This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

I want to address are use of pictures in various Olympics-related articles. Specifically, I'm concerned with the use of photos in Cross-country skiing at the 2006 Winter Olympics. The main goal of Wikipedia is to create a free encyclopedia. These images do nothing to promote that goal, and they may harm the goal. While there is some claim of fair use, the copyright notice on the NBC Olympics pages make it clear that these images are not free, and not fair use.

© 2006 NBC Universal. All rights reserved. Any use reproduction, modification, distribution, display or performance of this material without NBC Universal's prior written consent is prohibited.

I think we are doing great work as part of this project, but I feel we need to pay much closer attention to making sure it's free work. -- Sue Anne 06:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless someone was at every event of the Olympics who is willing to give up their galleries of pictures, it is impossible to find free alternatives of these pictures. You just cannot do it in the quantity that we need them. That said, I was the one who uploaded the pictures making that assumption, so I uploaded them as copyrighted, but fair use. If it would make you feel better, I could contact NBC and try to see if I could have permission to use some of the pictures now and in the future. I just think it's impossible to get free alternatives, and thus this is the best we can do. I understand where you're coming from totally, but you must understand my view.

If these are the only pictures that are available, and we're not allowed to use them, then each and every Olympics page on events (nevermind the ones from past years that don't even have published pictures) would be incomplete and could probably never get up to the status that we want. Regardless, I'll contact NBC when I can about this and see what I can do. Thanks for bringing up you're concern, though, Sue Anne. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  11:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

First off, we don't need any of the pictures. Having pictures is nice and improves the "encyclopedia" part of "free encyclopedia", but the overuse of fair use images is highly detrimental to the "free" part. Especially when we're stretching fair use as we are with, e.g., Cross-country skiing at the 2006 Winter Olympics. Also, if you do contact NBC, make sure you ask them to release the images under a free license (permission for Wikipedia is insufficient). -- Jonel | Speak 12:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm really busy now, but I'll take care of that in the near future/when I get around to it. I know it's important! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  02:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

How about this for a new userbox? It's easier to identify as Olympic-related, I think... tiZom _(2¢) 15:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... the Olympic rings' colors and arrangement is definetely something easier to identify with... except that the "Sports" has been dropped from the project name. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 16:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, if you could maybe come up with something that doesn't have "sports" in it, that would be ideal if you want to create a new userbox. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  02:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Oooh...how about this?

We have a winner!!! Andrwsc 05:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  11:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Undoubtedly the best proposal (not because it has my pictogram :P). But allow me to add some touches:

This user is a member of the Olympics WikiProject

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parutakupiu ( talk • contribs)

Yep, gotta use our "Olympic template color" of #bfd7ff! Andrwsc 16:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just took the blue shade from the rings, and lightened it a little. But I like this blue a lot better. Hey Parutakupiu, can you take a look at the image? The shapes have some black bordering that I couldn't fix. Think you could take care of it? And hey, do you guys think this should be the image that we put on our Olympic-related templates?

Which specific templates do you have in mind? Andrwsc 18:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

(tiZom, I've already uploaded a better version of your colored image) So, do we keep the current version ({{ User WikiProject Olympics}}) or do we go for one of the versions displayed above? Is a voting needed? Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 18:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I created User:UBX/WikiProject Olympics per WP:GUS and User:UBX. Should we redirect the current box there? Should we keep both? Is voting necessary? I think we've got consensus...

Also, as far as which template I think could use this image? I dunno, I was sort of thinking that this image (or something like it) could be the "logo" for the Olympic WikiProject... sort of like what is to the Nintendo Portal, or what is to the Beer WikiProject. Thoughts? tiZom _(2¢) 07:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You mean like using it on {{ OlympicsWikiProject}} instead of the barnstar? I think that would be appropriate, even if that's not what you mean. The barnstar should probably not be used as our logo; I actually just meant for it to be a placeholder until I made/found a better image. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  19:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I tested it and it looks very nice :) — {{ OlympicsWikiProject}} Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 21:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly what I meant. Now, can we change the color of that box from yellow to blue? Or is that a standard WikiProject color? I'm going to go ahead and add that logo wherever else I think it might be appropriate. tiZom _(2¢) 22:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I prefer it to stay like this. It's the standard color for WP banners and it's better not to put it different from the normal layout ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 22:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I have been playing around with some different formats for listing medalists, and I'd like some feedback on some of my work. Please see Austria at the 1952 Winter Olympics and/or Algeria at the Olympics to see some examples. I used the sortable table class, and created some new templates so that the medal column would sort properly and the athletes would be sorted by last name. I rather like the results.

We have several different styles for presenting these lists, and it would be nice to standardize on one. Some random examples:

1. Canada at the 1932 Summer Olympics — probably the most common style, using standard section headings for the medal type and a simple bullet list for each medal
2. Norway at the 1952 Winter Olympics — same idea, but the little medal icons have been inserted into the section headings
3. United States at the 2004 Summer Olympics — adds another layer of organization, grouping by sport within each medal type
4. China at the 2004 Summer Olympics — similar to USA 2004, but also adds a horrible, crufty "by date" table to the list
5. Brazil at the 2004 Summer Olympics — also similar to USA 2004, but adds pictures of everybody which stretches out the list and messes up the page layout considerably
6. Brazil at the 2000 Summer Olympics — quite different, but inspiration for my work. Uses a tabular format, assisted by templates like {{ MedalCountryTop}} to aid formatting. Sue Anne created these templates and has used them on several 2000 pages already.

I really think we ought to standardize on something. I latched on to the sortable table idea as a possible solution because it allows the user to easily sort by medal type or by sport, which I think was the motivation behind the extra level of hierarchy of style #3. It also uses a certain amount of color coding (with the little medal icons) as per styles #3 and #6, but without excessive amounts of color, in my opinion. To be honest, I'm not 100% fond of those medal icons, but they do serve a useful purpose in a large sortable table and are not purely for decoration.

As you can see from my two "guinea pig" pages above, these tables would be used on both per-Games pages and also the summary per-nation pages (where an extra column for "Games" is added).

What do you folks think? Andrwsc 18:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Andrew, I like your sortable table. I created the table on the 2000 pages simply because I thought that the bulleted lists weren't all that effective or good looking. My only problem with your template is that it uses those horrible medal images, which are a huge pet peeve of mine. I don't know if any of you have been watching the FINA World Championships, but they do a really nice (1) (2) (3) in a colored circle. -- Sue Anne 19:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Where did you see the improved icons? Swimming at the 2007 World Aquatics Championships still has the common ugly ones (albeit under different image filenames). I was also thinking that a simple colored medal shape with 1/2/3 would look best! The IOC medal database uses something like that too. Andrwsc 19:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Andrwsc, you already know my thoughts, and now that you listed the different organizations found on several pages I strongly believe that your idea mixes very well all of them!

As for the "ugly duckling" medal icons, it would be my pleasure to create a new set :) So your idea is a simple coloured circle with correspondent podium place inside, right? I'm on it! Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 21:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

(Me and my hurries...) How would you prefer them? With the same (small) size as the current icons or bigger (better quality) and then, if needed, reducing them through [[Image:...]]? Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 21:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a comment: Those medal images are ideal candidates for SVG format. Also, I like the sortable table as well. Kudos! tiZom _(2¢) 22:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I actually created them myself, editing the SVG text files by hand to make them very small (346 bytes each). How do these look: , , and ? Andrwsc 23:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

They look good! I was thinking of adding a background gradient, but yours do the job nicely too. The numbers are not very centered, but that's only visible in bigger size... and me being unnecessarily perfectionist :P Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 23:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, the numbers are centered horizontally as per SVG spec (using text-anchor), but not vertically. Here is the relevant source code for the gold medal icon:

<?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.0" width="16" height="16"> <g> <circle cx="8" cy="8" r="8" fill="#e0be00"/> <circle cx="8" cy="8" r="7" fill="#ffd700"/> <text x="8" y="12" text-anchor="middle" font-family="Arial" font-size="11" font-weight="bold" fill="black">1</text> </g> </svg>

I suppose I could fiddle with the "y" value for the text element to align it better. I wasn't happy with the output of inkscape when creating such a simple vector image (two circles and a text character), with all sort of extra crap in the file (pushed it out to about 2K in size) so that's why I handcrafted them.  ;) Andrwsc 00:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't bother youself. These new medals do the job greatly as I've already seen ;) Good job. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 01:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

(Unindent.) That all looks fine. I'm just wondering why now we think that the little circular images are fine? It seems like we've always been against them (with the colors and the words working just fine) but I was just curious as to the push for images. I'm fine with them, I guess; it doesn't really matter to me because it gets the point across. And if you do use the images, the numbered ones look much better. As for a more common general style, I'll have to look into that. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  02:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I guess the issue is where we should or should not use those icons. Certainly, I've been promoting their removal from places like medal table headings (by creating and using {{ RankedMedalTable}}, {{ MedalistTable}}, {{ OlympicGoldMedalist}}, {{ Infobox Country Olympics}} and its offspring, etc.) where the text label and background color is perfectly sufficient. However, when I started experimenting with the sortable medalist tables, I found it quite useful to have the color coding in that first column, so that you could quickly see if that column was the current sort key or not. I tried changing the color of the table cell background, but I thought that the result was a bit overwhelming. Take a look at Australia at the 2000 Summer Olympics (with no disrepect to Sue Anne's work!) to see what I mean. Also, I wanted the sort order of that column to be gold/silver/bronze instead of alphabetical order (bronze/gold/silver), and putting the icon in front of the text string helped reinforce that. Now that the icon has a 1/2/3 label, that really makes it obvious. Of course, I believe strongly in consensus, so if we agree that we should abolish the icons altogether, then I will remove them from those templates, but hopefully the new ones are aesthetically pleasing enough to keep. Note that I'm not advocating their use in all those other places! Andrwsc 03:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The USOC portraits of the US Olympic teams have been frequently used in bios of US Olympians. I myself uploaded many of these last year under fair use. However they are actually fair use replaceable of a living person, and it has since been determined that we cannot use these simply to show what the person looks like. As such, they will have to be deleted. Does anybody have any objection if I just delete them without having to tag and wait for a while? If people don't mind, then I am happy to delete their USOC fair use ones for them without the paperwork. Thanks, Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 03:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Without knowing that there was already a specific template for this award ({{ The Olympics Barnstar}}), I tried to outline a better message box for it, more compatible with our project (that yellow simply sucks!) and I created a new template ({{ The Olympics barnstar}}), which also shows an explanation on how to use it.

When I tried to capitalize all words moving the page to "The Olympics Barnstar", the conflict with the current template, showed me its existence. What I'd like to ask you is if you like the new version or prefer to keep the older one? In any case, I'll transfer the "documentation" text to the current template and delete the one I mistakenly created. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 01:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

That yellow has got to be the ugliest color, but that is that has been there and no one has changed it. I love your new version, so I think it would be appropriate for you to implement that version, canning the old ugly one. (No offense to the person who made it; I think it might have been me....) _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  19:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool. I'm gonna change it if nobody else is against. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 20:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

It was getting a little messy here, so I archived. I looked through all the headings, though, first, and everything seems to be cleared up, except for the whole Nation at the Olympics thing. I'm not sure if we should open this back up or not right now (I'm leaning toward no) but I just wanted to remind people of the issue before I stowed it away in the archives. That seems to be it; don't be afraid to bring back a discussion if you see it fit. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  22:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I had started a discussion on Talk:Olympic sports, but would like to continue it here because it impacts a lot of pages. To recap, I have collected the number of events in each sport at each Games, and plan to update the table on Olympic sports to show the number of events inside each table cell instead of just a bullet to indicate whether or not the sport was included. The next thing I want to do with this data is update each of the main Games pages if necessary. Specifically, each of those pages has a section that is called "Sports", or "Medals awarded", or something else. Often, this section has a bulleted list of links, preceded by a rather lame intro (e.g. nothing more than "See the medal winners, ordered by sport:"). I'd like to standardize this section to use a similar layout on every Games page and to include the number of events. For example, what we have at 2008 Summer Olympics#Sports is pretty good. The only real issue I have with that specific page is that I think the section should be pulled out one level and given a better name (e.g. "Program of events").

I have collected all the numbers and can start updating pages, but of course, we will have some discrepancies for the really old Games. For example, I count 89 events in the 1900 Summer Olympics, but the IOC page here claims 95 events, which we dutifully repeat in the infobox at the top of the page. Interestingly, the IOC also shows 90 gold medals awarded (with a double gold in one equestrian event), which leaves us with 89 events, so I stand by that number.

As always, any comments about page layout suggestions, how to handle the discrepancies with the IOC pages, etc. are appreciated. Andrwsc 23:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to see the removal of the list of nations participating in "sport at the Olympic games" pages. For example, the Athletics at the Summer Olympics page would be ridiculously long if all the nations who participated in this sport were added. I propose that only sports that are inherently team oriented, such as Basketball and Ice Hockey have a list of participating nations. I realize the tendency to cross-reference EVERYTHING in wikipedia, but I think we should do this reasonably. We've talked about this before Andrwsc, and unfortunately very few people gave their opinion on this subject. I hope we can get other people to contribute. Perakhantu 21:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I agree with you. As you point out, having this kind of table for some sports (esp. athletics) is a virtual duplication of the entire list of NOCs. I think that the number of participants is useful for individual "Sport at the year Games" pages, but a full table of every NOC times every Games is overkill to include on the top-level "Sport at the Olympic Games" pages. However, I think team sports are an exception. These tables are more manageable since only the larger NOCs tend to participate in those sports. On a related note, I think that per-sport tables on the high-level "Nation at the Olympics" articles are also overkill. Imagine if all the sports for all the Games were completed on United States at the Summer Olympics. It's not necessary. Andrwsc 22:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I've recently put this high-rated article on a FAC process and since then a very helpful editor ( User:JHMM13) took the hard job of copy-editing it entirely two times. Still, I believe an article of this importance should be analyzed and proofread by more users, knowing or not about the subject. Plus, Wikipedia's apparent "perfect prose" shaman (Tony1) has laid out some comments and you should know how demanding he is known for, as far as writing style is concerned :S

So please, anyone reading and willing, help me with this. Especially because I'm way out of his league of English writing, since I'm not native speaker. Thanks. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 02:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey all! This place is very quiet lately. Lots of work, I presume — here or in real life :)

Anyway, I had the idea of conceiving a logo for our project (about time!), on the line of the image proposal for our new userbox (which we later added provisionally to the announcements box) but without being simply an Olympic colours-shaded Athletics pictogram version.

What do you think? Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 19:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool! I'll take it! Good job. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  22:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Great to hear that! My concept was a mix between the running athlete and the Olympic rings (without blatantly reproducing the symbol — don't wanna get sued by the IOC). I think it came out quite nicely :) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 22:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, nicely done! And as for the quietness, I've been sorting out some sortable table template issues (if you'll pardon the pun) before I embark on completing the "Nation at the Olympics" pages, so stay tuned.... Andrwsc 23:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I've noticed that "sort(...)" is on top of your editing list ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 23:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Jim Thorpe has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Miskwito 04:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I have made same contributions on early Olympic games and I have a question. On Cycling at the 1908 Summer Olympics - Men's tandem I have found a footnote, which says, that there is a discrepancy between the times and the qualification. But maybe the time for the German team is not right. [ [1]] reports the winning time for Germany with 2:55.6 and not 2:05.6. When the time was 2:55.6 this would clear up, why Barnard/Rushen moved up to the semifinal. I am not an expert, but 2:05.6 is about 20 seconds faster than the next fastest time in this event. With standing start and no tactics more than 57 km/h - I do not know, if this was possible in 1908? Also the footnote says, that there was a hard fight in heat 4 with a very close finish - maybe the reason for such a fast race in 2:25.0? The next fastest time was from heat 7 2:43.2, more than 37 seconds slower than the German team. Doma-w 03:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The 2:55.6 time makes sense. I've changed the time in our article and attributed Wudarski. It's likely that some sort of transcription or typographical error made its way into the Official Report. -- Jonel | Speak 12:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Do we usually add the medals, which competitors won in the 1906 Summer Olympics in the medal-template and/or in the category:medalists for their country? And are these medal winners in our database still "Summer Olympic medalists"? Thanks in advance! Doma-w 22:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd be tempted to say "no, because they are not recognized Games, therefore those are not Olympic medals", but the thing is those people DID win those medals. I'm not the expert on this subject and I'm afraid to say anything wrong, but my suggestion would be to add those medals as "non-Olympic". Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 23:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

PS: Don't you want to be a member of the project? You've been creating a LOT of pages for Olympians and that's really helpful and worthy. It would be just to "officialize" your contributions :P —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parutakupiu ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

I asked, because nowaday these medals are unofficial, but for a long time they were official... And you are right! These winners have their medals at home! However the IOC did not want this games anymore...

...yes, if you want me to become a member? Yes, of course, if you think I can help. Doma-w 00:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Then go here and add your name! :) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 01:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Our convention on Wikipedia is to exclude them from overall medal counts and from the "List of Olympic medalists in sport" set of pages, although there are a few instances where this convention is broken and pages need to be edited. Athlete's pages should include them (e.g. Ray Ewry), although a footnote describing the current "unofficial status" of the Intercalated Games ought to be mentioned. Andrwsc 00:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

O.K. So I include these medals only in the text, but I do not include them in the medal-template and I also do not add the category e.g. "gold medalist for Denmark"!? Have I understood the convention? Is this correct: Axel Norling? By the way, I like the term current "unofficial status" ;) Doma-w 03:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I think, I need same help. Would somebody be so kind and have a look at this page: Gymnastics at the 1920 Summer Olympics and the history of this page? I only tried my best... Thanks in advance! Doma-w 19:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you need help with, but the page looks fine from what I saw of it. I don't really know what you were doing when I looked at the diffs, but were those names the names that Wikipedia uses, or what, because I noticed you made a lot of name changes. The only other thing that bothers me is that humongous table, because the teams were composed of so many gymnasts. Is there anything we could do about that? _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  20:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose you're talking about the last revert to your edits, Doma-w? The edit summary says the user reverted because the (name) changes were not sourced. You add ref tags for those gymnasts that only appear on the IOC medal database, but where did you get the other gymnast names which you changed? That's what you have to address ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 20:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I only tried to give all these gymnasts their correct name. And I started for the most of all Swedish and Danish gymnasts their own page. But all my edits were reverted and so are also many links destroyed.

E.g. Hans Rönne: the correct Danish name is Hans Rønne, because ö is not a Danish letter and ö is also not an English letter. So I gave this gymnast his correct name Hans Rønne and made a redirect Hans Ronne.

Also I have changed Sven O. Jonsson to his complete name Sven-Olof Jonsson. I know, that the IOC database only showns Sven O. Jonsson, but with the complete name it is much easier to differ from other people with related names. Doma-w 20:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Jared! No, I have no idea want we can do with this large table. All of these gymnasts are medalists. I think it is O.K. Doma-w 20:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it should be fine. There's really nothing to do, and really, it's still just like all the other articles. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  21:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Doma-w, the revert can be reverted back, but perhaps it's better if you add the source where you got the correct/complete names. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 21:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Parutakupiu! I know, that we can reverted back, but which source can I add? I can give a link to Danish language. ;)

Or, allow me to give an example: I have changed Hans Hansen (gymnast) to Hans Trier Hansen. I add his thrid name to avoid the brackets, also Hansen is a very common, we have 9 differnet Danish gymnasts in 1912 and 1920 called Hansen. But we are still speaking about the same person: Mr. Hansen born May 15, 1893.

There are only three persons, which have a differnet spelling: Helsteen resp. Helsten, Jonsson resp. Johnson and West resp. Vest. Here is on one side IOC and on the other side we have Wudarski/HermanDW/Mallon/Kamper, which all gave the same spelling, so these looks more like a typo to me. But I have not changed a single competitor. I only try to disentangle. Doma-w 22:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I added references, so I hope this helps clear up. Many thanks to Parutakupiu for his kind help! Doma-w 01:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

For this/these Belgian water polo player(s) we have two differnet pages: Gérard Blitz (sportsman) and Gérard Blitz (entrepreneur). The first is shown as the Olympic medalist in 1920 and 1924 and the second is shown as the Olympic medalist in 1936. Also these pages and also the page Maurice Blitz explain their relationship.

My problem is, that de Wael, Mallon/Kamper and databaseOlympics credits all three medals to one and the same player. Wudarski and the IOC medal database report only the name Gérard Blitz without any comment, so there it is impossible to differ.

Do we have any further information? Thanks in advance! Doma-w 12:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that the 'Nation at yyyy summer olympics' navigational templates are all set to automatically collapse. This is odd because they are almost always the only navbox there. For example, United States at the 2006 Winter Olympics and Luxembourg at the 1912 Summer Olympics. The only navbox is collapsed. I think this is a bad idea and could easily be switched to autocollapse with AWB. Thank you. Reywas92 ^Talk 17:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that I would agree with you, somewhat. I see what you're saying, but I think we wanted to go for consistency, and when you get a template like {{ NOCin2004SummerOlympics}} which has a humongous list of nations, it's really too big. But, again, I'm up for reconsideration. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  18:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I see, that is too big. But it will still be the only box on each page. I love navboxes, and I wish they were always uncollapsed, even on pages with many. Reywas92 ^Talk 19:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

As do I. They are wonderful—especially in Olympics articles—at linking together multiple similar pages. If you have any suggestion as to how to make the template like the Athens one smaller, by all means lay it out, because maybe then might we be able to say, OK, let's lock them open. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  19:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Now, we could separate the nations by continent, and lay it out so that the one dynamic template is comprised of 6 internal, collapsed nav bars. Another way to do it would be to make it 5 continents (one for each Olympic ring, as is what the Olympic rings partly stand for) and each bar would be colored one of the rings colors. But then, would we have to do this for each bar, or could we just do it for the big ones? See User:Mzajac/Soviet-legacy AFV Navbox _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  19:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure it could be done with only the big ones, though 6 continents (N. America has a lot of countries). For consistancy, only do it for those since 2000 (or another date). Reywas92 ^Talk 20:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

If we do that, we really should use the Olympic continents. -- Jonel | Speak 02:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I just "created" the Category:Competitors at the 1908 Summer Olympics by country, by resorting the country subcategories in Category:Competitors at the 1908 Summer Olympics. But are the Olympic competitors categorized by Summer Olympics by country anywhere else on Wikipedia? If not, should they be? A ecis ^Brievenbus 12:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Meet 2012 Summer Olympics bids — the newest project article to be given the right to carry a little star! :D

I told you my next promotion goal would be an Olympics-related article. A big "thank you" and also my congratulations to the editors who had a hand in this task, especially Jared and also a non-member JHMM13. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 22:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, I hardly did anything. I just did a few fix-ups here and there, and I did help with the format when I brought it to GA, but other than that, I did nothing compared to what Parutakupiu did. Way to go! And yes, also thanks to JHMM13 for doing numerous copy-edits to the page! Great job! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  23:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Haha! Don't be so modest because this won't let you :P Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 00:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

You still had more than double my edits! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _talk^┐  00:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Then having half of my edits is "hardly nothing"? :P That's why you should have the deserved credit ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 00:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations everyone on the good work. The talk page needs to be updated though - it doesn't even have the FA banner yet. -- Scorpion 00:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

A bot usually does that, as it's said on the FAC page. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 01:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi all. As you may or may not know, the 2007 Pan American Games are just around the corner. This is sparkling the creation of new articles covering events at those games (such as Swimming at the Pan American Games), as well as the articles pertaining to the 2007 Games, which are already picking up or should be as the Games approach. As you may notice, most of those articles will not be adhering to the standard formats that this Project has been looking to establish in order to raise the general quality of our coverage of Olympic sports (by the way, the Pan-Am Games follow the Olympic program, except for the inclusion of a few sports which are not Olympic, such as Bowling and Futsal). So I thought that the people more involved with this project might be interested in taking a look, and perhaps help those articles get started already at a higher standard. Notice that most, if not all, of the people who are or will be involved with creating those articles will not be familiar with this project or any of its concerted decisions regarding the standards for presenting sporting results. And in any event, we might look at it as some kind of "test event" for our coverage of next year's Summer Olympics maybe :). Cheers, Redux 19:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Do we have any agreement about the Olympic categories?

There was a question a few weeks ago (see above), but nobody answered.

I think it is really necessary to clean up all the categories, because there is much confusion.

Maybe we can also find a policy, how to categorize the competitors.

Thanks in advance! Doma-w 14:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

So where are we as far as this project? That's a really vague question, but I'm just curious as to what everyone is doing and where they're headed. I know ultimately our goal last time we spoke about goals was to ensure the 2004 pages were up to snuff, and it seems that's moving along slowly but surely. Other than that, I'm not too sure what else is going on, so maybe others could give everyone else a heads up if they're doing anything noteworthy, or moving in a noteworthy direction. (I haven't really been doing much because I've been caught in the crossfire between Raul654 and the rest of his supporters as FA director. I just have fundamental problems with the role he's playing.)

Anyway, that's it, I just thought I'd check in and see how everyone's doing. I don't think there's anything more we should be working towards, but if you can think of something, bring it up. Happy editing! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  11:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, my editing has been a bit sporadic lately. I've been spending time on Wikipedia:WikiProject Flag Template work, and now that I have my admin broom, I've also been spending time blowing away nonsense articles from Category:Candidates for speedy deletion.

However, I do have a couple of Olympic-related tasks on my to-do list. Very recently, I have been working on some of the 2004 pages — specifically the "match" sports like judo and taekwondo — to split them into individual event pages and reformat them to "standard style". I have used tournament bracket templates on those pages, like we started with boxing, so any comments on the results would be welcome. I rather like the clean layout of those brackets, so I'm pleased with the results. The only thing I'm slightly unsure about is that I had to use the family name of each athlete only, since there isn't enough room to put full names in those table cells. Of course, the wikilinks point to the full names. Is that really a problem, or are we ok with that layout style?

The next thing I have on my Olympic to-do list is to update the "Program of events" sections on each of the main Games pages with the numbers of events (like we have with 2008 Summer Olympics#Sports). I have a spreadsheet with all those numbers, so it will be a simple matter to quickly crank them out; I just haven't got around to it yet.

The last thing that I have on my mind is to finally get around and sort out the high-level "Nation at the Olympics" articles. You will have seen some of my ideas for a standard format for those pages — check out Kenya at the Olympics or Belgium at the Winter Olympics to see what I think a good "start class" article might look like for those series. The sortable table of medalists and the per-Games and per-sport medal tables are also driven from Excel code, so again, once I get around to it, I can quickly crank those out.

If we really like the sortable table of medalists, I think it would be worthwhile to get all the individual "Nation at the year Olympics" articles to adopt that format. I started with Austria at the 1952 Winter Olympics and Cuba at the 1972 Summer Olympics to test it out. Again, it might be good to start with the Category:Nations at the 2004 Summer Olympics articles so that we have something to point new editors towards when they work on those articles next year...

Andrwsc 16:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi all. Well, I've been a bit idle since I got 2012 Summer Olympics bids promoted. I can say I now know almost everything about this subject, considering the several run-throughs I made to it :D My "outside world" life has asked for a little more of attention from me, hence my absence and lack of Olympic-related editing.

Anyway, I've been trying to find a layout that can group together the content of Bids for Olympic Games (ballots) into the main article Bids for Olympic Games (and probably also chunk in the recently AfD-listed List of cities that failed in their bids to host the Olympics). It's taken quite some time because I've been trying to reference/confirm that ALL cities really did put a bid (this is harder for older Games). So far I've done the Summer bids, the other 50% are pending. The weather getting really Summery so I'm feeling less willing to stay home grabbed to my keyboard :P

As for Andrwsc's edits: I love the way the brackets look so clean and self-explanatory on those judo event subpages, so keep going that way. The other tasks I already knew about and gave my approval as well ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 16:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I settled down in the Stockholm of the year 1912. I tried to bring these pages to the standard layout as I learned to do from Andrwsc. I tried to improve the Football at the 1912 Summer Olympics with all squads and all matches played. So that this article consists now of four pages. Also I tried my luck with a bracket template on this page. But also all other sports were in progress like Rowing or Water polo. Which is sometimes not as easy, but mercifully Parutakupiu helped me out of my despair. :) Also the particular events, like Equestrian at the 1912 Summer Olympics - Individual eventing or Gymnastics at the 1912 Summer Olympics - Men's team were expanded after the brilliant starts from Jonel!

Sometimes I step back to the London from 1908 or I think forward to Antwerp. And on the way I try to give the competitors there place in history, and create stuby-bios for them. With great help from non-member: Gh.

If we start something about categories or "Nation at the year Olympics", let me know I would like to help! Thanks and :) Doma-w 20:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Some of you may have seen some of the recent work I've done to individual event pages for judo at the 2004 Summer Olympics and taekwondo at the 2004 Summer Olympics. I've used the now-common tournament bracket templates on those pages to replace a list of match results. I think the end result is much clearer way to represent the tournament and to follow an individual's progress.

However, there are a few style issues that would be nice to have consensus on before I continue:

1. Do we want to try and include the full name of each competitor at least once in the bracket? Because of size limitations, I think there are two options. We could provide the full name for the first round cells, but simply use the family name for all later rounds, or we could simply use the family name for all rounds. There is not enough room for brackets of 4 or 5 rounds to include the full name each time.
2. Do we want to wikilink the names for every instance, or just for the first round? In general, I advocate wikilinking all name occurances on sports result pages because those kinds of pages are unlike linear prose. Some readers may start at the final and work backwards towards the heats. Therefore, we should make it easy for those readers to link to the athlete or nation article. However, for tournament bracket, the "physical distance" on the rendered page between the first and last round is quite small, with a direct path drawn between them. Therefore, there isn't as compelling a reason to wikilink every instance of the name.
3. As a followup point, should we provide the country code and wikilink to the nation article for each round, or just show the flag icon for second and later rounds?
4. Do we want to highlight (in bold) the winner of each match, or just rely on the flow of the bracket and numerical scores to indicate the winners and losers?

To help illustrate these style questions, here is the same result bracket showing the different style variations:

	Round of 16				Quarterfinals				Semifinals				Finals
	Povetkin ( RUS)	RSCOS
	Rozhnov ( BUL)	1:37 (4)			Povetkin ( RUS)	31
	Köber ( GER)	18			Dildabekov ( KAZ)	15
	Dildabekov ( KAZ)	28							Povetkin ( RUS)	31
	Oluokun ( NGR)	13							Cammarelle ( ITA)	19
	Cammarelle ( ITA)	29			Cammarelle ( ITA)	23
	Mazikin ( UKR)	23			Mazikin ( UKR)	21
	Apanasionak ( BLR)	5											Povetkin ( RUS)	WO
	Aly ( EGY)	32											Aly ( EGY)	L
	Takam ( CMR)	19			Aly ( EGY)	19
	Bisbal ( PUR)	17			Jaksto ( LTU)	11
	Jaksto ( LTU)	26							Aly ( EGY)	18
	Núñez ( CUB)	18							Núñez ( CUB)	16
	Saidov ( UZB)	13			Núñez ( CUB)	21
	Estrada ( USA)	30			Estrada ( USA)	7
	Hawke ( TGA)	11

	Round of 16				Quarterfinals				Semifinals				Finals
	Alexander Povetkin ( RUS)	RSCOS
	Sergey Rozhnov ( BUL)	1:37 (4)			Povetkin	31
	Sebastian Köber ( GER)	18			Dildabekov	15
	Mukhtarkhan Dildabekov ( KAZ)	28							Povetkin	31
	Gbenga Oluokun ( NGR)	13							Cammarelle	19
	Roberto Cammarelle ( ITA)	29			Cammarelle	23
	Oleksii Mazikin ( UKR)	23			Mazikin	21
	Aliaksandr Apanasionak ( BLR)	5											Povetkin	WO
	Mohamed Aly ( EGY)	32											Aly	L
	Carlos Takam ( CMR)	19			Aly	19
	Victor Bisbal ( PUR)	17			Jaksto	11
	Jaroslav Jaksto ( LTU)	26							Aly	18
	Michel López Núñez ( CUB)	18							Núñez	16
	Rustam Saidov ( UZB)	13			Núñez	21
	Jason Estrada ( USA)	30			Estrada	7
	Ma'afu Hawke ( TGA)	11

Comments welcome! Andrwsc 20:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, first of all great work! Really great work! Thank you!

ad 1. To include the full name would be very nice, but then the bracket, as we can see, does not look very compact any more. And also the complete style does not look very nice. (The last name under the flag; and a short name like Victor Bisbal needs only one row) And, however, it is very easy to see the full name. So if we only have the opportunity to show the full name in this style I would say no.

ad 2. Of course, I would really prefer to wikilink every name. First it looks nicer and second if I have already clicked on the competitor the colour changes for very, so it is easy to see in each column, which one I have already seen. And it is no more work for the editor to link all - only a copy.

ad 3. Nearly the same. Only a copy and it looks much nicer.

ad 4. Yes. I would prefer to highlight the winner and his points. It's much easier to recognize the winner.

To sum up I would say, that the first one looks - perfect to me. :)

PS: I used the Template:Round16 on the Football at the 1912 Summer Olympics to have the possibility to shown also the date and the venue and to have a third place match. So maybe we will have same little modifications for team sports? Doma-w 22:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Parutakupiu's opinion

1. We should use full name for first occurrence ("alright, nice to meet you") and only family name for the following rounds (saving space);
2. I tend to wikilink all occurrences of the same (notable) link in tables, so I'd go for your thought too in here;
3. I don't have a fixed opinion on this, but perhaps the country code should stay for consistency's sake...
4. Highlight! Fastest, clearest way to evidence a winner ;)

In the end, I think it would be nice something like this:

	Round of 16				Quarterfinals				Semifinals				Finals
	Alexander Povetkin ( RUS)	RSCOS
	Sergey Rozhnov ( BUL)	1:37 (4)			Povetkin ( RUS)	31
	Sebastian Köber ( GER)	18			Dildabekov ( KAZ)	15
	Mukhtarkhan Dildabekov ( KAZ)	28							Povetkin ( RUS)	31
	Gbenga Oluokun ( NGR)	13							Cammarelle ( ITA)	19
	Roberto Cammarelle ( ITA)	29			Cammarelle ( ITA)	23
	Oleksii Mazikin ( UKR)	23			Mazikin ( UKR)	21
	Aliaksandr Apanasionak ( BLR)	5											Povetkin ( RUS)	WO
	Mohamed Aly ( EGY)	32											Aly ( EGY)	L
	Carlos Takam ( CMR)	19			Aly ( EGY)	19
	Victor Bisbal ( PUR)	17			Jaksto ( LTU)	11
	Jaroslav Jaksto ( LTU)	26							Aly ( EGY)	18
	Michel López Núñez ( CUB)	18							Núñez ( CUB)	16
	Rustam Saidov ( UZB)	13			Núñez ( CUB)	21
	Jason Estrada ( USA)	30			Estrada ( USA)	7
	Ma'afu Hawke ( TGA)	11

Notice I left the "team-width" parameter in blank, so it seems it avoids text-wraping on the first column... at least on my browser (Firefox). Don't know if it's the same on others. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 22:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Jared's response

I was writing my responses and I was edit conflicted! So I haven't read any of the above, but here's what I would say:

Hey there. I'll respond to your questions:

1. I think it's fine if just the family name is used in the whole template. The way I see it, it looks just as nice if not nicer, and any of the people that are actually important enough to have content written about them would be fully named and linked in the article text anyway, nevermind the fact that clicking on the link will do much in the same thing. It's better not to have to worry about breaking issues.
2. I would probably say Wikilink all of the instances in the template. We have the template for that, and like you said, people might look from the right to left. I think that it looks nice and doesn't add any other problems, but this I don't really have a strong opinion either way on.
3. Again, I kind of said this above, but I think we should have the whole shebang in each cell for continuity and just because the template works so nicely.
4. I guess this point of bolding is your call. I'm not sure if it's totally necessary, but it does clearly and quickly show who won that match, so I don't think it will either hurt or add any compelling benefits to the template.

So yeah, that's that. I think the templates are a good idea. They look nice and eliminate clutter (when used properly). _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  22:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

In response to the ones above now that I have read them, I like all preceding comments, and I think that the third mock up is the best. That works. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  22:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Andrwsc's followup

Well, at least among the four of us it looks like we have consensus for the original style I used on the judo and taekwondo pages, so thanks to all for the quick feedback.

Also see Tennis at the 2004 Summer Olympics - Men's singles for another bracket style. Those results use the full name in every cell, which looks good, but they do not have the link (through the country code) to the appropriate nation article, which is something we are trying to consistently include.

For Doma-w, as for your updates to the football pages, those look perfect to me. The standard format for team sports brackets and results is well-defined, as used on World Cup pages etc., so I think your use of those templates for brackets and match results is spot-on. I think there are some variations with respect to individual sports, and I just want to make sure that all the Olympic articles are at least consistent. Andrwsc 23:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops, missed Jared's second edit. Perhaps we have consensus for Parutakupiu's version, with the full name for the first round, but otherwise identical to what we have now. I think some brackets may have issues with 1024x768 screens, which is the smallest I like to design for, but I will check this out. Andrwsc 23:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I would say just the family name if fine, but I wouldn't care either way. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  23:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I like Parutakupiu's version. This looks very fine and the width is not really more. Then there were all parameters included. Doma-w 00:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Bolding the winners?

Just a minor clarification, but for consistency, should we get in the practice of bold-facing the winners of each match in the bracket, along with that person's score(s)? I think that it's helpful, but I noticed that I haven't been doing it myself. So just out of curiosity, I want to know what others think before I do it. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  15:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I've created Youth Olympic Games; I've meant to do it since the end of April but I hadn't had the time. Anyway, I just thought I'd tell you in case you had no idea the IOC planned to do this; I thought it pretty interesting. Expand it or add images, etc, if you want. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  14:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I am very sorry to tell you, that 20 international caps didn't save the footballer Henning Svensson from speedy deletion. So Sweden is missing one player from the Olympic squad in 1912. RIP Doma-w 01:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You can always bring this up at Wikipedia:Deletion review. The WP notability standards for Olympic athletes have been established to include those that have competed at the "highest level" of amateur sport. However, since Svensson didn't actually compete, I can see some gray area for debate. If you can find any references for other tournaments in which he did compete, satisfying WP:BIO notability guidelines, then I think you could get the article restored. Andrwsc 16:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have created four templates for this tournament. Sweden, Germany and Denmark survived. Sorrily the Netherlands disappeared. Once more a speedy deletion? I can not find it any more, now all the Dutch players have a fine, nice red link on their pages. It's a hard life for Olympic footballers (and Olympic bronze medalists) on wikipedia. Better not to waste my time any more? Doma-w 13:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The others look to be up for the chop as well... see Deletion log for Netherlands 1912 and the discussion it references Paulbrock 15:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The consensus of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football is that these squad templates are only created for World Cup squads. I have seen several similar templates for European Championship squads fail to survive TfD, so I'm not surprised that Olympic tournament templates get targeted too. Andrwsc 16:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

If 20 international caps are not enough - then I have no idea what I can do. Wiki has hundreds of players without a single cap. Also I don't think, that there was professional football in Sweden 1912, so they all were "amateurs". But the meaning is different from today... With 20 caps he was a hero in the 1910s.

In 1912 the Olympic tournament was the most important football tournament in the world! It will take another 18 years to see the first WC! Anyway, now I know, that football starts at 1930 and before there was nothing.

Also it seems really to be better not to waste my time anymore on Olympic football. Better to do some tug-of-war competitions or to create some racquets players. :) Doma-w 16:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, with 20 international caps, surely that would pass any notability standards for football players! I really suggest you bring it up at WP:DRV instead of giving up. But I would also keep track of the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football on squad templates before creating more of them for Olympic teams. Andrwsc 16:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh no, of course I will not create any more templates. Especially for football. :) There are really enough other Olympic sports. Doma-w 18:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I restored Henning Svensson (why waste time?), and discussion will take place on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henning Svensson. Your templates, on the other hand, may face a more bleak future.. Punkmorten 11:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring. Doma-w 12:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

This user AnonEMouse has put an AfD tag on several "Nation at the Year Summer Olympics" type articles ( deletion page with a list of other tagged articles), just because they're almost-empty stubs for small nations which didn't win anything at those Games, therefore "lack notability". Shouldn't he at least have warned this project? Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 17:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Without any comment. Only with a shake of the head. Well, it's much easier to delete than to create. Doma-w 18:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

In this case: to expand. But Andrwsc has already shown that it wasn't that difficult to add content. He was in a hurry but I bet he wouldn't be if he knew the ammount of work required for this project. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 18:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The ones that are for the deletion don't realize that there are hundreds of pages like that, just waiting for their turn to be completed. If they just knew the work they're expecting in order to stick to their idea and delete all that isn't "noteworthy"... But they won't be forcing me to go on a article expansion ride, just because of deletion threats. In the end, what's the point of deleting articles that will eventually be recreated when their turn is reached? Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 19:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like I picked in the right day to stop by and check out the project. Sorry that I haven't been around much lately. A job search, family craziness and a new obsession has taken my attention to other places. -- Sue Anne 00:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I have some questions/problems:

•   Spain is this the right flag for Spain from 1900 to 1928?

•   Trinidad and Tobago
•   Bulgaria
•   Fiji
•   Afghanistan Sorry, but I have no idea how to repair this.

•   Belize This is from 1976, showing the new flag and the new name Belize. The name was changed to Belize in 1973, but the flag was changed in 1981. So I think here we still need the old flag from British-Honduras with the name Belize?

Also there are some differences in the lists of the "participating nations":

Summer games	infobox	list of nations	reason
1960	83	84	Suriname did not compete
1964	93	94	Libya did not compete
1968	112	110	Mali and Tanzania did compete
1972	121	123	Ceylon and Guinea did not compete
1976	92	91	Cameron did compete before the boycott, like Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia
1980	80	81	Liberia did not compete, there were seven track and field athletes entered, but not a single one competed.
1984	140	141	Libya did not compete
1988	159	160	Brunei did not compete
1992	169	173	Afghanistan, Brunei, Liberia, and Somalia did not compete

Thanks in advance! Doma-w 12:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, if we use the {{ flag}} template instead of {{ flagIOC}}, for the same time periods:

• 1785–1931: {{flag|Spain|1785}} →   Spain (different flag; the one you showed is a merchant ensign).
• 1980–1992: {{flag|Afghanistan|1980}} →   Afghanistan.
• Belize doesn't have any other variant flag pre-1981. The article Flag of Belize says it was used since 1950, but only officially adopted in 1981.
• The others are really missing and are the same used by both templates.

— Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 13:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

{{flagIOC|ESP|1928 Summer}} shows the wrong flag. Someone changed this a few days ago, because there was always the right flag.

{{flagIOC|AFG|1988 Summer}} showns this:   Afghanistan

British Honduras changed its name to Belize in 1973, but the flag from British-Honduras was still in use up to 1981, so {{flagIOC|BIZ|1976 Summer}} shows the wrong flag. In 1976 the flag was , but the name was Belize. Doma-w 13:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've (fixed some templates/re-uploaded flags) and now they appear like this:

• {{flagIOC|BIZ|1976 Summer}} →   Belize
• {{flagIOC|AFG|1988 Summer}} →   Afghanistan
• {{flagIOC|FIJ|1968 Summer}} →   Fiji
• {{flagIOC|ESP|1928 Summer}} →   Spain
• {{flagIOC|BUL|1968 Summer}} →   Bulgaria

Wow! Perfect! Thanks!

And I had to correct 1972:

Summer games	infobox	list of nations	reason
1972	121	123	Guinea did not compete and 122 nations did competed

Doma-w 15:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

As for the missing flags, some folks have recently deleted some images that came from the Flags Of The World (FOTW) website and therefore lack the proper license to be used freely on Wikipedia. Yesterday I had planned to post some requests for free SVG images to be created by the folks who like to do that sort of thing, but didn't get around to it. As for the participating nations, I thought I had taken great care to make sure those lists were 100% correct, but it doesn't hurt to have extra eyes looking at it! I will investigate too. Andrwsc 15:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I re-uploaded some of the deleted flags but added a public domain rationale, since the FOTW website clearly states that all displayed content is free, unless otherwise stated. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 16:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I did some digging around in the official reports, and discovered these:

• 1960 — on page 48 of volume 2, there is a photo of the Suriname team in the opening ceremonies. The only athlete mentioned in the results is S. Esajas, who was a non-starter in heat 9 of the men's 800 metres. I think our precedent on Wikipedia in this case is to say that the country did participate (after all, they marched in the opening ceremonies, which I would consider one form of participation) even though the athlete withdrew, was injured, etc. We did the same thing for Virgin Islands at the 2006 Winter Olympics.
• 1964 — same situation: page 17 of volume 2 shows a photo of Libya in the opening ceremonies. The only athlete mentioned is Suliman Fighi Hassan, shown as not starting the marathon.
• 1968 — I found a single boxer from Mali (Soungalo Bagayogo, in light-heavyweight), so I have created Mali at the 1968 Summer Olympics. I couldn't find anything for Tanzania, not even in the list of country codes on pp. 15-16 of volume 3 of the official reports (this list says "participating nations", but includes 13 nations that didn't). What is your source for Tanzania?
• 1972 — you are correct about Guinea. I'm not sure why I included them, since volume 3 is so helpful with a complete listing all all competitors, sorted by NOC code. I have speedy deleted Guinea at the 1972 Summer Olympics. (it's handy to be an admin sometimes...)
• 1976 — you are correct about Cameroon: they had a team in the cycling road time trial, which is the only recorded result before they withdrew. All other instances of CMR in the results are the "walkover" results from boxing and judo. I have created Cameroon at the 1976 Summer Olympics.

I haven't looked at 1980+, but based on your descriptions, it sounds like they are similar situations to SUR in 1960 and LBA in 1964. Is that the case? If so, I think they should remain as "participated", but their articles need a similar intro to what was written for Virgin Islands in 2006. Andrwsc 18:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Update: I looked at 1992 and you are correct. AFG, BRU, LBR and SOM appear in the official results but as having no entries (different from having entries that did not compete). I have speedy deleted those four articles and updated the main article for 1992. Andrwsc 22:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Second update: I agree with your comments for 1984 and 1992, so I have speedy deleted those articles. Brunei in 1988 is an interesting case. Their delegation consisted of 1 official, and no athletes. The official marched in the opening ceremonies, so I would say that they did "participate" in the Games. It's also notable because this is the first participation ever by Brunei. Perhaps some sort of footnote could be added to the list of the main article, but I do not want to delete the Brunei article. Andrwsc 23:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Brunei in 1988 is very interesting. Kamper writes: Brunei takes part in the opening ceremonies, but only send one "observer" (Yes, he used this word) to the games and no athlethe. Doma-w 23:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

News

In general:

• We decided to count nations, like Suriname in 1960, which did not compete in an event, but were entered and participated in the opening ceremonies.

In 1960 then we had to correct the infobox to 84 nations, but maybe we can write 83+1 and add a footnote, and also the same footnote to Suriname? Because I am not really happy to show these nations as "full" participating nations. In 1900 Summer Olympics we have four nations, which really competed and in the case of Luxembourg won a gold medal, but they were not counted. So in 1960 we count a nation, which we know that has not competed (Surimane), but in 1900 we do not count a nation, which we know that has won a gold medal? Maybe it will be possible to find a way.

In 1964 the infobox had to shown 93+1 (for Libya)

1968: still missing Tanzania. :) I know, it is very hard to find, but I have the same source: Vol.3 Athletics: Norman Chihota 100 metres/heat 9 and 200 metres/heat 1 (page 521 and 522) Claver Kamanya 400 metres/round 1/heat 1, round 2/heat 1 and semi-final 1 (page 521 and 522) John Akhwari marathon 57. and last finisher! :) (page 532)

Boxing: Middleweight (- 75 kg) Titos Simba What a pity! Maybe he was the second best boxer in this tournament! Losing in round 1 to Christopher Finnegan (GBR) - becoming Olympic champion and gold medailst! (page 609)

1972: the infobox says 121, but our list has 122 members. So what to do?

1976 perfect

1980: With Liberia we have 81 - the infobox says 80. Maybe also a footnote?

Doma-w 23:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Good catch with TAN in 1968. I have created that article and added it to the appropriate navigation boxes. As for the numbers in the infoboxes, I would prefer to see a single number with a footnote (e.g. so that it looks like "84 ^[1]" instead of "83+1". Footnotes are your friend - they can explain any strange discrepancy we uncover! Andrwsc 23:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I like footnotes and here they are really necessary. Because now our lists differ from the most of others. :) Doma-w 00:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought you were going to attach the footnote to the infobox at the top of the page. Anyway, I've updated those articles to change the section footnotes into explanatory sentences in the section's introductory paragraphs. I've also added the numbers of competitors where the official reports had those numbers already tabulated. The end result is fairly clear, I think, handling even cases like BRU in 1988. Let me know if you are ok with my changes! Andrwsc 22:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

You will need to incorporate the Olympic Games of 1859, 1870, and 1875. The two participating countries were Greece and the Ottoman Empire. It only takes two countries to make an event international. Nipsonanomhmata 20:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Which one do we prefer?

Olympic medal record Men's basketball 1984 Los Angeles Team

Olympic medal record Men's basketball 1984 Los Angeles Team competition

Olympic medal record Men's basketball 1984 Los Angeles United States

And which one do we prefer in this case?

Olympic medal record Representing   Soviet Union Men's basketball 1988 Seoul Team competition Representing   Lithuania 1992 Barcelona Team competition 1996 Atlanta Team competition

Olympic medal record Men's Basketball 1988 Seoul USSR 1992 Barcelona Lithuania 1996 Atlanta Lithuania

Thanks! Doma-w 12:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Basketball isn't the best sport to use as example because it's an obvious single event team sport. Anyway, I'd go for the 1st option; the 2nd has an unnecessary "competition" word, and the 3rd doesn't show the event that awarded the medal (for other multi-event sports it is better to state it), besides the nationality is given on the article itself.

From the second set, I go for the first option again, but without the "competition". Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 17:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I've never liked "Team competition" to describe the event for team sports, so just "Team" is better. I've also seen "Men's team" or "Women's team". We should pick something and stick to it.

The usage of {{ MedalCountry}} has been discussed from time to time on its talk page. I think consensus was to include it only for situations where an athlete has competed for different countries at different Games (as in this example), but I've also seen it for single-Games medal boxes. In either case, I wouldn't deviate from that "standard" by changing to the second example.

You also need a slight correction to the bottom left example. The {{ MedalSport}} line ought to be above the first MedalCountry. Andrwsc 18:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

"Men's team" or "Women's team" would be the best, but the {{ MedalSport}} row already show the gender, so it gets awkward to figure out what to put on that cell... Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 18:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, of course the sport must be on top, this was my fault.

I agree, that the {{ MedalCountry}} makes sense, when a sportsman competed for more then one nation. There it is necessary, in other cases it can be there but must not.

To the text, which exlains the event: the nationality is shown in the text, the sport and the gender is already shown in the box. So we have "Team" or "Team competition" or a new idea!? Or is "Team event" better? By the way, I have created ALL team sport medalists with "Team competition" :-( I have seen this term used for many medalists in team sports and so I have also taken this one.

But the reason why I asked are these basketball players: Don Barksdale, Ralph Beard, Vince Boryla, Alex Groza, and Wah Wah Jones. Today I changed their medalbox from "United States" to "Team competition", but only minutes later they were changed back to "United States". (Basketball fans prefer the nation!? - unknown why) Doma-w 21:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: at Template talk:MedalTop, new discussions are underway about what to do with the current setup of templates. Join the discussion if you want to help out! _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  15:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

On the new created pages like: Gymnastics at the 2004 Summer Olympics - Women's balance beam, the medalists are shown:

Gold	Cătălina Ponor   Romania
Silver	Carly Patterson   United States
Bronze	Alexandra Eremia   Romania

Now I am a little bit confused, because I thought we will shown them like this:

Gold	Silver	Bronze
Michel Théato   Luxembourg	Emile Champion   France	Ernst Fast   Sweden

Isn't the easiest way to shown them with {{Medallists}}?

The result can be seen e.g. here: Field hockey at the 1928 Summer Olympics.

Thanks! Doma-w 12:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The vertical format is far more flexible because it handles all the instances where the medalists are not just one each of gold, silver, bronze. For example, gymnastics events often have situations with 2 gold + 1 bronze, 1 gold + 2 silver, etc. I've even seen one event with 2 gold and 3 bronze! Those events are awkward to handle with the horizontal format.

Additionally, the vertical format looks better for events with small teams. For example, in pairs events, if you put both names on the top line and the nation on the second line in each table cell, the horizontal format is quite wide.

As for "large" team events (e.g. more than 8 members), I have an alternate table format in mind (as per a previous talk page discussion), but haven't rolled it out yet. The closest example to what I have in mind is on Field hockey at the 1992 Summer Olympics. That would replace the "medal summary table" on the main page for team sports. Andrwsc 16:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all: I like them all! Also this version Field hockey at the 1992 Summer Olympics looks very good.

Maybe you can have a look at: Rowing at the 1908 Summer Olympics a horizontal version with two bronze medalists in each event. Or here: Rowing at the 1912 Summer Olympics a version with two bronze in a single event. (Here shown on overview pages, but the same can be used on event pages) Also nice!?

And this page: Rowing at the 1912 Summer Olympics - Men's eights on top with a horizontal version and at the bottom of the page with a special kind of vertical version.

And we also have this versions: Rowing at the 1908 Summer Olympics - Men's coxless pairs or Sailing at the 1908 Summer Olympics - 8 metre class. Also nice!? Doma-w 21:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, Rowing at the 1908 Summer Olympics is a bit of an oddball, because normally we use additional rows for multiple medalists of the same event (e.g. Judo at the 2004 Summer Olympics or Speed skating at the 1924 Winter Olympics). Another good examples is Athletics at the 1908 Summer Olympics with respect to high jump, pole vault, etc. In the 1908 rowing situation, since there were two bronze for every event and they were multiple-person teams, I can see the rationale for not using the standard layout.

As for those last two examples, honestly I don't like them. I find the coloring of the entire table rows to be distracting and ugly.

As you are beginning to see, we have a huge variety of formats that got introduced over time on Olympic pages. One of my biggest motivators on this project is to converge upon consistent style across all these pages. Obviously it is a work in progress! Sometime soon I think we ought to start documenting our "best practices", with pointers to the best examples of each kind of page. Andrwsc 22:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Such documentation would be wonderful. I tend to forget which way I'm supposed to do things whenever I have time to do serious work, and so I tend to copy whatever format I see first. Or create something new, which doesn't tend to work out too well, since I have essentially zero aesthetic sense. Which worked just fine when it felt like I was the only person working on Olympics pages, but not so much now that all of you wonderful people are here too. Which essentially means that I depend on you to clean up my formatting and make things look pretty! But give me one centralised place to look, and I'll gladly copy that format. When I find time to work on Olympics pages, which is unfortunately too rare these days... -- Jonel | Speak 22:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Amen to that! We have to get some time to start drafting up some docs/guidelines concerning layout, article naminga and hierarchy, etc. But we still also have so many holes to fill *sigh* Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 22:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

So I guess we are sticking with the vertical format. uh.. right? Perakhantu 22:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

That's what I'm consistently using! Andrwsc 23:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

But still there is not "official" decision and I still prefer the horizontal version... :o/ Doma-w 02:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Please have a look at: Stanley Nantais and Talk:Stanley Nantais This is a Canadian basketball player. He was in the squad for the Berlin Games, but he did not play in a single match and the IOC medal database did not list him as medalist. So the medalbox and the "cat:Olympic silver medalists for Canada" had to be deleted? But then the discussion will continue? Doma-w 21:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Could that be the worst Olympic logo ever?!? Sheesh. Andrwsc 18:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Haha! I'm one of veeeeery few that don't hate it. I don't love it either. It's a shocker alright and people's intense and harsh reactions so far (there's already an anti-logo online petition with +4000 signatures!) show they were not expecting such an untraditional Olympic logo. But what people (Londoners and British mostly) are resenting the most is that it has very little to do with the city, the nation and the Olympic Games themselves. That's what you get by giving them smooth torch/flame or brushed running athletes logos for the past Olympiads :P

I witnessed the logo's online launch and when I saw the promotional videos I immediately associated the logo with the Games concept that gave the Olympics to London. Funny enough, I didn't see the stylized "2012" right away, but a stylized planisphere, which could relate to London 2012's intention of staging a Global Games instead of another "London Games". Maybe it was only me, because LOCOG didn't specify this idea on their press release. Perhaps they should have so as to give the logo a deeper meaning that people aren't seeing now.

Anyway, in a few months (surely years) this will be forgotten and people will get used to the logo. And the London Olympics won't be suddenly bad because of a logo. I actually believe that the whole graphic brand surrounding the logo will make it look less harsh. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 18:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Note that the petition is now well over 10,000 (myself included). It looks like something that would represent some sort of 2012 Olympics video games or something, definitely not anything as stately as the Olympics. I, as well, did not even see the 2012 at first. Take a look at some of the alternates sent in to BBC → here. I personally really like the first one, and the concept for number 8 is also very good. I'm not usually one to hate things, but I certainly would hope that the LOCOG will change their logo. Maybe it's just the color, though. But I really don't think so. _└ ^Jared_┘^┌ _t^┐  19:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

10.000?! Didn't check it for the past hours... The LOCOG officials must have their ears burning! Hahaha! I don't believe there will be a change (not after they've spent the ridiculous amount of £400.000 for a logo!) but I don't dismiss a LOCOG reaction to these... widespread reactions :P Oh, and of all those suggestions to BBC, #1 was the only decent one :P

But... was Munich's logo "Olympic"?... ;) Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 19:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

It's now already at over 12000! I really don't like it either, and with pink color and block-style shapes, I don't think I'll get used to it very soon. My name is on the petition. Reywas92 ^{Talk Review me} 20:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, my name is not because I don't hate it. But even if I did, I wouldn't sign that petition because it's hopeless (especially an online petition with all its credibility flaws). This is the London Games emblem and that's that. Nobody should expect a turn back from LOCOG. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 21:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

United States at the 1936 Summer Olympics shows the gymnast Alfred Joachim as flag bearer, but there are same sources which report the water polo player Wally O'Connor as flag bearer. Do we have any further information? Thanks. Doma-w 10:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)