This page is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Olympics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Stephen Harrison (July 26, 2021).
"How to Use Wikipedia When You're Watching the Olympics".
Slate (magazine). Retrieved July 27, 2021. "The subject of pictures is the most painful one," wrote Wikipedia user Nimrodbr, who is active in the volunteer group WikiProject Olympics. At press time, some of the key athletes on the United States women's and men's gymnastics teams, including stars like Jordan Chiles and Brody Malone, do not yet have featured images on their respective Wikipedia pages.
To start a new discussion section, please
click here
Grammar of lead sections
A quick glance at the lead sections of a few WP articles about Olympiads shows me they have a fairly standardised opening sentence. Examples:
The 2022 Winter Olympics, officially called the XXIV Olympic Winter Games ... were an international winter multi-sport event ...
The 1964 Summer Olympics ... officially the Games of the XVIII Olympiad ... and commonly known as Tokyo 1964 ... were an international multi-sport event ...
The "were an international multi-sport event" is grammatically dubious, is ugly, and makes me uncomfortable. "Event" is a singular noun, so "was an event" would be correct. Most dictionaries show "Olympics" as a plural noun, so we have a sentence saying a plural noun is a singular noun.
I don't have an easy solution to this except restructuring the opening sentence of every single article to read something like The Games of the XVIII Olympiad, commonly known as the 1964 Summer Olympics or Tokyo 1964, was an event ... I am not a member of this project, so (assuming this is the right forum) I'd thought I'd point it out and throw it to you guys to discuss and decide what, if anything, to do.
Masato.harada (
talk) 16:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for bringing this up. Also, thanks for some preliminary research: you indicate that "Olympics" is generally treated as plural (e.g. "the 2022 Winter Olympics were") but, of course, "event" is not (e.g. "was an international winter multi-sport event"). I personally think that where these clashes of prescriptive grammar occur, Wikipedia can have some lee-way to write as fits best (i.e. use "were" or "was" and not worry about which noun disagrees), there are other potential solutions. We could replace the word "event" with a word or phrase that fits and is plural, or rephrase how it is included.
Kingsif (
talk) 21:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Website canvassing for changes to Wikipedia article terminology
Hey, I just wanted to make members of this WikiProject aware of
this website that's canvassing for changes to be made to terminology in sporting-related Wikipedia articles; so that editors are aware that this off-wiki canvassing is occurring. (Also notifying
WT:SPORTS.) All the best, —
a smart kitten[
meow 02:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)reply
This is a project of billionaire Peter Thiel's "Enhanced Games" enterprise. They want to ban the use of the word "doping" and change the word "cheated" to "fought for science and bodily sovereignty", among other things.
Jeff in CA (
talk) 20:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)reply
If they don't think doping is wrong, why do they think it's a dirty word? Anyway, if they get editors to come to WP in any numbers large enough to try and influence terminology, I'm sure it will be more than obvious to regulars and the blocking powers that be.
Kingsif (
talk) 21:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Olympic Games ceremony has been nominated for a 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.
Onegreatjoke (
talk) 03:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Back in December based on a few events Equestrian was moved to Equestrian events. Per WP:COMMONNAME and what the IOC calls the sport, Equestrian should be used. I am reopening this discussion here. Please comment!
Sportsfan 1234 (
talk) 00:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Personally, I prefer "
Equestrianism at the ... ". As you can see if you follow the link, there is actually an article with that exact name. "Equestrian" does not make any sense here; an equestrian is either the person riding the horse, i.e. the word is a noun – or it's an adjective, like in equestrian events. And "Equestrian events at the ... " is bad too. It's like "Football[ish] events at the ... ". There was not much participation in the previous RM. I suggest we go with "Equestrianism at the ... ".
HandsomeFella (
talk) 07:53, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The articles should be moved back to "Equestrian events..." per the consensus of the previous discussion, which cannot be unilaterally put aside and overruled. And notifications of this discussion need to be posted on the relevant pages. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I mean, there were multiple other discussions that concluded with staying at "Equestrian at", but as soon as another discussion is opened, it's all fair game again. Don't pick and choose which discussions you think we should and shouldn't stick with in perpetuity.
Kingsif (
talk) 17:58, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If a new consensus is reached through a new discussion, then the articles can be moved but
WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a valid reason to unilaterally disregard and overrule the consensus of the most recent RM discussion. wjematherplease leave a message... 23:41, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't see any IDLI, and if we look at that latest discussion, I don't actually know how it closed in favour of moving to "Equestrian events" given the lack of !votes for that outcome that actually had reasons at all, let alone good ones (grammar prescriptionists are the ones who just DLI). So that's reason enough to call it a malformed close, if you are looking for reasons to disregard it for some reason(?)
Kingsif (
talk) 00:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If someone wishes to challenge the close, then they can do that, but this is not the appropriate venue. What nobody can do, is unilaterally disregard and overrule it, which is what has happened here, without even having the courtesy to contact the closer of the discussion, or any of its participants, to notify them of this one. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes - I thought this was a discussion to talk about the most recent close, I now see it is apparently a malformed RfC or move request?
Kingsif (
talk) 21:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, "Equestrian" clearly should be used (treating it as the name of the Olympic sport/group of events - as the IOC and everyone who actually watches, instead of just comments on here, does - then it is both perfectly correct in English and fits our naming convention; there is no reason not to use it and every reason not to use anything else) and there have been many discussions that have come to that conclusion, but a handful of people who won't let go of nothing but their opinion that "it just sounds wrong" will keep moving individual articles, starting new move discussions, and being unpleasant in said discussions, until nobody has the mental energy to continue challenging them.
Kingsif (
talk) 17:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not an appropriate place to hold a discussion to overturn the result of a properly advertised RM. I've reverted the page moves for the time being.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 16:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Ryan Lochte has been nominated for a 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. – zmbro(
talk) (
cont) 21:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, Please note that Abdalá Bucaram, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is
scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's
Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBottalk 00:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI teamreply