Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics

Latest comment: 22 hours ago by Kingsif in topic Country×Sport at the Olympic Games
WikiProject Olympics (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconWikipedia:WikiProject Olympics is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

OlympicsWP logo.svg Welcome to the WikiProject Olympics talk page OlympicsWP logo.svg

Discussion Alerts Assessment Manual of Style Peer review
Here you can discuss with other users about general questions and issues involving the project. Here you can be updated on important changes in the workflow status of articles tagged by this project. Here you can check the project ratings statistics, learn how to assess articles, or request us an assessment. Here you can follow the project guidelines to help you create, expand, and format articles. Here you can ask the project membership to perform a review on any of its tagged articles.
Olympic Games
Arc Triomphe.jpg Paris
426 days left
Milan Cathedral from Piazza del Duomo.jpg Milan & Cortina
986 days left
Santa Monica Ferris Wheel.jpg Los Angeles
1875 days left
Olympics.svg TBD
2445 days left


To start a new discussion section, please click here

Project-independent quality assessmentsEdit

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:30, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other opinions requestedEdit

While not directly in the purview of this Project, there is a discussion with a similar theme (medal counting) which could use more opinions. Please join in the discussion at Talk:FINA Water Polo World Cup § Serbia and Montenegro. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 18:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Leopoldo Saínz de la Maza#Requested move 22 April 2023Edit

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Leopoldo Saínz de la Maza#Requested move 22 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Olympic competitors from the Russian EmpireEdit

I found the Category:Olympic competitors from the Russian Empire half-filled with competitors that represented Russian Empire at the Olympics and moved some sailors there from the Russia-category (Russian Empire category had one or two sailors before if I remember correctly). Then I see Category:Olympic footballers from the Russian Empire was redirected to Category:Olympic footballers of Russia. Should there be an own category for competitors from the Russian Empire (article exist as mentioned in first line)? Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:02, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That probably depends if there are separate categories for ROC etc. appearances, and if there was discussion on the redirect. Kingsif (talk) 11:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ROC as in Russian Olympic Committe? Four different categories with the word Russia exist in Category:Olympic competitors by country: RUS, OAR, ROC and Russian Empire. OAR and ROC have only a medallist category. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can see why Russian Olympic Committee and Independent athletes from Russia don't have athlete categories, I suppose, since those people are (usually) still Russian by nationality, but we should aim for consistency. The Russian Empire was distinctly different. If there wasn't a discussion on the merge, I'd recommend starting one. If there was, you can give rationale for re-opening it. Kingsif (talk) 21:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the Russian Empire were to have its own categories, should there be similar ones for the Republic of China until 1948? Currently the competitors that represented Republic of China at the Olympics are all within Category:Summer Olympics competitors for China. S.A. Julio (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would consider asking the China and Taiwan WikiProjects about how to handle that one. Kingsif (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All entities that have a Foo at the Olympics should probably have a Category:Olympic competitors for Foo, so Russian Empire at the Olympics and Republic of China (1932–48) should have. I also don't understand the reason for the of/for-switch between categories in Category:Olympic competitors by country (Category:Olympic competitors for the United States) and Category:Olympic wrestlers by country (Category:Olympic wrestlers of the United States). Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps a mass category move discussion could be explored? Kingsif (talk) 10:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I started with Category:Olympic footballers of Russia in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 10#Category:Olympic footballers of Russia. I'll start prepare the mass discussion. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories are now at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 14#Olympic sportspeople of Foo Kaffet i halsen (talk) 11:51, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Infobox Olympic eventEdit

I am wondering, is there any issue with using Template:Infobox football tournament at games instead of Template:Infobox Olympic event at Football at the 2020 Summer Olympics? Here is what the page looks like with the former template, and then with the latter template. I created {{Infobox football tournament at games}} a few years ago to include all the same information and formatting as Infobox Olympic event, with a few football-specific additions that would be useful to readers. However, these infoboxes were recently replaced with {{Infobox Olympic event}} by Sportsfan 1234, who gave "WP:OLYMPICS" and "NOLYMPICS" as reasons for the change. However, I have not found any discussion or style guideline which mandates the use of this infobox. Unlike other sports such as athletics, boxing, fencing, judo, etc., there are only two football events: the men's and women's tournaments. Therefore, I think it would be useful to readers to include an overview of the medalists in the infobox, which does not take up much space. I could make adjustments to the football infobox if there are any issues or requested changes, otherwise I don't see why using {{Infobox football tournament at games}} would be an issue? Would appreciate any input. Thanks, S.A. Julio (talk) 01:17, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I don't know why the change was made. NOLYMPICS is a notability guideline, WP:OLYMPICS is... this page. There are MOS guidelines for Olympics-related articles, but nothing on events and nothing overarching, i.e. nothing to mandate one template for all articles. That's a user that's not up for discussion if I'm remembering correctly, so just change back and tell them to come to the project if they want to create a template guideline. Kingsif (talk) 02:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree with Kingsif. Schwede66 04:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I disagree. The Olympic infobox is used for Olympic events. This is an Olympic event and the infobox should be used for it. Its pretty clear to me. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The football infobox includes the same general layout and all other details as the Olympic infobox, nothing is being lost. The purpose of an infobox is to summarise the key features of the topic, I believe most readers would be interested to see the medalists in this infobox. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:08, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See no problem with using the former method. Gives a better overview. Kante4 (talk) 18:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is an Olympic event. ALL Olympic events use this infobox. An Olympic event uses the Olympic infobox. Something like this could work as well [1] at the Ice hockey at the 2014 Winter Olympics article Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was pulled up for having more than one infobox in a recent GA review. It's much cleaner for the information to be all contained in one template. There's no need to be obsessed with "it has to be the Olympic infobox". Schwede66 20:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think the infobox must be the Olympic infobox template, but it has to include all the data fields in that template. Moreover, I believe this discussion should not focus only on football infobox since many team sports are in the Olympics. So it is desirable to have uniformity on the subject. Nimrodbr (talk) 20:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with S.A. Julio and had a similar experience, I believe involved the same editor. A year and a half ago I've created {{Infobox judo competition event}} for the same reasons. It also provides every functionality that can be found in {{Infobox Olympic event}}, and MUCH more. As Nimrodbr said, the scope of this discussion should be broader than just football. Stating that ALL Olympic events use this infobox is just an WP:OTHERCONTENT. The proposer's argument is that not all Olympic events should use the same template. One can't refute it by stating "But they do!". CLalgo (talk) 23:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You were refuted on your claim here [2]. Its easier to have one uniform template for all Olympic events than 28 different ones for each different sport. There needs to be consistency and uniformity here. After all the is firstly an OLYMPIC (or w/e mse) event. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If there were complete consistency, {{Infobox Olympic event}} would also be used on every event page, such as Basketball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's tournament. However, {{Infobox international basketball competition}} is clearly a more appropriate template to use on the page. I would understand objections if there were inconsistencies in formatting between the infoboxes, but there should be no issue when the output is in the same style. Common sense should be used, not forcing one template to be used across all articles. This sentiment seems to be shared with other editors here. S.A. Julio (talk) 03:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Infobox Olympic event would still be more appropriate for that article. This isn't a race to have an infobox on every page. Consistency matters however, and in this case since this is an OLYMPIC event the Olympic infobox shall be used. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Until you can argue for why you think consistency 1. is more important than including all relevant information, 2. can only be achieved by using the same infobox when others look identical, you are not going to be listened to. "Because I want it/because I say so" isn't a valid argument. This is a discussion you can take part in, but you're going to need to explain your reasoning. Kingsif (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nimrodbr: Regarding other team sports, maybe additional details should be added to the infoboxes when there is only a men's and women's event? This would include field hockey, handball, ice hockey, rugby sevens and water polo (and basketball before the 2020 Olympics). Handball, water polo and basketball all seem to implement their own style. S.A. Julio (talk) 03:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While the discussion on whether all/individual Olympic-related articles must use the same infobox continues, I would also like to know why Sportsfan used the edit reason when making their changes not to say "I think this option is better" and explaining why, but to link to completely unrelated pages (neither an MOS guideline). Kingsif (talk) 10:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From this discussion it seems that S.A. Julio, Kingsif, Schwede66, Kante4, Nimrodbr and myself are in consensus that other, non-Olympic infobox template could, and sometimes should, be used on Olympic-related articles. Sportsfan 1234 seems to be the sole holder of the Dissenting opinion. Can we agree the non-Olympic infobox templates can be used on relevant articles, even Olympic ones, unless there's a specific resolution against a specific infobox and/or sport?. CLalgo (talk) 08:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I still disagree. There needs to be consistency across the various Olympic articles. I am not convinced there needs to be individual infoboxes for an Olympic event. As I suggested, something used at the Hockey at the 2010 Olympics article is a fair compromise. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:49, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think there is a consensus from involed editors to include specific infoboxes, like @CLalgo: said. Kante4 (talk) 17:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you explain the purpose of the Olympic infobox then? No one has explained this at all. I think maybe a 3rd opinion is necessary here. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:19, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As the rest of the responders supported usage of alternative infoboxes, it is not their responsibility to "explain the purpose of the Olympic infobox". As you are the only advocate for this template, it is yours. Bear in mind, Meta-reasoning such as This thing exists, so it should be included is not a valid argument. The argument for consistency does has some merit, but it was clearly rejected in favor of functionality. CLalgo (talk) 18:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually you are not up for discussion. You have severe WP:OWN issues you need to address before throwing out statements like that. @Kingsif Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mate, me reverting your poor non-consensus edits (you unilaterally changing all body text "hockey" to "field hockey" and refusing to even discuss, despite status quo and tentative WP consensus that official names of Olympic events are used; article titles disambigged for ease of searching), me starting discussion, and you ignoring those and continuing to make the same edits to other articles that other people then contest? That's entirely a you issue. Trying to protect articles from one bad editor isn't OWN (especially when I had not edited any of the hockey articles until cleaning up after you), stop throwing that accusation around or be reported for UNCIVIL, which this reply of yours is and nothing else (it has no point but to be rude to me; and let's not forget you stalking me before, either). Not that I needed to explain your issues, see the thread above of you again insisting something has to be a certain way (despite no guideline), and several editors saying they disagree and have had the same issue with you trying to force. Kingsif (talk) 10:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For the benefit of everyone here, they can look at your talkpage history (before you blanked it yesterday) and see that I was actually being quite polite in my summary when I noted you aren't up for discussion: there's lots of threads there of people asking you to stop making wide undiscussed changes that you think are helpful but which don't have any guideline backing and therefore would require you to start discussion to change. Persistent editing issues. Kingsif (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draftification of Olympic AthletesEdit

Following an RfC, approximately 900 articles on Olympic Athletes from the 1896 and 1912 Olympics inclusive were draftified. The full list can be found here, while a list including categories can be found here.

Finally, a category containing all currently affected articles can be found at Category:Drafts subject to special procedures from May 2023.

If there are other formats it would be useful to have this information in please let me know and I will do what I can. BilledMammal (talk) 18:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Country×Sport at the Olympic GamesEdit

Any thoughts on these two Country×Sport at the Olympic Games intersections:

Do they add something beyond Lebanon at the Olympics and Category:Olympic swimmers of Lebanon? What would a better name be? List of Olympic swimmers for Lebanon? Kaffet i halsen (talk) 20:14, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Those are some ugly lists; the best suggestion I have if they are to be kept would to be turn them into listicles akin to the "List of (Country) national football team squads" ones (example: List of England national football team World Cup and European Championship squads) - but there are arguments for deletion so I wouldn't perhaps put in the effort quite yet. Kingsif (talk) 23:46, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]