Olympics Project‑class

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 Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

WikiProject Olympics was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on February 2010.

This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 23 July 2012.

This WikiProject has been mentioned by a media organization: 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.

Olympic Games Paris 99 days left 2024 Summer Milan & Cortina 659 days left 2026 Winter Los Angeles 1548 days left 2028 Summer TBD 2118 days left 2030 Winter

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]

Hello, just cross posting this discussion [1]

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. _wjemather^{please 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. _wjemather^{please 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. _wjemather^{please 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]

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 — MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mark Phillips#Requested move 27 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Matthew Dunn#Requested move 27 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that the 2020 articles use a lowercase x for 3x3 basketball article titles, however the 2024 article links are using a multiplication symbol for 3×3 articles – some of which have been created. We should be consistent, but what do we want to use?

Lowercase x

• Basketball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 3x3 qualification
• Basketball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's 3x3 qualification
• Basketball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 3x3 tournament
• Basketball at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's 3x3 tournament
• Draft:Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 3x3 tournament, draft article(!)

Multiplication sign

• Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 3×3 qualification
• Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 3×3 qualification
• Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 3×3 tournament, used in templates/article links, currently a redirect
• Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 3×3 tournament, used in templates/article links, currently a redirect

Hoof Hearted (talk) 14:05, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One would think that we would mirror the main article, which is 3x3 basketball. I believe that is the lowercase x but I could be mistaken. Primefac (talk) 14:09, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable, and I think is the easier way to go for fixing article names. It appears from this edit that the lowercase x is the consensus for naming convention. If no one objects I'll start renaming. Hoof Hearted (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection here. Noting the first sentence of the main article has a sourced claim that it's "pronounced three-ex-three" as opposed to three-by-three. So if that's correct, it supports using the letter x instead of the math symbol. DB1729^talk 17:39, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn’t do that. It’s one of those issues where it is best to go through a requested move to flush out where the consensus lies. Schwede66 17:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The International Olympic Committee has apparently recognised them as part of the official program. The only medal table updated so far is the one for Berlin 1936 (I wonder why), where Germany's lead is now even more substantial. I suggest bringing all the other medal tables for editions 1912 through 1948 in line with the official IOC website. You can easily check the medal totals via these links: 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1936, 1948. 109.71.177.2 (talk) 15:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Individual athletes in the art competitions are also listed with the medals themselves.(e.g. Paul Höffer - Olympics.com)

The justification for example in Art competitions at the 1936 Summer Olympics,

"At the time, medals were awarded to these artists, but art competitions are no longer regarded as official Olympic events by the International Olympic Committee. These events do not appear in the IOC medal database, and these totals are not included in the IOC's medal table for the 1936 Games".

is actually invalid and would either have to be revised or the medals should actually be included in all medal tables on Wiki.Nevertheless, a consensus on this would be desirable, as this would also affect the articles of the nations concerned (xxx_at_the olympics). Miria~01 (talk) 13:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was just reading the Individual Neutral Athletes at the 2024 Summer Olympics, when i saw that some user(s) have been adding a "from" column in every sport's section to differentiate the Russian athletes from Belarusian ones. This also includes flags of both the countries. But doesn't it violates the neutral nature of the this team. I do not think we should include the country from which these athletes hail from and especially not the flags. Also, are we going to list ANI as a precursor of Russia at the all time medal table. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 06:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will bow to those with wider knowledge on this project, but just to observe that going back the Unified Team of the 90s, Wikipedia has always shown the national identity of competing athletes from such "groups". doktorb _words^deeds 07:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The indication of nationality there is intended to reflect the value of the information rather than questioning the nature of this special team. See also Independent Olympians at the Olympic Games and Independent Olympic Participants at the 1992 Summer Olympics, which was historically a similar case. For the question of the Top ten medal rankings (incl. precursor) in all-time: I would include this if Russian athletes win medals under the IOC code (AIN), as many statistics, with an asterisk for thins case, will probably be found that way. Possible Belarusian medalists should be ignored there. But it is not a strong case, whether medals from athletes under (AIN) should apply to Russia in this table, and I would understand a rejection. Miria~01 (talk) 10:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But flag icons here are shown as the nation represented, and they represent no country at all. Zip. No way that flag icon should be there. I don't even think we should be showing from where they hail since those two countries are banned from participating, but certainly the flags should not be there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for example at 2024 Australian Open – Men's singles, those flag icons should certainly be omitted. --DB1729^talk 13:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes, the flags are really not necessary. But I would keep the information about nationality. Miria~01 (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can see an argument for keeping the nationality (w/o flag icons) on this particular article in question. It's informative as to whether they happen to be from Russia or Belarus. But in Olympic results articles in general, there should be no mention of nationality at all. DB1729^talk 13:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Olympic results articles will likely use ((FlagIOCathlete)) which calls the AIN flag. Primefac (talk) 13:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In keeping the strange "from" info for this article, does that mean we should add a column for other articles that have athletes who are "from" one country but compete for another? Look at Freestyle skiing at the 2022 Winter Olympics – Women's big air. The gold medal was won by Eileen Gu "from the United States." She represented China. I don't even see a footnote or mouseover for that, and I'm sure there are lots more than just her. It seems like a bad precedent to set for this one article. If they represent China, even though they are from the United States, that's all we need for the Olympics. If they represent no nation, that's good enough. Otherwise we'd need to create an article for all the athletes that have represented one nation while being "from" another nation. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be the only article where nationality ("from" should actually be changed to "nationality") is mentioned (same as here Independent Olympians at the Olympic Games (but w/o flags)). In all Olympic results articles (as Primefac stated) and medal tables only the AIN team name would be shown with the associated flag, same as here for e.g. Shooting at the 1992 Summer Olympics – Women's 10 metre air pistol, where only the (IOP) flag and team name for Šekarić is shown. Miria~01 (talk) 20:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think making this article a special case is not the best idea. And using "nationality" vs "from" is a very bad idea. The word nationality in connection with the Olympics, in any parameter, has a very distinct meaning, and it confuses the reader to add labels the Olympics refuse to use. These are independent athletes representing no country. If a reader wants to know more about the person they can click on the name link, or reference source, and find out. And this isn't the only article where this conversation should be taking place. We also have articles such as:

• Independent Olympic Participants at the 1992 Summer Olympics
• Individual Olympic Athletes at the 2000 Summer Olympics
• Independent Olympic Athletes at the 2012 Summer Olympics
• Independent Olympic Participants at the 2014 Winter Olympics
• Independent Olympic Athletes at the 2016 Summer Olympics
• Refugee Olympic Team at the 2016 Summer Olympics
• Olympic Athletes from Russia at the 2018 Winter Olympics
• IOC Refugee Olympic Team at the 2020 Summer Olympics
• Independent Olympians at the Olympic Games

and it could spill over into articles such as:

• Authorised Neutral Athletes
• Authorised Neutral Athletes at the 2017 World Championships in Athletics
• Authorised Neutral Athletes at the 2018 European Athletics Championships
• Authorised Neutral Athletes at the 2019 World Athletics Championships

So it's not just one article here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• As Fyunck points out, we have a dozen other articles where athletes 'from' various nations - who all competed at an event as neutral individuals representing no nation - are listed without mention of any nationality. It's clearly not confused any reader yet, and is neither vital information nor particularly useful information at the list articles in question. It seems unnecessary to add. Maybe some users will argue it's not necessary to remove if it's already been added, but if just for consistency it probably is best to remove it - before even getting into the debate of the athletes not belonging to any nation for the purposes of the IOC. Kingsif (talk) 23:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm pretty much neutral on including the country of origin for these athletes, and so I'm fine with removing it. Note that several of the articles listed by Fyunck do actually indicate a country. If for consistency, then removing the country should be considered for those articles as well? Also Fyunck, if wider participation is desired (and it would probably help) are you thinking posting notifications at the above articles' talk pages, or moving the discussion to a more visible place? DB1729^talk 23:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ping @Fyunck(click): to above comment. It doesn't look like there's any passionate views, really, so I'd just remove from all. Kingsif (talk) 23:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To be honest, I don't edit a lot of Olympic articles... I'm just trying to help with my experience on thousands of tennis articles. I gave the best insight I could and was thinking of leaving it to others with more Olympic editing tenacity. A couple of the articles I listed actually have some flags also... I'm saying they would also be affected by decisions here unless this is a one-off article. If people want me to mention this discussion on those article talk pages I can certainly point them here. More eyes are always welcome, especially from those that edit Olympic pages profusely, since they would be the ones that would have to deal with changes against consensus in the future. note - I just added a neutral mention of this discussion at each of the talk pages I listed. There could be more pages I missed but this might bring a couple more folks with viewpoints that could help. This is the type discussion where WikiProjects shine. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with one statement. The countries of the athletes for the respective games are always mentioned if they came from several countries. Otherwise the matter is naturally unnecessary.

several country origins (with nationality/flags)

one country origin (no nationality)

Independent Olympians at the Olympic Games (overview from 1992-2018 -> medalists Yugoslavia, Kuwait, RUS) Independent Olympic Participants at the 1992 Summer Olympics (-> Yugoslavia + N.Macedonia flags for Athletes) Unified Team at the 1992 Winter Olympics (several post-soviet states) Independent Olympic Athletes at the 2012 Summer Olympics (former Netherlands Antilles + South Sudan) Refugee Olympic Team at the 2016 Summer Olympics (several differnt) IOC Refugee Olympic Team at the 2020 Summer Olympics (several different)

Individual Olympic Athletes at the 2000 Summer Olympics (-> all from East Timor) Independent Olympic Participants at the 2014 Winter Olympics (-> all from India) Independent Olympic Athletes at the 2016 Summer Olympics (-> all from Kuwait) Olympic Athletes from Russia at the 2018 Winter Olympics (-> all from Russia)

Although I'm more of a supporter with the information of country origins, I wouldn't feel particularly bothered except for one article (overview of Independent Olympians), as one could argue that these always concern the explicit games (<NOC> at the <year> Summer/Winter Olympics).Miria~01 (talk) 03:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a non-clunky way to indicate what country they typically represent while still making clear that at this time they're not allowed to? Like perhaps "primary NOC" or something of that nature? Greenday61892 (talk) 14:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Typically" is an interesting word to use. There will be many athletes who have never been to the Olympics before, so they've never represented any NOC. Most who have been before will have represented one or another differently-named "not Russia" committees, because between doping etc. it's been a while since Russian athletes have been allowed to rep Russia in many competitions. So most if not all don't have any "typical" (taken as previous/most common) NOC to list. And since there's plenty athletes who represent NOCs of nations they weren't born in, we can't effectively assume and OR say that given the chance they would represent Russia or Belarus.

Main question should still be if a reader needs this information in this article, while considering the accuracy and consistency. Kingsif (talk) 21:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://olympics.com/en/olympic-games/barcelona-1992

Historical changes: ...The other ex-Soviet republics participated as a "unified team", although the winners were honoured under the flags of their own republics. At the opening ceremony, the flags of the former post-Soviet states were also be displayed and their names are be announced in the stadium -> Barcelona 1992 Opening Ceremony (Full Length) - youtube (linked with timestamp 1h18m8s for the Unified team in the IOC's official YouTube channel)

With regard to the refuge team, the countries of origin are also explicitly mentioned on the official IOC website.[2]

After research, I see it as very legitimate for both the Unified and the refugee team to mention their nationality or country of origin. In view of this, I am more strongly against a blanket judgment and each article should be considered individually according to the circumstances.

The Olympic Charter: Chapter 2, Rule 41

https://olympics.com/ioc/faq/competing-and-being-part-of-the-games/can-i-compete-for-another-team-than-my-nationality

A competitor who is a national of two or more countries at the same time may represent either one of them, as he may elect. However, after having represented one country in the Olympic Games, in continental or regional games or in world or regional championships recognised by the relevant IF, he may not represent another country unless certain circumstances.

So to speak, the athletes are tied to their country NOC long before the Olympic Games by their nationality. Only if they change their nationality (three-year waiting period not starting for the former country NOC in any games or championships) can they compete for a different country NOC. Some Russians changed their nationality and where even granted an exemption to the three-year waiting period by the IOC Executive Board[3] for the 2024 Games. In this sense, it is informative to know that these, athletes starting for (AIN) in 2024 with Belarusian or Russian passports [4], are not eligible to start for another country NOC. If they were, they would even have to compete for this.

To distinguish between the two countries can also be seen as informative, as readers easily see from the tables how many athletes of each country have passed the "rules" and whether there is perhaps a certain preponderance in the number overall and specifically in respective disciplines. Miria~01 (talk) 11:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion is to move Football at the 2024 Summer Olympics group tables from articles such as Group A, Group B, Group C & Group D to a common template in order to enable ((#invoke:Sports table)) functionalities such as showteam, in the same way other football competitions do.

Examples:

• ((2023–24 UEFA Champions League group tables))
• ((2023–24 UEFA Europa League group tables))
• ((2023–24 UEFA Europa Conference League group tables)).

In a different yet related issue, if the suggestion is accepted, the same restructuring could be done for the ((Football box)) templates in order to enable template functionalities such as bg, or even result if switched to ((Football box collapsible)). CLalgo (talk) 10:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a shift in the last few years away from having game-specific group templates such as these, instead using section transclusion to only require a single page to be updated across all pages. This still allows for the #invoke to be used (see, well, any of the previous editions) without the need for template calls. Primefac (talk) 11:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do know of the switch, but A) It didn't effect every football tournament article, as I've demonstrated, and B) It still disables module and template functionalities. I thank you for you comment, but is has no relation to the original post. CLalgo (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the "LST" can be tweaked and those features can be included. It's the first time someone said something like this so i am not sure how big the issue is and if this would warrant a template. Kante4 (talk) 15:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It can't be done through "LST" as far as I can tell and this isn't the first time it's brought to discussion. I can't remember when, but I remember a consensus reached for a specific change such as suggested after the new norm was adopted. CLalgo (talk) 19:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Came across Draft:Elizabeth Kleinheinz. She was at the 2024 Winter Youth Olympics but did not place, and the coverage mostly seems routine. I was planning on declining on TOOSOON-type rationale, but thought I would get opinions here first. Thanks! Primefac (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]