Wikipedia

Talk:Chronological summary of the 2016 Summer Olympics/Archive 1

< Talk:Chronological summary of the 2016 Summer Olympics
Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Starts edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can someone please document all the competitions that happened on August 6, 2016 soon. I'll try, but I don't have much time to do it.--JJBers (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Day 3 edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is it time to add day three yet, I'm unsure do it now, but I believe it should be done. As this comment comes out it's nearly 10 pm in Rio.--JJBers (talk) 00:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Chronological summary of the 2016 Summer Olympics. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 07:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 239 external links on Chronological summary of the 2016 Summer Olympics. 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:

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) 00:53, 9 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chronological summary of the 2016 Summer Olympics. 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:

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) 00:12, 7 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Citations edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Kudos to everyone who has been working to keep this page updated but a quick reminder that this is being linked to from the front page ITN section and as such it's important everything that gets added should have a WP:CITATION. Viewing the page and seeing a sources column in the medallists tables being virtually empty isn't exactly a great advert for Wikipedia and I'm sure if it continues there will be pressure to remove the this article from the front page. Thanks - Basement12 (T.C) 18:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Im trying to add sources to the pages I'm updating as its live. I can add them to the table here when the days done.Lihaas (talk) 20:16, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've been going through and adding citation links to the official NBC Olympics results pages...given that the pages for each event already exist, would it be acceptable to "pre-load" the reference links into the table? Or should I keep waiting until the event actually concludes? Jivjov (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'd wait until results are actually confirmed to add any links, would look a bit odd otherwise. As an added bit of advice a citation to a newspaper article (or news website) is preferable to these types of results pages where possible; the sites don't tend to stay up for long post-Games and can result in a lot of dead links even when archive links are added (especially true for official Games websites) but we can cross that bridge at a later date. Cheers - Basement12 (T.C) 11:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

MedalistTable edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago18 comments9 people in discussion

I added back the MedalistTable per event, as it was on Day 1. As far as I know nowhere else on WP are the medalists presented in a chronological order. If you want to remove them please discuss here. Note that the argument "they are duplicate info" is not valid as the one or the other way medalist winners are to be presented on this page. Is is just that using the template we are consistent across the sports and with other medal lists as well. Hg03u (talk) 12:43, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

As explained in the edit summary for the removal, the consistency for the previous games of summer and winter use this format instead of having redundancies across WP on the medalist page AND the country pages as well as the gold winner here. See the previous pages for the games. And we worked through getting a format last time, especially n 2014 as I updated most of it based on 2012.Lihaas (talk) 14:29, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
The medal winners are already here (as well as on the chronological page of the previous games), the only purpose of Medalist template is to present them uniformly. So redundancy is not an argument. If we remove redundant data not much is left on the page because exactly the same argument is applicable to match results in team sports, with the exception that a medal won is a more prominent event on a day than a single team match.
" And we worked through getting a format last time, especially n 2014 as I updated most of it based on 2012 " , so what were the arguments against inclusion of the Medalist template the previous time? You cannot just refer to past as an argument. Hg03u (talk) 14:42, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
Support- I believe that the medalist table should be re added into the page. It could just be added into the older pages if you worry about continuity.--JJBers (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
I'm not saying you cant change it but you need a wider consensus than just your BOLD move to insert that change. Get that consensus first!
The detailed medalists are duly listed on the link to the article already on the table.
Change can happen but it needs wider consensus.
BTW- OP, you cant dismiss arguments just 'cause you don't like it and expect your version to stay. Per BRD, you have a right to insert new changes, but when it is reverted the onus is on you to gain consensus before adding it back.
FYI- WP:BRD is clear in meaning BOLD, REVERT, DISCUSS. As such instead of dismissing arguments you don't like and saying it "cant be used" you can give your reasoning why it should be used so as to form consensus and set precedence instead of going though tired arguments with new editors everytime this comes around.Lihaas (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
The only argument you have is referring to how it was done in 2014. I asked you whether there was any specific reason in 2014 against mentioning the MedalistTemplate but you did not reply to that. So can you please show me the place where this specific addition (MedalistTemplate) was discussed and rejected? I am interested to read that.
By the way I only reverted only one of your edits and that was because you removed the medal winners of shooting without putting them back in any other from. So you were removing relevant info (regardless of the format) from the article. This is the case as well with your latest revert. If you delete something from the article because you disagree with the formatting, please put back the information in whatever format. Hg03u (talk) 20:21, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
Support for addition of the silver and bronze medalists in one summary table per day. 178.94.167.39 (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

If the idea is to expand the daily "Gold medalists" table at the the bottom of each day to a general "medalists" table, I have no objections. Here's an example header, keeping both the reference column, and the column indicating if the gold medalist broke a record:

Sport Event Gold medalist(s) Silver medalist(s) Bronze medalist(s) Ref
Competitor(s) NOC Rec Competitor(s) NOC Competitor(s) NOC

What I object to is what was done yesterday: pasting {{MedalistTable}} and spreading them out all over he place so it looked like a haphazard mixture of bulleted lists and tables, instead of a cleaner format. Zzyzx11 (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

  • Support an example header shown above. It was my idea but edits were reverted per unknown reasons. 178.94.167.39 (talk) 22:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support OP here, I am fine with this solution as well (and in fact this is the version that I filled this afternoon). As long as all medalists (not only gold) are listed in a unified and easy to find fashion it has my support. Minor comment to your format: you might want to add the Record column to the end like what happened in Women's weightlifting 53Kg when the record breaker didn't receive any medal. Hg03u (talk) 00:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Question: There is one issue: there are several events (like football and tennis) that use a knockout tournament stage where the Bronze Medal Game is held the day before the Gold Medal Game. So how should these tables be filled when the bronze medal winner is known before the gold and silver? Should the bronze medal winner be also listed on the day of the bronze medal game (and the gold and silver winner columns be blacked out)? Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
If silver and bronze winners are to be added as well then it should be on the same day as the gold - splitting them would result in a lot of confusion and it is only an issue in a few cases - Basement12 (T.C) 08:37, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment: One reason for only having gold medallists at previous Games was to keep the size of the page down, adding in the names and flags adds a lot to the page size, as long as that doesn't become a problem I'm fine with it. However, what will cause problems on that front is that we are already (for some unknown reason) listing lots of group/early stage results with flags, contrary to what has been done previously. No idea who decided this was a good idea but I for one am against it and would prefer the 2012 style where only important highlights are mentioned. I would suggest removing some of the content and switching to that now rather than waiting until we have an unmanageable large article - Basement12 (T.C) 08:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment I've dropped a note on the Olympic Project talkpage for further input into this. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 13:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment: I much prefer the cleaner 2012 version – without pictograms, or flags in bulleted lists, only in tables – but I'm OK with adding silver and bronze medalists to the table at the bottom of each day. And another thing: overlink and sources! Parutakupiu (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment: A couple of you have asked about the inclusion of the pictograms, flags, and the group stage results: I started adding those because that is how it was done on the 2014 page. I assumed that the 2014 style would be the most recent, current consensus, NOT the older 2012 style. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support: As a random reader, I do like a) the medal table shown above that includes gold/silver/bronze for the day and b) the pictograms and flags and such. I do think individual tables for each sport looked cluttered, but a summary of all medals would be nice. 184.75.230.115 (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • So, there are no any arguments against the addition of the silver/bronse medals in the table. Let's go to add the columns. 178.94.167.39 (talk) 14:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Minimisation edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

Would it be possible, AND who would be agreeable to minimise each day's detail except the current day like we do for Major League Baseball or Hockey schedules for individual teams? We would leave it up to the reader to 'open' past days.Juve2000 (talk) 21:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sounds like a winner of an idea to me Jivjov (talk) 21:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
Ditto. 184.75.230.115 (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Ok to "hide" (in collapsed state) the past days details but leave the summary table for each day expanded. 178.94.167.39 (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Strong support minimisation. It's ok now. - EugεnS¡m¡on 17:10, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chronological_summary_of_the_2016_Summer_Olympics/Archive_1&oldid=1136305507"