Talk:List of Olympic records in athletics
 | List of Olympic records in athletics is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
 | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on August 6, 2012. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
| This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Events no longer on Olympic list edit
Although they will never be broken, there are a large number of Olympic records in events that are no longer part of the programme. One wonders how this got to FL status when it is so clearly incomplete. See here and here for the events involved. At the very least, the lead ought to acknowledge the shortcoming of the list. Kevin McE (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for you belated input. I will address your concern in the list itself. Feel free to list it at WP:FLRC if you think it doesn't meet WP:WIAFL. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have added a note, hopefully that is sufficient for now. If you do wish to list it at FLRC, perhaps you would be kind enough to leave it until the article is no longer on the main page? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Interestingly, I did a search on the IOC for one of those "defunct" events, specifically one which you pointed to, women's 3,000m which was run at three games. The IOC themselves don't seem to list an "Olympic record" for them, if this search is anything to go by. I searched a few other defunct events, got similar results. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Surely anything that can be demonstrated to be the fastest time at an Olympic Games is the Olympic record. For events that only featured at one Games, then the records of that games are proof (eg 3,500 m walk and sources in the article). For more recent events, eg the women's 3000m, then IAAF records will prove that 8:26.53 is the record. Undoubtedly the data is less conveniently sorted (I have just come across [www.sports-reference.com this site] which reports at least some records), but I don't think that justice is done by ignoring the historic events. Perhaps editors at WP:WikiProject Olympics will know suitable RSes. Kevin McE (talk) 21:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think it's a bit synthetic to "create" Olympic records which the IOC themselves don't even acknowledge. But meh. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- I would think that the best legal performance at an Olympics is, de facto, an olympic record. Who a record is listed by is not, I would suggest, intrinsic to the definition. Kevin McE (talk) 09:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- You may think that, but if the IOC themselves don't recognise the defunct event's records, I'm unclear as to why Wikipedia should. Still, as I said, now it's not on main page, feel free to nominate the list at WP:FLRC. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sarcastic selective quotation is not a useful contribution to discussion. So what is the definition of a record? Kevin McE (talk) 17:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- Not sarcastic at all, simply a statement of fact, that you, or indeed anyone else may think it appropriate to use mathematics and deduction to declare records (you did say "I would think that...."). However, I'm using the IOC records database which lists current records as actual Olympic records, and doesn't acknowledge that defunct events, e.g. the women's 3,000m as you pointed me to, have Olympic records. Sure it may not be perfect but if the governing body of the Olympic Games doesn't acknowledge a women's 3,000m record, I'm not sure why we should synthetically choose to do so. But, once again, I've added the caveat to the page, and you're free to list this page at WP:FLRC, since this conversation is clearly going nowhere given our opposing views (and given the lack of interest from anyone else). The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- At the time a record in a defunct event was set IOC of course did recognise these times as records. So nothing speaks against to list records in defunct events. Wikipedia can be more than an actual IOC database which just list current records.Montell 74 (talk) 13:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- Not sarcastic at all, simply a statement of fact, that you, or indeed anyone else may think it appropriate to use mathematics and deduction to declare records (you did say "I would think that...."). However, I'm using the IOC records database which lists current records as actual Olympic records, and doesn't acknowledge that defunct events, e.g. the women's 3,000m as you pointed me to, have Olympic records. Sure it may not be perfect but if the governing body of the Olympic Games doesn't acknowledge a women's 3,000m record, I'm not sure why we should synthetically choose to do so. But, once again, I've added the caveat to the page, and you're free to list this page at WP:FLRC, since this conversation is clearly going nowhere given our opposing views (and given the lack of interest from anyone else). The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sarcastic selective quotation is not a useful contribution to discussion. So what is the definition of a record? Kevin McE (talk) 17:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
- You may think that, but if the IOC themselves don't recognise the defunct event's records, I'm unclear as to why Wikipedia should. Still, as I said, now it's not on main page, feel free to nominate the list at WP:FLRC. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- I would think that the best legal performance at an Olympics is, de facto, an olympic record. Who a record is listed by is not, I would suggest, intrinsic to the definition. Kevin McE (talk) 09:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think it's a bit synthetic to "create" Olympic records which the IOC themselves don't even acknowledge. But meh. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
- Surely anything that can be demonstrated to be the fastest time at an Olympic Games is the Olympic record. For events that only featured at one Games, then the records of that games are proof (eg 3,500 m walk and sources in the article). For more recent events, eg the women's 3000m, then IAAF records will prove that 8:26.53 is the record. Undoubtedly the data is less conveniently sorted (I have just come across [www.sports-reference.com this site] which reports at least some records), but I don't think that justice is done by ignoring the historic events. Perhaps editors at WP:WikiProject Olympics will know suitable RSes. Kevin McE (talk) 21:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of Olympic records in athletics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613131109/http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_860.pdf to http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_860.pdf
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-23-olympics-trackaug23%2C0%2C7585096.story
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:32, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Olympic records in athletics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080824161228/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214579942.shtml to http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214579942.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Olympic records in athletics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929090236/http://www.webcaa.org/eng/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=164&Itemid=58 to http://www.webcaa.org/eng/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=164&Itemid=58
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:56, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Olympic records in athletics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://archive.is/20121204182854/www.london2012.com/athletics/event/men-20km-walk/phase=atm092100/index.html?v=1002012080418 to http://www.london2012.com/athletics/event/men-20km-walk/phase%3Datm092100/index.html?v=1002012080418
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
removed photos? edit
The five photos of athletes in the article are not needed and do not flow well on the page. Anyone mind if I remove them? Doctormatt (talk) 06:00, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- OK, no response, so I removed the photos. The page flows well now. Cheers! Doctormatt (talk) 05:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't see this note. I replaced them as they don't break any flow as far as I can see on browsers I use and the images were agreed by consensus at FLC. Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:17, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Could you please let me know what FLC is? Thanks! Doctormatt (talk) 17:58, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- WP:FLC. Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! The problem with the images is that they are displayed with massive whitespace to their left when the browser window is not sufficiently wide (for example, for users with small screens). This can also happen as a result of the zoom level, which effectively reduces the page width (I can share a screenshot if you'd like to see what I see). Since the images can cause this unsightly breakage of the layout, and are not needed on the page (it's a list of records, after all), I would like to remove the images. Please let me know your thoughts. Cheers! Doctormatt (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- No, the images are fine for the vast majority of normal browser widths. We can't cater for everyone but unless you really compress the horizontal width to such an extent (e.g. 640 pixels), of course undesirable results will occur. Using images down the sides of featured lists is commonplace. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:02, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- That's too bad. The page looks bad on browsers at non-extreme widths. I see you are fixed on your point of view, so I'll go away. Take it easy! Doctormatt (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- You've been the only person to make such a complaint in the last five years. I would hardly consider 640 pixels to be "extreme width"!! Maybe buy a computer with a larger screen!!! Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 07:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- (I have to respond when someone uses so many exclamation points.) Extreme as in "extremely small or large", so "non-extreme width" means "not very wide and not very small". Vision difficulties, zoom-level, and text-width preferences (for optimum readability) play a role here in determining the effective pixel-width viewed. I get it: you really like the pictures and do not consider my experience relevant. That's cool. We can't all listen to everybody. Doctormatt (talk) 19:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- You've been the only person to make such a complaint in the last five years. I would hardly consider 640 pixels to be "extreme width"!! Maybe buy a computer with a larger screen!!! Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 07:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- That's too bad. The page looks bad on browsers at non-extreme widths. I see you are fixed on your point of view, so I'll go away. Take it easy! Doctormatt (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- No, the images are fine for the vast majority of normal browser widths. We can't cater for everyone but unless you really compress the horizontal width to such an extent (e.g. 640 pixels), of course undesirable results will occur. Using images down the sides of featured lists is commonplace. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:02, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! The problem with the images is that they are displayed with massive whitespace to their left when the browser window is not sufficiently wide (for example, for users with small screens). This can also happen as a result of the zoom level, which effectively reduces the page width (I can share a screenshot if you'd like to see what I see). Since the images can cause this unsightly breakage of the layout, and are not needed on the page (it's a list of records, after all), I would like to remove the images. Please let me know your thoughts. Cheers! Doctormatt (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- WP:FLC. Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Could you please let me know what FLC is? Thanks! Doctormatt (talk) 17:58, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't see this note. I replaced them as they don't break any flow as far as I can see on browsers I use and the images were agreed by consensus at FLC. Cheers! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:17, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Incorrect information! edit
Yelena Slesarenko is not the current record holder for the womes`s high jump.The current record holder is Stefka Kostadinova since 25.05.1986, 31.05.1986, 30.08.1987
| 2.07 m (6 ft 9+1⁄4 in) | Stefka Kostadinova (BUL) | 25 May 1986 | Sofia |
| 2.08 m (6 ft 9+3⁄4 in) | Stefka Kostadinova (BUL) | 31 May 1986 | Sofia |
| 2.09 m (6 ft 10+1⁄4 in) | Stefka Kostadinova (BUL) | 30 August 1987 | Rome |
In this page you can see the correct record Women's high jump world record progression
Please fix the page, it is wrong since the day it is made. And delete my topic(this topic) after the edit. Thank you! 212.39.75.182 (talk) 03:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- You are wrong. This article is about records at the Olympic Games.Montell 74 (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)