Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics

Welcome to the WikiProject Olympics talk page
Discussion	Alerts	Assessment	Manual of Style	Peer review
Here you can discuss with other users about general questions and issues involving the project.	Here you can be updated on important changes in the workflow status of articles tagged by this project.	Here you can check the project ratings statistics, learn how to assess articles, or request us an assessment.	Here you can follow the project guidelines to help you create, expand, and format articles.	Here you can ask the project membership to perform a review on any of its tagged articles.

Olympic Games Paris Underway 2024 Summer Milan & Cortina 551 days left 2026 Winter Los Angeles 1440 days left 2028 Summer French Alps 2010 days left 2030 Winter

Archives Archive 1 – August 23, 2004 – April 5, 2006 Archive 2 – April 22, 2006 – October 24, 2006 Archive 3 – November 20, 2006 – March 23, 2007 Archive 4 – March 28, 2007 – June 5, 2007 Archive 5 – June 5, 2007 – July 5, 2007 Archive 6 – July 9, 2007 – November 3, 2007 Archive 7 – November 10, 2007 – July 30, 2008 Archive 8 – August 1, 2008 – August 24, 2008 Archive 9 – August 24, 2008 – February 8, 2009 Archive 10 – February 17, 2009 – April 23, 2009 Archive 11 – April 23, 2009 – March 25, 2010 Archive 12 – March 26, 2010 – April 26, 2011 Archive 13 – April 22, 2011 – August 20, 2012 Archive 14 – August 19, 2012 – July 9, 2015 Archive 15 – July 24, 2015 – August 23, 2016 Archive 16 – August 22, 2016 – April 3, 2018 Archive 17 – January 30, 2018 – August 27, 2020 Archive 18 – September 2, 2020 – August 26, 2021 Archive 19 – August 30, 2021 – November 29, 2022 Archive 20 – January 11, 2023 – Archive index

To start a new discussion section, please click here

1896 Summer Olympics

I'm thinking about rerunning this one in late July at WP:Today's featured article. It was promoted to FA back in 2005, but I've run some automated checks on the article that turned out fine, and people have done a good job keeping up with questions on the talk page. It reads well. Yes, no? - Dank (push to talk) 01:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Looks good. Kingsif (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Timelines on qualification articles

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is it necessary to list the opening ceremony in a timeline of qualification events for each sport's qualification article? I don't think its necessary, with the timeline being left to just qualification events and dates. Thoughts? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Could you give an example page? The few sports I keep track of don't seem to have this. Primefac (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Judo/2024 Olympics is the only one. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed it but there was some objection. But if there is a wider consensus to have them included, then we can add it back. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1233403041 for the record. I don't see why that information needs to be included, it's not really part of the qualification timeline (especially if it's not listed for any other sports). Primefac (talk) 23:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I totally agree with you. I can't recall it being on any qualification article including events outside the Olympics as well. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree with the removal. It's not part of the process. Kante4 (talk) 07:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I think we have consensus for removal? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I support removal as it seems irrelevant. Schwede66 23:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move at Talk:María José Rienda Contreras#Requested move 5 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:María José Rienda Contreras#Requested move 5 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yuna Kim A-class assessment

Hello everyone, WikiProject Figure Skating has just started doing A-class assessments. Our first article submitted for review is Yuna Kim, and we're in need of a third reviewer. Here's the link to the assessment: Wikipedia:WikiProject Figure Skating/Assessment/Yuna Kim. The assistance of any member of this project would be muchly appreciated. You don't have to necessarily be a figure skating expert (although that would help, of course), but you should at least be knowledgeable about editing and contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks to all and best. Editor120918756 (talk) 06:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I would, but having scanned the A-class review list page, I feel like I am not versed enough in the (many!) guidelines the FS project has on writing a FS biography to be a particularly useful reviewer. Several of the FS-specific A-class review points come down to handling FS-specific terminology, sources, guidelines in an appropriate manner and with my minimal experience editing in the area, I feel I could not well judge for myself any of those things, let alone assess and give recommendations.

If you are lacking for reviewers due to so many regular contributors of the FS project having edited the article, perhaps that is an indication than many users who could otherwise be the third reviewer have as a collective agreed on the quality status of the article - through combined editing - and another reviewer may not be necessary? It seems to reflect the amount of work the project has put into this article, and would be easier than needing to find a user willing to build up some experience in the area just for a review. Kingsif (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the response @Kingsif

I'll tag @Figureskatingfan here so she can read it. Editor120918756 (talk) 04:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for your response, @Kingsif. Actually, this was going to be the next step. We're trying to adhere to the agreed-upon requirement for three reviewers, but in this article's case, several editors who are familiar with our guidelines and who are experienced figure skating editors have worked on it. I agree, the solution is to come to a consensus that two reviewers are enough. Best to you! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! It's a great read of an article, I'd just check the photo number/sizes before sending it to FA or anything! Kingsif (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Kingsif Oh, yes! Thanks for at least reading it and telling us it looks good. That doesn't need any expertise, and most readers wouldn't have any expertise either. Editor120918756 (talk) 08:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Reserve players

Hello everyone, i just wanted to ask if the number of reserve or alternate players should be included in the total athletes represented by the country at a event or should only the number of actively participating athletes should be included? PrinceofPunjab^TALK 08:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, these players are not officially on the team and do not get awarded medals if they remain reserves. I remember there were some discussions on the topic regarding the volleyball teams. Tone 08:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion you are talking about is here PrinceofPunjab^TALK 08:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if that's changed now that, in football at least, alternates can be added to the squad list and then taken back off. But alternates in a team, and a reserve in an individual sport to make sure the field is full if someone drops out, are quite different things. Kingsif (talk) 23:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Medal summary sections on sport at x Olympics format.

Hello,

As per the standard it appears the Medal summary section has the medal table first followed by the medalists, with each event and a link titled "details". This is standardized across all sports from what I can see except Tennis. I think this needs also apply to tennis as well so all sports are standardized. Example here of Weightlifting/2024 and Tennis/2020. Thoughts? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

One of the guides linked in the MOS guide for this project is [1] Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree, should be consistent. Kante4 (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we need to force project-wide consistency as long as the tennis articles have internal consistency. It's a minor formatting point and not one that I think has any distinct pros/cons. Kingsif (talk) 20:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. All Olympic articles should have the same consistency. We shouldn't be formatting one differently. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

We're not going to do this again, are we? Where you argue consistency for the sake of consistency without having any reason why it's an improvement over status quo. The project can't keep asking you why you think regimental consistency is needed only for you to not have an answer; we'll just have to go to a BRD cycle. Kingsif (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

@Kingsif:It looks like they are doing this again. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kingsif:Are you saying this has happened before with them... arbitrarily changing articles like Tennis at the 2024 Summer Olympics to their standard of consistancy? Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, changing formatting and the like, being challenged, and not giving a reason besides "consistency". If something works, especially if it is something that has added functionality relating to its specific topic, there's no reason to change it. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

A couple things here. When you look at a list of Olympic sports pert near for every one of the the Olympics is either the pinnacle of the sport or pretty much the only high point of their sport. And they are very team oriented. When I looked at the list of all these sports i cold see three that don't fit that mold. Tennis, Boxing, and Golf. None of those use the regular format. Golf has no medal summary section, only an events section. In that section the medal table is first and the medalists (of which there are only two items) is second. Boxing has a medal summary section but the only thing in it is the medal table. It also has a separate medalist section and that section is "above" the medal summary section. So it does depend on the sport itself. Olympics are far down the line of importance for tennis.

Also, none of those Olympic Sports articles are the same. Nothing is more important for a reader than "who won the event." That should be front page top of the line news. Yet articles such as Gymnastics bury the winners. And hey, that sport also has a separate medal table and events section. Those event winners should be at the very top, way above schedule and participation. Volleyball is even more ridiculous... I gave up on that article in trying to find out who won. It's a mess! So those Olympic articles have big issues and the order of tennis winners isn't out of the norm. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this "Nothing is more important for a reader than "who won the event." The medalists are buried towards the bottom. Maybe a discussion on how we organize these pages is needed. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

If you saw my first message, the MOS guideline linked for Ice hockey at the 2002 Winter Olympics, has a "Medal summary" section with medalists + medal table. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Remember also that that is not Wikipedia MOS, that is Wikiproject Olympics MOS which is no different that Wikiproject Tennis MOS. And you mentioned their MOS example of Ice hockey at the 2002 Winter Olympics. But right next to it is another example of Archery at the 2004 Summer Olympics which is better laid out with the winners at the top and the medal table at the very bottom. So their MOS has a huge difference in style. Per that, our Olympic tennis article is just fine. I think they were trying to make sure the tables looked similar, not the actual placement of the tables. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I feel as though the medal table + medalists should be grouped together or in sections next to one another. The medal table seems out of place in the 2004 example. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree. If it were me I'd probably have the medal summary at the top and the medal table right below it, either separate or in the same section. Then I would have the Event summary, then Qualification and format section, and finally the participating nations. But that's me where my knowledge there ends with which way to load the arrow. But the lead section, at the very bottom, says the Korean team won three out of the four gold medals contested. No mention of the Italian team also winning gold. And it's the South Korean team, so issues abound. I'd probably mention those team wins in the very first paragraph of the lead... maybe the second. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

If you read the goal of this Wikiproject "Set up consistent structural and graphical layouts for displaying data on theme-specific articles." Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

As does the Tennis Project, and Olympic Project examples does not practice what you preach. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:16, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Right this is an Olympic event first, not a tennis event. So WP:OLYMPICS shall have priority. That's common sense. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 12:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I changed the format of the list of tennis olympic medalists listed in Category:Tennis at the Summer Olympics to reflect the style of winners listed in other tennis articles and then transcluded said tables to List of Olympic medalists in tennis#Olympic medalists for consistency. Changes made:

- removed the dividing rows between the men's, women's and mixed doubles disciplines

- replaced the "X discipline + detail" by moving link from "detail" to the discipline listed above it by wikilinking the discipline draw page. Details feels redundant. You can just wikilink the actual discipline instead of typing it out in blank text and then adding a link to it titled "details" below it using {{detailslink}}.

I would retain the new design for the 2024 and future olympic tennis events for consistency across olympic tennis events.

OR

If you disagree, we can create an article guidelines page for WP:OLYMPICS, similar to what Tennis wikiproject has, wherein templates/examples of table formats are listed to have some template/guideline to refer to avoid confusion in the future. Again, every wikiproject has its own mos styles. In the case of olympics events, I honestly don't know which takes precedence, but I feel maybe we can reach a middle ground. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Boxing weight categories

A decision needs to be urgently made on the article names for specific events; please contribute to the discussion: Talk:Boxing at the 2024 Summer Olympics#Weight categories - urgent. Thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 08:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

DYKN Mixed 4×400m relay at 2024 World Relays

I've nominated a DYK hook about the mixed relay qualification for the 2024 Summer Olympics at Template:Did you know nominations/2024 World Athletics Relays – Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay. I realize it is a bit late, but maybe it can still be reviewed in time, so it can be featured on the main page on 2 August, the day with round 1 of the mixed relay. Your help would be appreciated. – Editør (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Note regarding Inside the Games

I am writing to advise that editors should approach recent Inside the Games articles with caution, and cross-check with other sources. The new owners of Inside the Games, since 1 November 2023 have been linked with Umar Kremlev and pro-Putin sports officials.

Recent articles may be biased towards the Russian point of view, which may undermine their reliability: for example, this article over-exaggerates the 2024 BRICS Games attendance, which included countries that Russia consider "unfriendly". See also: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 437 § insidethegames.biz (2nd review).

There may be more instances of pro-Russian slant that I may have missed, but I am trying to address my habit of doomscrolling. Best, --Minoa (talk) 11:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Canada Soccer drone spying scandal § Should this be titled "Dronegate"

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Canada Soccer drone spying scandal § Should this be titled "Dronegate". Kingsif (talk) 00:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Germany Medal Count

It makes absolutely no sense of splitting up Germany‘s medals into Germany (post Unification); West Germany and East Germany. There should be one Germany with all medals. After all do we split up say France into Third Republic, Forth Republic, Fifth Republic ? Makes no sense. 146.0.191.120 (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Those republics weren't competing against each other at the same time like East and West Germany were. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I can see that it is difficult to combine East Germany and West Germany during the period when they both competed separately. Given that the legal state (with its international agreements) which survived Unification was West Germany (and this includes its committee membership at the IOC) then it is best to have Germany = Germany since 1992+West Germany + Unified Teams + Weimar Republic (incl Nazi Germany) + pre WWI German Empire.

How do we change it ? BoNiLi (talk) 16:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

According to the same logic - we would have to change Great Britain before Ireland gained independence. After all Ireland and GB are now competing against each other now but not before 1921. BoNiLi (talk) 16:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Germany Profile - olympics.com

The IOC itself considers the records of the teams (NOC) from West Germany (FRG) and East Germany (GDR) in the period 1968–1988 to be separate teams and therefore not part of the records of team Germany (GER). Miria~01 (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

"Best" nation? from Sports at the Olympics

What does "best nation" mean in the summary table? It is not defined anywhere, nor would a reader normally be expected to know what that meant. (Most gymnastics medals? Most gold medals? Hiighest scores with gold-silver-bronze ranked 5-3-1? Men's and women's considered separately or all events combined? etc.) Unless that term can be defined in some reasonable way, I recommend deleting that column from the table. (The page is currently locked, so I can't edit it.) 2603:7000:3400:69F6:A585:F860:B98E:45D9 (talk) 01:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

It is something that is counted at the Games, meaning if all the gymnastics events had an overall medal table following Olympic standard (most golds over most medals), which nation comes out on top. It's probably unnecessary, but the discussion should probably be held at the article talkpage before removing. Kingsif (talk) 22:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Competes in a few hours

This Olympian competes in a few hours .. in case someone may be interested in reviewing and perhaps creating her draft article -- Draft:Ada Korkhin. In advance of reader interest in her that is sure to come. Thanks. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:C88D:848F:5F9A:6FA0 (talk) 21:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Now in mainspace. Schwede66 22:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Fencing Alternates

Trying to get a consensus here on how to deal with fencing alternates? The results system for Paris 2024 lists all alternates. Should we be listing them in the totals on the nation articles? Here is where it gets messy, using Canada as an example. The men's sabre team had the alternate compete, so we should be listing the name of the alternate, and adding a +1 to the total athlete number. However, in the women's team foil event the alternate did not compete in any event. So do we list her name, even though she did not compete, but is listed on the results system as being a part of the team? Thoughts? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 12:40, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The cleanest way of dealing with this is for the results tables to list those who competed, with accompanying prose listing alternates who did not. Schwede66 18:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Yea that works! What about the athlete numbers? Do you support adding alternate numbers (if they compete) to the total count? Also each fencing team event lists all the alternates, so I think we need to indicate who is an alternate on those pages, and which alternates competed. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hm, not sure on that one. My inclination would be to count those who compete, but that's obviously muddy when someone gets replaced who was set to compete but never did so. If the alternate steps in, the count shouldn't increase, I'd say. But some athletes do compete and during the competition, the alternate steps in. In that case, I'd say the count goes up. But that's just my thoughts; what would other editors do? Schwede66 02:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Yea, for fencing its weird, because the alternate is allowed to come in and compete (and not replace anyone). If the alternate competes AND does not replace anyone, I think they should be added to the total. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Medal Summary Order

What should the appropriate order be? Should the medal table come first, then the list of medalists or vice versa? From what I can see for 2024 the medal table comes first and then the medalists. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The MOS guide [2] has two variations, with the 2024 pages all following the Ice hockey at the 2002 Winter Olympics format. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no wikpedia MOS that tells us the order. Just the Olympic essay. Every Olympic tennis article is the same way, and every Olympic page for years has been all over the place. Many have the Medalists and medal tables in separate sections entirely. For consistency, Tennis at the Olympics has been very consistent. This was just discussed above with you being in the minority, or at the most no change. One editor suggested you have tried this tact before... not sure what he meant. Olympic Golf has no medal summary section and Olympic tennis uses the events first then the medal. And what about the Olympic essay own example at Archery at the 2004 Summer Olympics. Nothing at all like the rest, but it looks pretty good. You seem to demand they are all identical and it looks like Wikiproject Tennis and Wikiprojct Olympics have purposely left it flexible. Those projects expect the tables to be laid out the same, but article placement is not a big deal. I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

And I see you have been reverted by multiple wikipedia editors for 6+ reverts on the issue... 4x in the last 24 hours. That's a big deal so I'd keep it cool on the reverts for awhile. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually you and the other editor are the only ones supporting your POV. As mentioned above:

Goals

The project aims primarily to:

Create and improve articles whose content has connection with the Olympics.

Set up consistent structural and graphical layouts for displaying data on theme-specific articles.

So there needs to be consistency. For 2024 ALL sports have the medal table first. Why should tennis be different, keeping in mind the goal for this project? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 10:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Tennis isn't the only one and I've shown you this over and over.... even you so-called MOS shows this. Tennis Project also needs consistency and this article would be out of whack with all others. Olympic project doesn't rule supreme over everything else. And you are reverting more than just two editors.... it's like four! Please knock it off. Fyunck(click) (talk)

I would place the list of the medalists first and then the medal table for ease of access to the casual reader/visitor of the page to see the list of winners FIRST and then everything else. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Artistic swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics

For the infobox, do we list both events as being for women or mixed? Since the intent was for men to compete, I suggest listing it as mixed. However, no men eventually competed. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

If the entry is as a mixed event, then it is mixed. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

"sticky" content (hidden & scrollable tables)

I know we don't have consensus on George Ho & Jroberson108 edits to hide most of "sports at Olympis" articles content. So I'm asking your opinion. I personally am not a big fan of such edits. Pelmeen10 (talk) 23:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Diffs? Kingsif (talk) 23:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't know exactly what you mean. Links/diffs please as Kingsif suggested? George Ho (talk) 23:12, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Mostly for summary, medal tables and participating nations. [3] [4]. Pelmeen10 (talk) 23:15, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

For the first diff, I never intended to make the table scrollable and its window smaller. Rather I initially intended to change the sourcing of table splitting, which was done before me. Somehow, someone else merged the tables into one, making the table longer. Someone else created {{Sticky table start}} and {{Sticky table end}} and used them for certain tables, like this one. I eventually used those templates instead rather than try to revert back. (An editor contested my attempt to revert.) George Ho (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Ranking order in athletics

Apologies in advance if this was already discussed (in that case please point me to the discussion).

I noticed there are two kinds of qualifications in these Olympics. One type is swimming in which the top X fastest of all the heats advance to the semis, and then it makes sense to list all the swimmers in the heats in one table ranked by the times. OTOH in running the qualifiers are the top X fastest in each heat plus the next Y fastest across all heats. In this case it is odd to me that all the runners in the heats are in one table, instead of being in separate tables for each heat (as was done for example here). Is there an explanation for this?

Cheers! --SuperJew (talk) 11:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, each heat seperated makes more sense in that case. Kante4 (talk) 11:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm not a huge fan of both qualification types being basically the same shade of green in that Athletics example (I much prefer two-colour systems as seen in places like here) but having each heat/round as its own table is definitely more useful. Primefac (talk) 12:18, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Interesting sidenote, though I do think there's a difference. The rugby example you brought the green qualifies to k/o stage+RWC, while the yellow qualifies for RWC only. In the athletic both green shades qualify for the next stage, but via different methods. Regardless the main point is the separation of table per heat and seems there is a consensus for that so far. Say we'll give it another day and if there is no opposition, we can work on changing the pages? --SuperJew (talk) 16:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. Regarding the colour, as they advance to the same round it's no big deal for me. Q and q does it for me. Kante4 (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, sure, colour should never be the only designation of a fact, but oddly enough in this case the visual aspect is easier to see for sighted users. Primefac (talk) 18:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)