Shortcut
WikiProject iconSports Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
To-do list:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Implementation of consensus infobox changes for current seasons[edit]

At Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_172#Designating_current_seasons_in_infoboxes, I read clear consensus to use text rather than images to designate the current season. I went ahead and made the change at ((Infobox award)), but since I'm not a sports person, I'll leave the implementation for sports templates such as ((Infobox football league)) to you all here. ((u|Sdkb)) talk 21:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added a DNAU tag to this thread; feel free to remove it once you have finished implementation. ((u|Sdkb)) talk 20:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles on expansion of US major leagues[edit]

I noticed that Wikipedia has articles with the titles of Expansion of the National Basketball Association and Expansion of Major League Soccer but has Potential National Hockey League expansion and Potential Major League Baseball expansion. Wouldn't it make it easier for readers to use similar titles for these articles? (Also, there doesn't seem to be a similar article for the NFL.) 216.147.237.72 (talk) 19:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If they're all about potential expansion, then they should have consistent titles. And if they are then just "Expansion of ..." is very misleading to the reader, since it strongly implies a history of the expansion that has already occurred. As for no such article NFL, that's not a "problem" to fix, per se, it's just work no volunteers have done yet, assuming reliable sources for such work could be found, and there's no way to force the voluteers to do it. But suggesting such an article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American football might encourage the work. That said, it needs to stay within "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" policy, at all of these articles, and that can be challenging. There's a particular encyclopedic way to write about notable plans for the future and notable expected future events (and it's not the way a newspaper or blog would probably do it).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I went ahead and re-named them Expansion of the National Hockey League and Expansion of Major League Baseball to match Expansion of the National Basketball Association and Expansion of Major League Soccer. They cover not only potential expansions, but also previous expansions. As such, the artcile name should reflect that. Taken care of. - BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 00:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have started a discussion at Talk:Expansion of the National Hockey League#Page move. Expansion of the NHL is covered under History of organizational changes in the NHL. A one name-fits-all strategy is not necessary. isaacl (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BeFriendlyGoodSir: It's not the best route, making unilateral page moves. GoodDay (talk) 00:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now I know. Thank you, BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 02:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sports venues[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues has fallen inactive. Perhaps Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force should be reparented here? Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Facilities and venues task force  ? -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That sounds reasonable. I would do this as a WP:RM at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
An RM has been opened. See WT:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force for the discussion -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 05:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
checkY Now established at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Facilities and venues task force. The ((WPSPORTS)) banner now needs updating to flag the new TF -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Move Sports Venue TF to WPSPORTS from WPEVENTVENUES[edit]

An editor has requested that Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. This would make the primary project for the Sports venue task force WPSPORTS, and the inactive project WPEVENTVENUES the secondary project. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 05:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

checkY Now moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Facilities and venues task force. ((WPSPORT)) needs updating to account for the new TF. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 21:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assessment classes

Working on integrating this taskforce into the project banner (basics done already), but we have to decide if we want categories like Category:B-Class sports facilities articles, etc., generated for this, or for the articles to simply sort into Category:B-Class sports articles, etc. Thread open about this at Template talk:WikiProject Sports#Facilities and venues taskforce.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bodybuilding anyone?[edit]

Hello,

the bodybuilding space seems quite abandoned and someone recommended adding a Sports tag to my article.

I am looking to get Draft:Jo Lindner - Wikipedia published - I am wondering which detail or information would help getting it to noteworthyness...

Since his disease isn´t currently listed on Wikipedia I thought this might be something worth having, too.

I am of course not looking to outsource work or ask for a co-writer.

Thank you all. MarvDj (talk) 16:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps WP:BEAUTY or WP:FASHION or WP:MARTIALARTS or WP:HEALTH ? Modelling is covered under FASHION. Beauty competitions is covered under BEAUTY which would seem to be Mr. Olympia style competitions. Exercising is covered under HEALTH -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 23:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wouldn´t say a bodybuilding competition is the same as a beauty pageant... I guess he just doesn´t fit anywhere so to speak... MarvDj (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, it's definitely not a martial art. And some of what goes on is actually unhealthy.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps the scope of WPBEAUTY ought to expand to other such ideas of beauty competitions (ie. Mr. Olympia, RuPaul's Drag Race, not just Little Miss, Miss Universe, Mr. America, Mrs. America); or just try reviving Wikipedia:WikiProject Bodybuilding by expanding scope through merging it with other ideas of body definition (ie. the "beauty" in beauty pageants, "fitness" in fitness modelling, etc). -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 05:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would argue most sports can pose a health risk, American football for example... MarvDj (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And they're classified as sports not health topics.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thought about for several days, and I would continue to categorize such articles under sports, since bodybuilding is an intensely physical competitive (at least much of the time) activity; i.e., it is a sport, albeit not a contact one. Maybe WP:BEAUTY would also want to cover it, since bodybuilding events are also "pageants" pertaining to physical looks, but it's up to that wikiproject's partcipants how broad they want their scope to be. It's not a martial art, and is not a health (medicine) topic, though some articles like rhabdomyolysis may be both medical topics and peripherally related to bodybuilding. The bio in question above is not a health topic; a person having a health condition doesn't mean they get categorized as a medical subject for WP purposes.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Would you say the article as it is now would pass the notability threshold? I am afraid it might be deleted if it is declined once again. MarvDj (talk) 00:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Better discussed at the draft's talk page.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stadio Olimpico/2[edit]

Hello, I completely rewrote the article, using the sources I already used for writing the article in Italian. It is not a traduction from the Italian article, but a different writing.

First issue: as I told before, I am not a native speaker, thus a native might correct possible flaws.
Second issue: I would like to cooperate to make that a featured article but I just am not savvy about en.wiki customs on that matter. That apart, there are two sections of the article which are susbstantially, if not totally at all, unsourced: the average attendance by club by season, which source URL links to a spam site; and the concerts list which lacks totally of any source and aside from being unverifiable, is also in my opinion of very questionable utility. But, as I told, I don't know the customs here so I prefer that it's you who decides what to to with these sections. thanks -- Blackcat 23:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No-breaking sport scores[edit]

FYI
 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Due to technical issues involving at least two popular modern browsers, it has been proposed to add MoS advice to apply no-wrap (one way or another) to sport scores, to prevent "12–3" line-breaking after the "–". There's some disputation about exactly what wording to use, though little if any opposition to saying something about it in the guidelines. See discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#NOWRAP on sports scores.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shohei Ohtani[edit]

Moot
 – Closed early by the RfC opener, due to changes in the background facts making it moot.

We need some more input at this RFC concerning Shohei Ohtani. GoodDay (talk) 08:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion on rebranded sports franchise[edit]

A professional lacrosse franchise (formerly Chrome) recently rebranded to take the identity of a defunct franchise (Denver Outlaws), and thus a discussion is taking place as to how to react to this. The status quo is that Denver Outlaws covers both the defunct franchise and the current franchise's operations from 2024 onwards, while Chrome Lacrosse Club covers covers the current franchise's operations from 2019 to 2023. Any input from WikiProject Sports members as to whether or not this should be changed in some way would be greatly appreciated. — AFC Vixen 🦊 22:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AFC Vixen: This reminds me of the mess between the New Orleans Pelicans and Charlotte Hornets in the NBA.
Charlotte Hornets existed from 1988-2002 but moved to New Orleans and became the New Orleans Hornets then renamed to New Orleans Pelicans.
The Charlotte Hornets are now retconned as having suspended operations from 2002 to 2004, while the Pelicans are considered a 2002 expansion team even though they really aren't. They became the Charlotte Bobcats from 2004-2014, and then went back to being the Charlotte Hornets from 2014-present, maintaining the name that their competitor (New Orleans Pelicans) once had. Hope you can apply to your situation. - BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 04:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article name discussion[edit]

Hello, sports fans! There's a discussion about renaming a sports-related article back to its former name, or possibly to some other name, at Talk:United States cities with teams from four major league sports#Name of this article. Interested editors are encouraged to give their opinions there (and not here, to keep the discussion all in one place). Thanks. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sports Spectrum "[Name] is Christian." spam[edit]

Hello all,

I'm unsure if this is the right place to put this, but here goes.

I've viewed many athlete articles over the years, and I've noticed that, in an otherwise well-written article, the "personal life" section starts off with the above appellation.

The problem with this is that a) the site in question is essentially a tabloid for Christian sports with no journalistic credibility; b) no other source is ever included; and c) they are often standalone "fun facts" style sentences with little or no additional info connecting to the rest of the article.

Examples: Jayson Tatum, C.J. Stroud, Justin Fields, Trae Young etc.

By encyclopedic standards, the relevancy of religious information in a biography depends on whether the person is actually prominent as a member of that faith. For instance, Tim Tebow is very outspoken and Amar'e Stoudemire is a very prominent convert to Judaism. But for the bulk of these athletes, the additions are unnecessary and seem like spam to direct clicks towards Sports Spectrum. These are athletes, not philosophers or religious authorities.

I think these should be undertaken to be removed but was curious to see what others think.

Thank you. SteelMarinerTalk 05:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I completely agree. That website is NOT an independent, reliable source on anything. It is only ever going to tell us positive things about a person being a Christian. It's never going to tell us if someone stops being a Christian. Nor will it talk about people who aren't Christian. Yes, it simply IS Christian spam. HiLo48 (talk) 05:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. We don't, after all, toss in other unremarkable traits such as "He has red hair" or "She was in her college chorus." Someone like Tim Tebow or Muhammed Ali, an athlete whose faith is a frequent and notable topic, that's one thing. The vast run of athletes, no. (And why just athletes? How often do we remark that this musician or that Nobel laureate is "Christian?" Come to that, how often do we categorize then as Catholic, Unitarian or agnostic?) Ravenswing 05:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"She was in her college chorus": Fraternities are often mentioned though.—Bagumba (talk) 08:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Split discussion on Lionel Messi[edit]

A discussion is underway to determine whether or not splitting two sections of the Lionel Messi article into their own article is the best solution to resolve the article's WP:SIZERULE issue. Input from as many voices in the community as possible would be much appreciated. — AFC Vixen 🦊 07:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For those wondering, the finished discussion is in Archive 27. - 20:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC) BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is Bristol Motor Speedway a stadium?[edit]

The article "List of U.S. stadiums by capacity" ranks the Bristol Motor Speedway on first place. This makes sense considering that it has 153,000 seats, more than any other stadium. However, I question whether it can be considered a stadium: in fact, although it is fully enclosed, it has hosted american football games only a few times and is not designed for such events. Also, if it was to be considered a Stadium, the List of stadiums by capacity would include it on first position, and the article on Narendra Modi Stadium would not refer to the latter as the largest stadium in the world by capacity. Anyway, in the case you agree that Bristol Motor Speedway can be considered a Stadium, the other pages I mentioned should be corrected. Kind regards, 14 novembre (talk) 16:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since that list of stadia does not require, by definition, that they be venues for American football, I don't see why Bristol Motor Speedway should be excluded. It's a stadium for a sporting event, with seats for spectators; done deal. Ravenswing 11:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ravenswing I see what you mean, however the main argument against it being a Stadium is the fact that no other article refers to it as the largest stadium in the world, also, by searching "largest stadium in the world" most sources report Narendra Modi Stadium or incorrectly Rungrado May Day Stadium 14 novembre (talk) 19:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Truth be told, that's a fairly terrible argument. The measure of whether a building is an athletic stadium isn't, and can't be, whether or not a Wikipedia article says so. Is motor racing a sport? Most people, including NSPORTS, would hold so. Does this stadium host motor racing? Few people would claim otherwise. Therefore. And your own statement highlights the issue: that nationalism, parochialism and partisanship colors the argument. Ravenswing 21:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes it's a sports stadium, because it hosts sports and hosting American football is not a requirement to be an American stadium. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ravenswing @Joseph2302 I agree that motor racing is a sport. However, we have List of sports venues by capacity, and we alla agree that not all of them can be considered stadiums. It is difficult to say whether a sports venue can be considered a Stadium or not, however, most sources, external to Wikipedia, report Narendra Modi Stadium as the largest in the world. Anyway, if you agree Bristol Motor Speedway actually is a stadium, we should correct the other articles I mentioned in my first comment. Kind regards, 14 novembre (talk) 11:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It obviously IS a stadium. So I agree we need to correct our articles. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 08:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Village Pump RFC, of interest[edit]

An RFC at Village Pump may be of interest, to this WikiProject. GoodDay (talk) 19:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Placeholder title for future franchise[edit]

A discussion is currently underway as to what placeholder title we should give to a future Australian Football League franchise based in Tasmania. Opinions from as many people as possible would be most appreciated. — AFC Vixen 🦊 03:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Rugby#Requested move 11 January 2024[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rugby#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personal best?[edit]

I'm looking over some early female athletes (say from the 1922 Women's World Games and 1923 Women's Olympiad) and look at Mary Lines: her infobox lists her top recorded Olympiad times as "personal bests", which is terminology the citation, Track and Field Statistics also uses. For Marcelle Neveu her Olympics.com page calls her 1928 Olympic result her "personal best". I know modern athletes train so that their season performance peaks at top race days, but even then plenty of people clock PBs at practice or lesser races. With 1920s female athletes even (pseudo-)Olympic results can be difficult if not impossible to find published anywhere outside maybe some deep unsorted local newsmag archive, so the notion of these times being labeled a "personal best" seems rather odd.

Is there a different convention for elite athletes? for sports publications, for WP? Or is my amateur understanding of "personal best", as your best properly clocked time regardless of race, on point despite what these sources use (on generic captions)? SamuelRiv (talk) 05:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The short answer is that if it's not recorded, it won't end up on Wikipedia. "I was in my backyard when I got my personal best" might be a true statement, but only officially recorded times really count towards anything. We are not obligated to publish information about people, especially if that information doesn't exist. If a newspaper from 1920 lists Jane Doe running her personal best at a marathon, we use that information in the infobox up until the point when someone finds a recording from after that race, even if it's not her "final" personal best. Primefac (talk) 07:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The term has to be understood in context. Typically media-reported personal bests are for best times in official competition, where there is a neutral third party performing the timing, following a standard procedure. Athletes of course track their own personal bests during training, but this serves a different purpose and isn't an unbiased timing. isaacl (talk) 00:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My question wasn't clear. When an source is using "personal best" in some ambiguous context like this, where the term "PB" is clearly just a template field across all athletes' pages, how should that be interpreted for, say, infoboxes? Because in the athletes I linked it seems they are taking the field title too literally (akin I suppose to WP:HEADLINE?). SamuelRiv (talk) 17:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now I'm not understanding your clarification. If a source uses "personal best" and it's the most recent/highest value for "personal best" that has been given in the sources... we use it? Primefac (talk) 17:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC) Clarified below by Isaacl's statement. Primefac (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the source is not clear from context if an official personal best or a training personal best is being referred to, then the corresponding article shouldn't use that source to verify an athlete's official personal best result. In the cases to which you are referring, as official times are being listed as personal bests, I think the context is that these are official personal best results. (The reliability of the source, though, is a separate question.) isaacl (talk) 17:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Numbering of Emperor's Cup & Emperor's Cup Finals pages, are out of sync[edit]

I need big time help concerning (for example) 2019 Emperor's Cup & 2019 Emperor's Cup final. I thought I had corrected the numbering on all those pages, but apparent I blundered. There pages missing or something, which is throwing off the numberings. GoodDay (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is wrong with the numberings? - BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 20:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's in the intros. If you go by the 1921 Emperor's Cup & the 1922 Emperor's Cup final? they don't add up, when you get to the later pages. GoodDay (talk) 20:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Input request[edit]

Can I please get some input in the discussion at Shawnacy Barber? Paul Vaurie (talk) 00:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invitation to the Unreferenced article drive[edit]

WikiProject Unreferenced articles | February 2024 Backlog Drive

There is a substantial backlog of unsourced articles on Wikipedia, especially for sport articles! The purpose of this drive is to add sources to these articles and make a meaningful impact towards improving Wikipedia as a whole.

  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles cited.
  • Remember to tag your edit summary with [[WP:FEB24]], both to advertise the event and tally the points later using Edit Summary Search.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.

CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Getting Walter Payton and Bill Russell added to list of awardees[edit]

Hoping someone from this Wikiproject can add Walter Payton, Bill Russell and a few others to the list of Academy of Achievement awardees. I work for the organization so will leave the request up to others: Talk:Academy_of_Achievement#Additional_Names_for_Awardees_Table Jarc12030 (talk) 17:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Academy of Achievement has been updated accordingly. - BeFriendlyGoodSir (talk) 20:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Website canvassing for changes to Wikipedia article terminology[edit]

Hey, I just wanted to make members of this WikiProject aware of this website that's canvassing for changes to be made to terminology in sporting-related Wikipedia articles; so that editors are aware that this off-wiki canvassing is occurring. (Also notifying WT:OLYMPICS.) All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 02:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a project of billionaire Peter Thiel's "Enhanced Games" enterprise. They want to ban the use of the word "doping" and change the word "cheated" to "fought for science and bodily sovereignty", among other things. Jeff in CA (talk) 20:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for letting us know. I'll be on the lookout. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Related discussion from July at Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2023_July_8#"Natural"_Records? and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sports/Archive_12#enhanced.org. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redlinked categories[edit]

The latest run of Special:WantedCategories contains four red links for "[Decade] in youth football", and nine redlinks for "[Decade] in women's strength athletics", all of which are being autogenerated by the use of either ((YYY0s in youth association football category header)) on "[Decade] in youth association football" categories, or ((YYY0s in women's weightlifting category header)) on "[Decade] in women's weightlifting" categories. This is a new problem that emerged for the first time on today's redlinked category report, coming from categories that have existed since 2020 without causing this before, so they relate to something that was done to an existing template or module within the past couple of days.

The problem categories are:

Since redlinked categories aren't allowed to be left sitting on pages, however, these need to be either created or eliminated as quickly as possible. So my question is, are these categories wanted, or do they represent a mistake that needs to be repaired? If they're desired, then could somebody from this project create them right away, and if they're a mistake, then could somebody from this project find and fix it so that the redlinks go away? Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move at Talk:United States Football League (2022)#Requested move 11 February 2024[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:United States Football League (2022)#Requested move 11 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 02:04, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why is one a disambiguation page, while the other is a re-direct?[edit]

Why is Western Conference Finals a disambiguation page & Eastern Conference Finals a re-direct? Should they both be the same? GoodDay (talk) 05:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories