Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Contents
List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians edit
List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
This is now one of the largest lists by size on Wikipedia. I suppose it's really a few lists that add up to one subject. I have put a lot of work into it this year, basing the appearance on a comparable list I found at the Hebrew Wikipedia, taking some poor bullet lists from related articles, and altogether adding the hundreds of missing entries for completion. I nominate it as a candidate for FL because I think it is quite a neat complete work - though, more on that - and for advice on further improvements, of course. Given its size, I sure am expecting some! I am currently in the process of migrating its many references to a more user-readable harvref format, since there are also hundreds of those. The only concern I have to it becoming FL is that it is a dynamic list; former Olympians can come out at any time, and there are more predictable periods in the run-up to Games when already-out athletes are announced to be competing. However, we have other dynamic lists at FL, and while they may be less prone to change, I think the somewhat predictability here makes it manageable. Happy to answer any questions, and thanks for looking it over! Kingsif (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Technical considerations edit
Before getting too far into this nomination, I want to note that this page is really long. Right now, the post-expand include size is 1790806/2097152 bytes, or about 85.4% of the maximum page size (2 MiB per WP:LENGTH). I think it would be prudent to consider either splitting the page or reducing the page size – otherwise, there will likely be serious technical issues within a few years. (Removing images from the table might help, though I don't know how much the HTML code to display the images actually contributes.) I'm open to suggestions here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I second this. This is a great list, and the pictures and notes are instrumental to it, despite making up so much of the length - a list of names alone wouldn't be as interesting. But the fact is that the athletes added for the 2020 and 2022 games alone are 20% of the incredibly long list, which means we can safely assume another massive addition for the 2024 games. As RunningTiger123 notes, it's already 85% of the way to the point where the page will literally stop rendering partway through- as in it will just cut off in the middle of the table and not display anything further down. This means that, very likely, in 1.5 years the page will be unreadable by anyone, and it's frankly already unreadable for anyone who is on a slower internet connection, which is a good chunk of the reading populace. It's nice to have it all in one page, but this is, unfortunately, a problem that a lot of longer lists like this face, which then reach the same unfortunate conclusion: you have to break it up into sublists. I'd recommend breaking it up into at least 3 or 4 lists by year of Olympic debut, though alphabetically is also sometimes done. It's up to you, but something has to be done, I'm afraid. --PresN 03:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @RunningTiger123 and PresN: Thank you both, these are exactly the kind of comments I was hoping for on that side - as well as table accessibility notes (which would presumably make the code longer if not up to scratch). As for resolving it, the longer notes take up quite a bit, even the shorter notes get long with references; the images are around 100 characters per entry, which is a lot with this many, but not as much as the notes. I think I agree that splitting is the better solution; the LGBT issues at the Olympic and Paralympic Games article (which needs work, but) has some rough historical periods - would these be beneficial to breaking it up?. Kingsif (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Another thought for splits: Summer athletes, Summer artists, intersex athletes, Winter athletes, and Paralympians getting lists at separate articles. The Summer athletes at least could do with splits, too, I fear. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not a technical guy, like, at all, but my lists all have a lot of images ... and I don't know if they've done something in the last two years to fix the problem, but a few reviewers were telling me that some of the images stopped loading for them when I got up to roughly 100 images. You have a lot of SVG pictograms on top of a lot of photos, too ... I don't know if that's a problem, but it might be. Personally, I haven't had the problem of images not loading for my own lists, so I can't test the problem I'm talking about. - Dank (push to talk) 17:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I think splitting by type of athlete is fine, but I agree that the same issue will still arise with summer athletes. If I had to pick a non-arbitrary cutoff, maybe start a new list from 2004 onwards, as transgender athletes were first allowed to compete at those games? I could also see the list being split from 2020 onwards since those were described as the "Rainbow Olympics", though I think it's probably too soon to determine if that's a meaningful nickname that will stand the test of time. I would also be fine with a somewhat arbitrary cutoff from 2000 onwards (i.e., pre-21st century in the first list), or really at any point in the last 20 years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the ideas - I think 2004 is a good suggestion. I'll probably start with 2004-present to see how long the resulting lists are, in case the pre-2004 needs to be split further. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kingsif: Okay, since you're splitting this, would you prefer to close this nomination, or do you think you'll have a nominate-able chunk that can take the whole list's place in short order? Up to you. Since you asked, I'll give you an accessibility review for this list in a second in any case. --PresN 04:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the accessibility review, and the input so far. I think that splitting this means splitting everything out and, maybe (and which I've prepared for), leaving a boring old plain text list at the List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians article/title (essentially to serve as a hub and to preserve history) - I think I will leave this open because a variety of cut-pastes and scraping the names shouldn't take too long. The process can then decide if the plain list is suitable, right? And I'm sure the process will come up with suggestions to, I suppose, "highlight" some of the more prominent athletes of each type. Of course, I trust your judgment on if this nomination should be closed and, perhaps, one of the split articles to be nominated once all cleaned up. Kingsif (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The current list at the title of this nomination should be suitable now, to begin review. There are only the summary tables now present at this list, and I think I have made these accessible with this edit. Thanks again for this. Kingsif (talk) 01:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kingsif: Okay, since you're splitting this, would you prefer to close this nomination, or do you think you'll have a nominate-able chunk that can take the whole list's place in short order? Up to you. Since you asked, I'll give you an accessibility review for this list in a second in any case. --PresN 04:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the ideas - I think 2004 is a good suggestion. I'll probably start with 2004-present to see how long the resulting lists are, in case the pre-2004 needs to be split further. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Another thought for splits: Summer athletes, Summer artists, intersex athletes, Winter athletes, and Paralympians getting lists at separate articles. The Summer athletes at least could do with splits, too, I fear. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @RunningTiger123: For future reference, how are you able to see the post-expand size? ~ HAL333 20:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB) edit
- Unless otherwise specified, these apply to both the main table as well as the summary ones in {{LGBT Olympians overview}}
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. You have captions for the tables at LGBT Olympians overview, but not the main one. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Countrybecomes!scope=col | Country. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding
!scope=row
to each primary cell, e.g.| [[Robert de Montesquiou]]becomes!scope=row | [[Robert de Montesquiou]]. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. Note that the "primary" column of cells doesn't have to be the first column, but it usually makes more sense for it to be so. Right now, you have the name and picture as two separate columns, with a grouped header cell and some sorting magic so that readers can sort by the picture column and actually sort by the name, but it may be cleaner overall to just have the first column be a combined "name <br/> picture", or else swap the name and picture columns. It is fine to leave the name column as the primary and the second column if you don't want to change it, though. - This would also fix a second issue: none of your images have alt text, which is needed for non- or poorly-sighted readers. It's fine to skip the alt text if you have a caption that explains what the picture is (e.g. the name of the person) in the same cell (or rather to have a generic "|alt=athlete" or something, since otherwise the alt is the image url which is a mess), but right now you don't have it in the same cell, so the images don't have explanatory text right alongside them as far as screen reader software is concerned, and would need an alt text of the person's name at minimum.
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. --PresN 04:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi PresN, this review hasn't had any input since January and I think I'm going to withdraw it and put up List of intersex Olympians for the moment. I remembered your comments and came to review them to implement them there, but I'm finding them a little complicated at the moment. Maybe it's the hour or maybe it's because of the different cells. Would you be willing to expand on some of the points at that list's talk page - no problem if not, I'll try to wade through the accessibility help page and I'm sure you'll have comments when I put it up for consideration :) Kingsif (talk) 22:01, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Drive-by comment edit
- What's actually sourcing the "by sport" table at the top? The other tables I can see summarise data already displayed in the big table so I guess fall under WP:CALC, but the level of detail in the "by sport" table isn't displayed in the big table. If I want to know who, say, the one intersex judoka is, how can I confirm that? Do I have to check the references against all the judo entries (none of the judo entries mention intersex in the notes column)......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChrisTheDude: For that particular one, the list of intersex Olympians just got split out. More generally, yes, it is looking through all the entries. When the list was much less formal, some of the entries had the person's sexuality/gender identity, and I think the list of LGBT sportspeople is still like that. The issue with having such a column has increasingly been people not labelling themselves, or having identities that don't neatly fit one word — and it's obviously not something we want to mislabel. Of course, as comes to gender identity and intersex people, this is a bit more cut and dry than with sexuality, so if you have ideas on how to incorporate the information in the tables, I would love to hear them. Kingsif (talk) 18:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kingsif, in the by country tables may I suggest that link point the relevant country at the Olympics article, or where is exist, the country at the Summer/Winter Olympics article rather than just the country article, eg. Argentina at the Olympics and Australia at the Winter Olympics. – Ianblair23 (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ianblair23: great suggestion, thanks! Kingsif (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.