Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics

Add topic
Active discussions

To start a new discussion section, please click here

WikiProject Athletics (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the discussion.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Athletics (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the discussion.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

World Championships name changeEdit

It has been proposed that all "xxxx World Championships in Athletics" articles from 1976 would become "xxxx World Athletics Championships". Plese see and discuss Talk:2017_World_Championships_in_Athletics#Article_title_change. Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Nanjing 2020 cancelled due to coronavirusEdit

According to Inside the Games, the upcoming 2020 World Athletics Indoor Championships will no longer be taking place in Nanjing, China due to the ongoing coronavirus outbreak. There's fears that the event may be cancelled completely if a new host isn't found, though it's unclear whether they'll find one or just cancel the event altogether.

Conor M98 (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Non-World Athletics running disciplinesEdit

There are some niche forms of competitive running that have quite a following, but don't fall within the World Athletics definition of athletics: specifically tower running, skyrunning and snowshoe running. As forms of unaided competitive running, these comfortably sit within the definition of athletics in my opinion. What are other's thoughts on this? Just thinking if it's a fair thing to start adding Towerrunning World Championships, Skyrunning World Championships and World Snowshoe Championships to the relevant athletics lists and navigation templates. SFB 00:32, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

These things are so unstandardised and ad hoc that I would never look them up in wikipedia's. It are no sports I think. Even though they are called world championship. ;-) WeiaR (talk) 11:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

USA Indoor ChampionshipsEdit

FYI - I have started a discussion for a page move at Talk:USA Track & Field Indoor Championships. The article base is split across different names so we need consensus for an agreed name. SFB 20:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this page a good idea?Edit

Draft:List of sprinters

I've got mixed responses from the help desk.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 16:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Furthermore, I've been leaving out records that have been taking away for drug violations. Do you agree with that?
Well, I'm sceptical. Medals from different competitions all together without distinction? And a page without sources? Where is this information coming from? The page title is not accurate, nor is a good idea to write "This is a list of notable sprinters." - you are only listing medalists. Pelmeen10 (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
@Pelmeen10:The information comes from the articles. Can you think of other notable sprinters that didn't win medals? The list can't include every sprinter with a Wikipedia article.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 16:07, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Addendum: I believe there should be a place on Wikipedia to look up the world's best sprinters, just as you might look up the world's best writers or movies. An objective qualification is good for this. Most of the sprinters with Wikipedia articles are just not good enough. I hope to add a column for world records held after the rest of the table is done.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 16:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Is the Continental/ IAAF World Cup considered prestigiousEdit

I thought it was important because it's an IAAF event (although it's recently been discontinued). However, many athletes who won medals in the IAAF Continental Cup don't have it in their medal boxes. So I'm wondering if it should be included in lists such as this: Draft:List of British medalist sprinters. —Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 18:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

When it started it was arguably the most prestigious global event after the Olympics but it faded in glamour dramatically with the introduction of the World Championships, especially when that event switched to a two year rotation from four. Personally I think it's worth inclusion though. Topcardi (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for responding. I will work on adding it to athletes' medalboxes. Then I will include it, unless someone else disagrees.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 21:49, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
@Naddruf: Prestige-wise, Topcardi summed it up well and I agree it would be important enough. Not convinced, though, that it was an event that the concept of "medals" really applied to. I don't think it ever had a gold/silver/bronze notion; individual winners were just winners, not gold medalists, second-placers were just second-placers. An American analogue would be the NCAA championships; it's a high-quality meet and you do sometimes get oddball mentions of NCAA "gold medalists" and "bronze medalists", but there are no actual medals involved and "NCAA champions" is far more common terminology. Sideways713 (talk) 04:45, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Sideways713: Does that mean they shouldn't go in infoboxes with a medal next to them?—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 14:15, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I can see that going either way. In the most literal sense I think it's a mistake to treat them as medals. ([1], for example, explicitly makes the point that there were no medals.) On the other hand, if you look at say Mike Boit's medal box it includes his "silver" from the 1977 IAAF World Cup in Düsseldorf, and it does feel like a pity to wipe that out since it's certainly way up there as a noteworthy race and accomplishment. Having missed the 1976 Olympics to the boycott, that was his one opportunity to meet the champion, Juantorena, on the highest stage with them both in peak form; and he pushed Juantorena to the limit. I think the German wiki excludes World/Continental Cup results from infoboxes, but I have no strong opinion on whether we should follow suit. Sideways713 (talk) 04:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

2003 world indoor championshipsEdit

Results in the Women's High Jump are partially wrong.

Qualifying started at 1.87m and the final started at 1.88m. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmak76 (talkcontribs) 14:46, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

National Record QuestionEdit

Hi all, style question here. In an athlete's info box, if a PB was a national record when it was set, but now isn't, should it keep the NR next to the time? I've been tidying Polat Kemboi Arıkan, and his times were national records when they were set but have now been superceded. Red Fiona (talk) 23:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

IMO, the NR (any record) note is not necessary in the infobox at all, it's not an essential information. The records he set should be mentioned in prose (if possible, add when was the records superceded etc). Many articles have a wikitable under the section "Personal bests". In those cases I don't think it's necessary to remove NR note when the records were superceded. Pelmeen10 (talk) 21:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Statistics section, updatedEdit

Greetings, For Athletics WP, I added progression, pie graph, rainbow; added wikilinks "Quality operations" log and "Popular pages". JoeNMLC (talk) 18:02, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Jimmy Adar at AfDEdit

Please see this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Annie de Jong-ZondervanEdit

I created the page about female athlete Annie de Jong-Zondervan (born 1907) because she was a notable speed skater. But I see see was even more notable as a athlete. She is seen as an important athlete in Dutch athlete history (not yet mentioned in article; but according to the page in Dutch). I continue in writing about speed skating, but if someone is interested please continue with expanding the article. SportsOlympic (talk) 21:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

World/Olympic medallists in discipline pagesEdit

Hi Project. I was looking at a couple of articles on athletics disciplines and was surprised that these included full listings of all of the Olympics and World Champs medallists. This is just replicating information on the corresponding articles - e.g 400 metres contains info that is a direct facsimile of content on 400 metres at the Olympics and 400 metres at the World Championships in Athletics (though curiously there isn't a 400 metres at the World Athletics Indoor Championships which has a table on the overall discipline article). In my opinion, it would be better to just link to the different championship articles rather than having this replication. Cripesohblimey (talk) 10:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

These medallist tables are transcluded on the articles, rather than duplicated so it's a feature rather than a bug. It is very common for readers to want to see the global medallists of an event at the main event page, and it's not something that has attracted criticism until your own comments here. The 400 metres page is not yet over-sized (< 50K currently) but it may be helpful to remove the lists in future if the article content increases substantially (we really should have the histories of the events in prose, but this is a project with a large history and scope but with a limited number of editors. Note that 400 metres at the World Athletics Indoor Championships is a valid red link, indeed it is an article that our French colleagues have already created at fr:400 mètres aux championnats du monde d'athlétisme en salle. They also have European medallists listed at fr:400 mètres aux championnats d'Europe d'athlétisme too, so again this shows the amount of work left to do! SFB 01:39, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Naming convention for sports stadiaEdit

A request for comment is open regarding the use of parenthetical disambiguation in relation to articles on sports stadia here: Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RfC Naming convention for sports stadia. Input is welcome. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Is a sponsor the same as a club?Edit

In the article for runner Molly Seidel, the "club" attribute in the infobox is being used to identify her current sponsor. Clubs and sponsors don't seem equivalent to me, but there doesn't seem to be a better spot to indicate a sponsor. Is it not appropriate data for the infobox, or is it acceptable as-is, or something else? -- Fyrael (talk) 22:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Master world record progression articlesEdit

Hi. For years now, we have had a whole series of records on Masters world record progressions. These are often problematic for multiple reasons; lack of notability, poor sourcing, and wrong contents. Examples:

  • Masters M55 100 metres hurdles world record progression is not a world record progression, as it goes from 1996 to 1994 to 1995 to 1989 to again 1996. The 1988 entry is not listed in the sources as a world record, it seems to be WP:OR by the article creator. The main source[2] seems to be a hobby project, not an official page from e.g. the IAAF.
  • Masters W45 triple jump world record progression shows some unratified records: strangely, the source for the 2019 record gives a different distance for the unratified Glovil jump (12.42 vs. 12.39), and includes an even more impressive 12m75 by Tatyana Ter-Mesrobyan which is for some reason not included in the list.
  • Masters M45 marathon world record progression is another nice example of WP:OR, with unsourced entries, entries which are sourced but deemed "incomplete information", and entries sourced to equally reliable or unreliable sources which are accepted as is.

Should this all be draftified, deleted, merged, ...? Fram (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Progression in athletes' biographiesEdit

As you can see in the manual of style it is recommended to insert a section for progression. However I underwent this rollback. Users of the project, I especially ask the more experienced @Sillyfolkboy: and @Trackinfo: how stay things? --Kasper2006 (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kasper2006 and Lugnuts: I've challenged that reversion as the statistics are presented well, not excessive, and context is clear. The purpose of WP:NOTSTATS is to avoid inclusion of large data sets with low relevance, or where they are so large as to be difficult to understand. A list of season's bests by an athlete does not have those issues. It is common for Wikipedia biographies on sportspeople to include year-by-year statistical summaries of a sportsperson's career (e.g. matches played, goals/points/runs scored etc.). A season's best time is simply the equivalent to that. That kind of data has long been unchallenged and is present on many prominent, well-reviewed articles, such as Usain Bolt#Season's bests.
I would suggest to make use of the Graph module on articles too, like the Bolt article does, as this makes the data easier to view. Sadly we also have to include the tables too because the Graph module does not allow for notation (or hover over) to show readers the underlying data point value on the graph. SFB 19:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Regardless of Usain Bolt having this data, for less-established athletes, it does read like someone is trying to post their CV into their wiki article. "Oh, wow, she ran 11.68 in 2011!" said no-one, ever. The personal best info is in the infobox, and that's all it needs to be. One time/stat, with a source, as the rest seems to be unnecessary bloat (or Bolt, ho ho). Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:53, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to rename the articles of an entire categoryEdit

That is the Category:Year rankings in athletics from "year" in "event" to "year" "event" world top lists. Example: from 2011 in hammer throw to 2011 hammer throw world top lists. --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I suggest we refocus this set of articles as yearly summaries of athletics events, rather than simply the best performances of the year. That keeps the articles in line with the style set by articles like 2019 in the sport of athletics. I would recommend renaming the category Category:Year rankings in athletics to Category:Athletics events by year to reflect that scope, as demonstrated at 2019 in 100 metres. SFB 18:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
  Like --Kasper2006 (talk) 09:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Headercolor pink in Italian female athletes infoboxEdit

I don't know if diversifying the default headercolor for the biographies of the athletes is deprecated, ten years ago when I started putting it pink in the biographies of Italian female athletes I thought not. Now the biographies that have it are hundreds, but not all, because in three or four cases one user in particular has reverted every time for years. I ask the community how I should behave. I am willing to bring it to the default mustard color every time I meet the various biographies again if my favorite reverter   is right, but I would eventually need someone's collaboration to do it massively in all of them. Otherwise we convince the user that the choice of the same color for a certain nationality of female athletes can be accepted. --Kasper2006 (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

  • Oppose systematically using pink for Italian female athletes' infobox. It's offensive. —valereee (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose not just pink for Italian athletes, but any colour for any individual. Pink for girls and I assume blue for boys? Hard to believe this is 2021. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose: this pink colour associated with gender/sex is a nonsense.--Arorae (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose structural use of pink to highlight that athletes are female; not sure if offensive is the right word, but the stereotype is harmful enough to avoid it where possible. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 18:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • It's hard to believe that someone younger than I am could have such an attitude. User:Kasper2006, do you really believe that such colour-coding is appropriate in a 21st-century encyclopedia? Or are you just trolling? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:57, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose and SNOWBALL close ASAP: I'm going with deeply offensive. Looking at a sample of the pages that Kasper2006 is editing, they are leaving the default color for men and changing the color to pink for women. This reinforces stereotypes, adds markedness, and implicates Wikipedia in old-school sexism. The people most likely to notice are editors, who might notice the discrepancy between multiple articles, and actions like this targeted against women play a part in gender bias on Wikipedia. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 19:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Oh finally! After 10 years I pointed this out to you, even I didn't like it, but once I started I wanted to standardize. Ok from tomorrow, now it's night here, I'll get to work to return to the default color--Kasper2006 (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Fixed the first 102 in this Category:Italian female sprinters  Y . As I had already done a month ago, I ask if anyone would help me in this work, which would fix a situation that is at least ten years old and which I do not think I had even started, if anything I had only conformed and lately I had begun to abandon, creating the new biographies, see the last two in chronological order created by me on 25 April and 29 April. --Kasper2006 (talk) 05:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Articles as "United States at the YEAR World Athletics Relays"Edit

@Arorae: @Sillyfolkboy: @Trackinfo: @Geschichte: @Pietaster: Since I created the United States at the World Athletics Relays article, I wanted to know if you think it is appropriate to continue creating the articles of the "country at games" of the single editions? Because a user has put a PROD to a first article of this type that I had created. Before I even objected, I chose to ask the project. Sorry if I tag someone, but otherwise, as happened recently, I would have no answers. --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kasper2006: The main "COUNTRY at COMPETITION" pages are a good idea because they are effectively spin-off articles from the national pages like United States national track and field team. As for edition-based pages, e.g. United States at the 2021 World Athletics Relays, I don't think that meets general notability because the coverage of each competition isn't high enough to warrant it.
Personally, I think building more articles at the "COUNTRY at COMPETITION" level makes most sense, for most nations, at most competitions, most of the time. That approach is much easier to navigate and maintain. For example, I don't really see much value in articles like Aruba at the 2017 World Championships in Athletics. Low volume info like that is better presented at Aruba at the World Athletics Championships. Possibly it might make sense to list national squads for an edition of major championships in a single article – similar to something like 2018 FIFA World Cup squads. SFB 22:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
I do agree with Sillyfolkboy. I do have great interest in Relays but the coverage is quite poor, even for main teams.--Arorae (talk) 22:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
@Sillyfolkboy: in may opinion what you say in the long run is not always valid. For the main teams it is not. If in a few editions of the event Italy (certainly not the USA or Jamaica) has an article of 16,382 bytes and not that much expanded, what do you think would happen in the long run? --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Kasper2006: I think in the long run something like Italy at the World Athletics Relays becomes a large, fully fleshed out article with lots of detail, like England at the FIFA World Cup for example. The main point I'm making it that if someone nominates to delete an article like Italy at the 2015 IAAF World Relays, that nomination will probably be successful because it doesn't really meet any of the inclusion criteria for sports or articles in general. In contrast, I think there are many good arguments for keeping articles like Italy at the World Athletics Relays, which include numerous sources over many years. I understand the reason for creating Italy at the 2015 IAAF World Relays, from a coverage/data representation point of view, but it feels like it falls outside Wikipedia's article norms. SFB 01:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Most of the "* at the * Championships" articles are poorly maintained. They are a useful sorting of the results based on national team but our wikipedia performance is inconsistent. I tried maintaining a few over the years but it is quite cumbersome. Data between results pages does not align with the country pages so it is not an easy copy and paste job. Its actually an obnoxiously difficult alignment process for each performance. If we are going to retain these, lets create a consistent MoS so at a minimum it can be cut and paste. Frankly all of the formatting on the Athletics Championship articles if far too complex to expect anyone below an advanced editor to consider adding content to. It kind of defeats the openness of wikipedia editing. If it is going to be so complex, the let the complexity work for us. As I delve deeper into PHP, it would be better to make the data auto copy from page to page, probably not possible in wiki but its a goal to set forth. Such articles would also be a good place to discuss team issues but there is precious little coverage of it in media. As for 2021, I'm a Yank and USA didn't participate, along with most of the world leaders. Our coverage was non-existent so from a wikipedia perspective, there is little source material to work with. Trackinfo (talk) 05:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Title of the article European Team ChampionshipsEdit

As you can see on the official website of the European Athletic Association, the official name of the competition is today European Athletics Team Championships. As can be seen from the logos of the various editions, the competition took on this new name starting from Gateshead 2013. It is necessary to proceed with the inversion of the redirect. And consequently to move the articles of the editions from 2013 to today. --Kasper2006 (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how the user Arorae did the redirect reversal. The problem is that now there are hundreds of pages and categories to fix (and sub-pages, think of those of the Super League), in addition to all those of the editions from 2013 onwards. That's why I asked for the intervention of the community, because it takes someone more experienced than us who knows how to do this job through bots and not manually. --Kasper2006 (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Little Athletics Good Article ReassessmentEdit

Little Athletics, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Most viewed stub in this WikiprojectEdit

--Coin945 (talk) 13:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

RFC on flagsEdit

A RFC is underway which might have a considerable effect on the usage of flags in the articles in this WikiProject. Any input is welcome and you can join the RFC here.Tvx1 17:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposal for all-time 25 athletes/25 performances lists for each eventEdit

For a number of years now, there have been 25-deep lists of top athletes in many if not all of the major athletics / track and field events. But there has always been a problem with these lists - how to present marks that are not personal bests by the athletes but would otherwise be on the lists? And how many of these other performances should be noted? For the sake of discussion, I am calling these "secondary" marks.

The present approach is clumsy, arbitrary in how many performances are on the list, and the information contained so hard to discern, it's almost useless. For example, on the all-time list for women's 5,000 metres, we have the 25 top women in question, followed by this list of secondary marks:

Below is a list of other times equal or superior to 14:29.82:

  • Letesenbet Gidey also ran 14:23.14 (2018), 14:26.57 (2020) and 14:29.54 (2019).
  • Tirunesh Dibaba also ran 14:23.46 (2008) and 14:23.68 (2013).
  • Almaz Ayana also ran 14:14.32 (2015), 14:16.31 (2016), 14:18.89 (2016), 14:21.97 (2015), 14:25.84 (2013), 14:26.83 (2015) and 14:29.19 (2014).
  • Meseret Defar also ran 14:16.63 (2007), 14:24.53 (2006), 14:25.52 (2008), 14:26.90 (2013), 14:28.98 (2005) and 14:29.52 (2011).
  • Genzebe Dibaba also ran 14:19.76 (2015), 14:21.29 (2015), 14:25.22 (2017), 14:26.89 (2018) and 14:28.88 (2014).
  • Hellen Obiri also ran 14:20.36 (2019), 14:21.75 (2018), 14:22.12 (2020), 14:22.37 (2017), 14:25.78 (2016), 14:25.88 (2017), 14:26.72 (2019) and 14:29.77 (2016).
  • Vivian Cheruiyot also ran 14:22.51 (2007), 14:25.43 (2008) 14:26.17 (2016) and 14:27.41 (2010).
  • Senbere Teferi also ran 14:23.33 (2018),14:29.82 (2016
  • Agnes Jebet Tirop also ran 14:24.24 (2018).
  • Sifan Hassan also ran 14:26.26 (2019).
  • Konstanze Klosterhalfen also ran 14:28.43 (2019).

Surely I am not the only one to ask how this mess is useful and informative to anyone. First, why is Gidey at the top here even though there are FIVE other athletes with superior secondary times? It makes little sense to have her on top of the others, even if she is the record holder, because so many have better secondary marks. And, why list a time of hers which would not even make the 25-list if made by another athlete! And, speaking of that, what is the criteria for cutoff for what secondary marks make it to this list? The cutoff time of 14:29.82 is slower than the 25th woman on the overall list - 14:29.50 - so why are we listing it here? I count four performances here that wouldn't even make the list! Most other lists have cutoffs with no discernible rhyme or reason and are as strangely specific as that (though most only have marks which would otherwise make it to the 25-list).

I propose a redo of these lists to address these issues. Instead of a list 25-deep of performers with an arbitrary list of secondary performances below, make the limit of all-time performances also 25 - and have a single list that goes 25-deep with the performances, adding the additional performers to make 25 of them. In this way, we can instantly see which athletes are the dominant ones, with many marks sprinkled through out the top 25 - the old approach makes any effort to figure that out tedious.

There is a further advantage in that this approach instantly allows a reader to know how a new mark ranks all-time. So, on the list below we can see that when Jakob Ingebrigtsen ran a new European record in the 5,000 m last week, he also ran the 20th fastest time in history. With the old lists, you'd have to pick out all the times faster than his time from the hodge-podge of times listed below the main list, and add them to how many runners were ahead of him all-time. If he or someone runs 12:41.00 tomorrow, we'd know right away that that is the 6th fastest time in history - his placement being 5th fastest runner in history, depending on whether it was a PB or not.

Someone better with making tables should do something better than this - like maybe italicizing the secondary times and rank numbers, and drawing a line after the 25th performance to indicate no more secondary marks, etc. In the end, this approach makes the lists far more user-friendly for the casual reader, and we don't need to constantly check those secondary marks - once one goes under #25, it's off the list!

This list, by the way, is accurate as of today, per World Athletics.

All-time top 25 athletes, top 25 times, men's 5,000m
Ath.# Perf.# Time Athlete Nationality Date Place Ref
1 1 12:35.36 Joshua Cheptegei Uganda 14 AUG 2020 Monaco
2 2 12:37.35 Kenenisa Bekele Ethiopia 31 MAY 2004 Hengelo
3 3 12:39.36 Haile Gebrselassie Ethiopia 13 JUN 1998 Helsinki
4 4 12:39.74 Daniel Komen Kenya 22 AUG 1997 Brussels
5 12:40.18 Bekele #2 01 JUL 2005 Paris
6 12:41.86 Gebrselassie #2 13 AUG 1997 Zurich
5 7 12:43.02 Selemon Barega Ethiopia 31 AUG 2018 Brussels
8 12:44.39 Gebrselassie #3 16 AUG 1995 Zurich
9 12:44.90 Komen #2 13 AUG 1997 Zurich
10 12:45.09 Komen #3 14 AUG 1996 Zurich
6 11 12:45.82 Hagos Gebrhiwet Ethiopia 31 AUG 2018 Brussels
7 12 12:46.53 Eliud Kipchoge Kenya 02 JUL 2004 Rome
8 13 12:46.79 Yomif Kejelcha Ethiopia 31 AUG 2018 Brussels
9 14 12:46.81 Dejen Gebremeskel Ethiopia 06 JUL 2012 Paris
10 15 12:47.04 Sileshi Sihine Ethiopia 02 JUL 2004 Rome
11 16 12:47.20 Mohammed Ahmed Canada 10 JUL 2020 Portland
17 12:47.53 Gebrhiwet #2 06 JUL 2012 Paris
18 12:48.09 Bekele #3 25 AUG 2006 Brussels
19 12:48.25 Bekele #4 18 AUG 2006 Zurich
12 20 12:48.45 Jakob Ingebrigtsen Norway 10 JUN 2021 Florence
13 21 12:48.63 Jacob Kiplimo Uganda 08 SEP 2020 Ostrava
14 22 12:48.64 Isaiah Kiplangat Koech Kenya 06 JUL 2012 Paris
15 23 12:48.66 Isaac Songok Kenya 18 AUG 2006 Zurich
16 24 12:48.77 Yenew Alamirew Ethiopia 06 JUL 2012 Paris
17 25 12:48.81 Stephen Cherono Kenya 12 JUN 2003 Ostrava
18 12:49.04 Thomas Pkemei Longosiwa Kenya 06 JUL 2012 Paris
19 12:49.28 Brahim Lahlafi Morocco 25 AUG 2000 Brussels
20 12:49.50 John Kipkoech Kenya 06 JUL 2012 Paris
21 12:49.71 Mohammed Mourhit Belgium 25 AUG 2000 Brussels
22 12:49.87 Paul Tergat Kenya 13 AUG 1997 Zurich
23 12:50.24 Hicham El Guerrouj Morocco 12 JUN 2003 Ostrava
24 12:50.25 Abderrahim Goumri Morocco 26 AUG 2005 Brussels
25 12:50.55 Moses Ndiema Masai Kenya 01 JUN 2008 Berlin

Canada Jack (talk) 00:46, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Am I really the only one who sees a need to clean up these pages? Thoughts anyone? Maybe I should start changing these pages myself? Canada Jack (talk) 16:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Canada Jack: I agree that the additional notes are a bit disorganised and I often disregard them. World Athletics allows for top 25 viewing on a "best by athlete" and "All" basis[3] and I think the best solution is to mirror that and have two lists, one for top 25 performers and one for top 25 performances. This will allow readers to see the rank of both performers and performances and is a bit easier to maintain than a combined list where it's likely that some editors will miss off performances and/or edit war over whether it should be a performers or performances list. SFB 09:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Same opinion as SFB, 2 separate lists will be easier to read.--Arorae (talk) 09:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
OK, I'm seeing these changes and am reacting negatively. Well, here's a problem to this approach; the tables will become drastically too long, as athletes run these races over and over again throughout their careers. This is especially true for the shorter races. Furthermore, you'll then have to dig up the best times from athletes from yesteryear for the sake of consistency. Otherwise, cut out all the times that no longer fit the Top 25. To simply put, one way or the other - but not both. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 05:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments - I've changed the lists a bit to make them more readable, here is the latest one I did - for the men's long jump.

Example. Can you name Mike Powell's top 10 jumps? I refuse to believe that he jumped the all-time best, without jumping previous distances. Surely, he's jumped at least 8.6 meters multiple times. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 05:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Ath.# Perf.# Mark Wind m/s Athlete Nationality Date Place Ref
1 1 8.95 +0.3 Mike Powell United States 30 AUG 1991 Tokyo
2 2 8.90 +2.0 Bob Beamon United States 18 OCT 1968 Mexico City
3 3 8.87 -0.2 Carl Lewis United States 30 AUG 1991 Tokyo
4 4 8.86 +1.9 Robert Emmiyan Soviet Union 22 MAY 1987 Tsakhkadzor
5 8.84 +1.7 Lewis #2 30 AUG 1991 Tokyo
6 8.79 +1.9 Lewis #3 19 JUN 1983 Indianapolis
7 8.76 +1.0 Lewis #4 24 JUL 1982 Indianapolis
7 +0.8 Lewis #5 18 JUL 1988 Indianapolis
5 9 8.74 +1.4 Larry Myricks United States 18 JUL 1988 Indianapolis
5 9 +2.0 Erick Walder United States 02 APR 1994 El Paso
5 9 -1.2 Dwight Phillips United States 07 JUN 2009 Eugene
8 12 8.73 +1.2 Irving Saladino Panama 24 MAY 2008 Hengelo
13 8.72 -0.2 Lewis #6 26 SEP 1988 Seoul
14 8.71 -0.4 Lewis #7 13 MAY 1984 Westwood
14 +0.1 Lewis #8 19 JUN 1984 Los Angeles
9 14 +1.9 Iván Pedroso Cuba 18 JUL 1995 Salamanca
17 8.70 +0.9 Myricks #2 17 JUN 1989 Houston
17 +0.7 Powell #2 27 JUL 1993 Salamanca
17 +1.6 Pedroso #2 12 AUG 1995 Gothenburg
10 20 8.69 +0.5 Tajay Gayle Jamaica 28 SEP 2019 Doha [1]
21 8.68 +1.0 Lewis #9 05 AUG 1992 Barcelona
21 +1.6 Pedroso #3 17 JUN 1995 Lisbon
11 21 +1.7 Juan Miguel Echevarría Cuba 30 JUN 2018 Bad Langensalza [2]
24 8.67 +0.4 Lewis #10 05 SEP 1987 Rome
24 -0.7 Lewis #11 06 AUG 1992 Barcelona
12 8.66 +1.6 Louis Tsatoumas Greece 02 JUN 2007 Kalamata
13 8.65 +1.3 Luvo Manyonga South Africa 22 APR 2017 Potchefstroom [3]
14 8.63 +0.5 Kareem Streete-Thompson United States 04 JUL 1994 Linz
15 8.62 +0.7 James Beckford Jamaica 05 APR 1997 Orlando
16 8.60 +0.7 Miltiadis Tentoglou Greece 26 MAY 2021 Athens [4]
17 8.58 +1.8 Jarrion Lawson United States 03 JUL 2016 Eugene [5]
18 8.56 +1.3 Yago Lamela Spain 24 JUN 1999 Turin
18 +0.2 Aleksandr Menkov Russia 16 AUG 2013 Moscow
20 8.54 +0.9 Lutz Dombrowski East Germany 28 JUL 1980 Moscow
20 +1.7 Mitchell Watt United States 29 JUL 2011 Stockholm
22 8.53 +1.2 Jaime Jefferson] Cuba 12 MAY 1990 Havana
23 8.52 +0.7 Savanté Stringfellow United States 21 JUN 2002 Palo Alto
23 +1.8 Jeff Henderson United States 22 JUL 2015 Toronto
25 8.51 +1.7 Roland McGhee United States 14 MAY 1995 São Paulo
25 +1.7 Greg Rutherford Great Britain 24 APR 2014 Chula Vista

Women in Red hosting Olympics and ParalympicsEdit

Greetings from WP:WikiProject Women in Red! Starting 1 July, we’re going to have a three-month focus (July, August and September) on the women of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Your participants are warmly welcomed to join us for the event, documenting as many women as possible; additionally if you have relevant lists of red links that we should encourage participants to take up, we’d love to know. Thanks very much!--Ipigott (talk) 15:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Cannabis and sportsEdit

New stub: Cannabis and sports. Any project members care to help expand? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Medal tablesEdit

for the 2020 Summer Olympics, World Athletics just edited a wonderful and uptodate statistics handbook (download here. As the editor insists on, the book modifies a lot of doping cases since the last 20 years, solved or not yet solved, giving the medal to the right athletes. But this huge work will never finish, because IOC or IAAF/WA (for legal reasons with WADA) have not decided yet to reward the right athletes, and in some cases, giving a gold medal to a doped second athlete, is worse than taking off the medal to the bad guy or girl. By the way, I would like some opinion about the Medal tables that are edited by users without corresponding to the official sources (IOC, WA, EA and so). I think it is against WP rules, and especially WP:NOR to modify the official published tables, without any official source of the same level. Am I right?--Arorae (talk) 05:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Arorae: We don't necessarily need to align articles with official sources, as long as sufficient sources exist to justify that difference and explanatory notes are provided to describe the existing differences between the sources. You can see that on the approach on Olympics articles that incorporate info on the 1906 Intercalated Games (not officially recognised by the IOC but acknowledged by many other sources). We've also had to take that approach where errors in statistics have been identified - such as the 1951 Pan American women's javelin winner.
In terms of the specific issue of how to approach medal tables and Authorised Neutral Athletes (ANA), we should explain that World Athletics does not class this as a team or rank it in the medal table, yet many other sources do. A quick search for the 2017 World Championships medal table shows sources including Xinhua, Eurosport, London Evening Standard, and The Guardian all included ANA in the medal table and also ranked it as a team. That needs to be acknowledged because that means some sources will say Germany ranked tenth in the medals and others will say Germany ranked ninth. Our job is to gather and explain these multiple truths, rather than decide which one is right. SFB 10:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
You focus only on ANA case, but I have a wider approach. When The Guardian published a Medal Table in 2017, it may change since, quite rapidly after late DQ. and ANA athletes are not a "team". We do not read the same sourcing.--Arorae (talk) 10:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Competition record tableEdit

For competition record tables, such as in Jean Paul Bredau, are we meant to exclude events for which they didn't make it into the final heat? Or do we include them but leave the placement blank? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 21:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

As a further question, which events qualify for the competition record? Do they have to be a national, continent-wide, or worldwide championship? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 21:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Marcell Jacobs sudden popularity led to too much confusion in the articleEdit

I created the article year ago and kept it until before the Olympics following the rules of Wikipedia:WikiProject Athletics and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Athletics/Manual of Style/Biographies. Now I will arrange the article step by step according to the MOS of the project and detailing every single change in the "edit summary" of the article after each modification. But I'll go into more detail on my edits, explaining its, in this section.

  1. In the MOS first goes the biography section (which eventually includes the career section) and then the statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:50, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  2. World, European and National records need a specific section in the Statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  3. Also national titles need a specific section in the Statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  4. Add Others international meetings section (why national meetings and not Diamond League?) --Kasper2006 (talk) 22:05, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Caitlyn/Bruce Jenner Olympic articlesEdit

Not sure how the Athletic Project sees this so I thought I'd at least bring it up. We have an edit at Athletics at the 1976 Summer Olympics that is of interest and a related discussion at Talk:Athletics at the 1976 Summer Olympics. Just an fyi. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Not sure exactly what your intention is, Fyunck(click), but MOS:DEADNAME applies to Olympic articles just the same as it does everywhere else, per WP:CONLEVEL. Newimpartial (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
I just said to look with no quantifiers. I have no idea how others look at the situation. It's just to let the listed projects know what is being discussed. There will probably be a formal RfC on the article where more can speak their minds and it's always good to have more viewpoints. You on the other hand have inserted your own biased opinion on the subject here. Shame on you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
For me the name of Bruce Jenner must also be kept. As for athletes who changed their name from married (e.g. Jessica Ennis). --Kasper2006 (talk) 05:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
@Kasper2006: that should be mentioned on the talk page discussion listed above where it will carry more weight. This was really just an fyi no matter anyone's feelings. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The thing is, consensus within one project must defer to WP community consensus, per WP:CONLEVEL, the same way Talk page consensus does. What we have in MOS:DEADNAME is one of the most widely discussed guidelines in the project - and the argument, "but our project does X because of our sources", was explicitly brought up and rejected in the large RfC on the revision in question. A formal RfC on the article does not set aside site-wide consensus.
And Wikipedia does handle name changes when transitioning differently from other name changes (and has for nearly a decade). You don't have to like it, but the community has spoken on this, and the idea that they should be treated the same has been rejected, over and over. Newimpartial (talk) 11:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


  1. ^ "400m Hurdles Semi-Final Results" (PDF). IAAF. 28 September 2019. Retrieved 28 September 2019.
  2. ^ Jon Mulkeen (30 June 2018). "Echevarria extends long jump world lead to 8.68m in Bad Langensalza". IAAF. Retrieved 12 July 2018.
  3. ^ "Long Jump Results". 22 April 2017. Archived from the original on 29 June 2017. Retrieved 22 April 2017.
  4. ^ "Breaking: Miltiadis Tentoglou terzo europeo di sempre nel lungo!". Retrieved 26 May 2021.
  5. ^ Roy Jordan (4 July 2016). "Six world leads on third day of US Olympic Trials". IAAF. Retrieved 4 July 2016.

Updated Logo for the 2022 World Athletic ChampionshipsEdit

Hey all,

New here but wanted to update the logo for the 2022 World Athletics Championships in Oregon, but have no idea how to go around that. Would anyone be willing to help me out?



A bunch of Athletics related categories are being attacked.

These need some comments from knowledgeable people. Trackinfo (talk) 07:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Is Rule 1 of WP:NATH still part of the SNG after the RfC on WP:NOLY?Edit

There was an RfC on WP:NOLY a bit ago to change olympic notability from competition to medalist. The RfC dos says in the close This is should not be read to wholly supersede all other established subject notability guidelines listed within WP:NSPORT that involve the Olympics in some way. Editors may find that, for some Olympic sports, individuals beyond medalists may be reasonably presumed to be notable owing to their status as a participant or owing their place earned. Notwithstanding, does the rule have competed in the Olympics, the IAAF World Championships in Athletics, the IAAF World Indoor Championships in Athletics, the IAAF World Cross Country Championships, or the IAAF World Half Marathon Championships (former IAAF World Road Running Championships) still apply? I figure it would, but I just thought it would make sense to get input from people with much better familiarity in this than me. snood1205 19:05, 26 December 2021 (UTC)


Hi. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salvador Alanís. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi. And this one: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gösta Grandin

Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 13:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

And one more: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friedrich Prehn. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 10:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Pending proposal to declare NSPORTS (and NTRACK/NATH) an invalid argument at AfDEdit

A new proposal is now pending to add language to NSPORT providing, among other things, that "meeting [NSPORTS or NTRACK/NATH] would not serve as a valid keep argument in a deletion discussion." If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Subproposal 1 (NSPORT). Cbl62 (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Village pump proposalsEdit

There are several proposals located at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability to either abolish or significantly rewrite WP:NSPORT which may be of interest to this project's editors. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

To be more specific, your input, one way or the other, on several pending proposals to alter NSPORTS would be welcomed. These proposals are as follows:
  • Subproposal 1: Requires "all athlete biographies must demonstrate GNG when notability is challenged at AfD" and that "SIGCOV in multiple secondary, independent reliable sources would have to be produced during the course of an AfD". Also potential limitations/exceptions.
  • Subproposal 3: "Remove all simple or mere 'participation' criteria in NSPORT, outside of ones related to Olympics and equivalent events."
  • Subproposal 4: "Modify all provisions of NSPORTS that provide that participation in 'one' game/match such that the minimum participation level is increased to 'three' games/matches. This raises the threshold for the presumption of notability to kick in."
  • Subproposal 5: "Implement a requirement that all sports biographies and sports season/team articles must, from inception, include at least one example of actual WP:SIGCOV from a reliable, independent source. Mere database entries would be insufficient for creation of a new biography article."
  • Subproposal 6: "Conditional on Subproposal 6 passing, should a prod-variant be created, applicable to the articles covered by Subproposal 5, that would require the addition of one reference containing significant coverage to challenge the notice."
  • Subproposal 8: "Rewrite the introduction to clearly state that GNG is the applicable guideline, and articles may not be created or kept unless they meet GNG." Further: "Replace all instances of 'presumed to be notable' with 'significant coverage is likely to exist.'
  • Subproposal 9: Strike, as allegedly confusing and/or at odds with other parts of NSPORTS, the following sentence from the lead: "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below."
  • Subproposal 10: "Require each project that has inclusion criteria based on participation in a league ... within the next 30 days to justify the inclusion of each league. Such justification must include actual 'random' (truly random) sampling showing that 90%-plus of the players in each league receive sufficient SIGCOV to pass GNG. At the end of 30 days, any league as to which the data has not been provided must be stricken from NSPORTS." Cbl62 (talk) 09:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)


Hi. You may or may not be interested in the following discussion:

Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Article request - John YoungEdit

A request was received at the Help Desk, purporting to be from John Young, requesting that an article be written about him. The original request is at Wikipedia:Help_desk#John_Young. Apparently he was a New Zealand-based runner, so I thought somebody here might like to take it on. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sourcesEdit

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

  • John Smith "Article of things" Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[ Article of things]" ''''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

AfD (2nd May 2022)Edit

Hi. Please see this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:APPNOTE - "The talk page or noticeboard of one or more WikiProjects or other Wikipedia collaborations which may have interest in the topic under discussion."