baseball (FLC page)
• Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics (FLC page)
• List of Olympic medalists in curling (FLC page)

To avoid any of these not being promoted due to lack of quorum, I ask the members and other users to consider giving a look at them and placing comments. Thank you! Parutakupiu (talk) 22:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Asian Games by country articles

FYI, several Asiad related articles have been prodded for deletion on March 23, see WP:PRODSUM for that day.

76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

They have all ended up for deletion at AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 March 25

76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

2026

There's already a 2028 Olympics article, but there's no 2026 Olympics article... that's a bit strange. Considering the 2010 Games just ended, and in comparison with the 2008 Olympics, having an article 20 years after that, there should be 2026 and 2030 articles... 76.66.194.32 (talk) 06:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The convention of starting an article of a future Games is that there are reliable published sources for that games. Since no one has officially declared interest yet (to my knowledge), an article has not been started. The much larger Summer Games (2028) take more advance planning, therefore cities have already indicated their interest.

On another point, there was much criticism and Deletion nominations for Games for 20+ years in advance. So we have not been in a rush to start a new page until the above source guideline is met. Cheers-Cbradshaw (talk) 05:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Asian Games by country articles

FYI, several Asiad related articles have been prodded for deletion on March 23, see WP:PRODSUM for that day.

76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

They have all ended up for deletion at AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 March 25

76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

2026

There's already a 2028 Olympics article, but there's no 2026 Olympics article... that's a bit strange. Considering the 2010 Games just ended, and in comparison with the 2008 Olympics, having an article 20 years after that, there should be 2026 and 2030 articles... 76.66.194.32 (talk) 06:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The convention of starting an article of a future Games is that there are reliable published sources for that games. Since no one has officially declared interest yet (to my knowledge), an article has not been started. The much larger Summer Games (2028) take more advance planning, therefore cities have already indicated their interest.

On another point, there was much criticism and Deletion nominations for Games for 20+ years in advance. So we have not been in a rush to start a new page until the above source guideline is met. Cheers-Cbradshaw (talk) 05:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)