Talk:1926 World Artistic Gymnastics Championships

I will try to mount a more specific and compelling 'argument' later, but if one is to compare the names on the Men's Team Champions CzechoSlovakian team from these championships, as detailed on this article, they contrast greatly with a photograph of a lineup at these championships from a Science of Gymnastics Journal. I would be interested to see a primary source on this subject - perhaps the FIG publication.

QuakerIlK (talk) 04:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Apparent statistical computation errors
I recently found a new information source (gymnastics-history.com) which has the complete results for many of the early World Artistic Gymnastics Championships, including 1907, 1913, 1922, 1926, 1930, 1934, and 1938. That website provided much more in the way of details on these early world championships than anything I had ever seen before. In a bout of enthusiasm, within the last couple of weeks, I have made edits to each of those pages listed above, and more, providing tables that display much more thorough coverage of those games than had previously existed on the various pages. In doing so, I first created a unified spreadsheet in Excel, whereas no such thing existed beforehand on the information source, so that 1) I could more easily compose the "coding" for the new edits and 2) Do things like create formulas in Excel that did things like double-check my work as well as create new meta-data (which has also been added, in some cases, in the new edits, and which is also verifiable via Wikipedia's own technology via sortable wikitable functions). In doing the last aforementioned, I did discover a few inconsistencies in the original sources. Perhaps the most major of those errors is the ones I found for the team competition at these 1926 games. I used a sum function to add all the relevant parts of the 1926 Worlds to come up with what should have been the final totals based on all the team apparatus scores plus behavior and punctuality scores. The sum function provided the exact same team totals as existed for teams 4-6, here (respectively, Luxembourg, Belgium, and the Netherlands), but the already-stated team totals for all of the medalist teams were actually lower than what the sum total of all the parts would be. For 1st place Czechoslovakia (TCH), the added total was 1198.797 rather than the stated total of 1159.96; for 2nd place Yugoslavia (YUG), the added total was 1163.367 rather than the stated total of 1152.02; and for 3rd place France (FRA), the added total was 1142.23 rather than the stated total of 1020.77. None of the placements would be affected by any such corrections, however they remain notable, especially since these errors are relevant to the actual medalists, rather than to teams or individuals much lower in the rankings and therefore apparently less consequential. (In this particular instance, the inconsistencies seem to be saying that the medaling teams were even better than the non-medaling teams than was actually reported.) For 1926 individuals, I also found computational inconsistencies regarding 34th place Albert Stuiwenberg of the Netherlands and 36th place Jos. Van den Bogaert of Belgium. I have also found computational inconsistencies for example, in 1907, for individuals Pol Giesenfeld of Belgium and Nikolaus Kummer of Luxembourg. And there were a few others I found in these or other material recently added by me. I didn’t really find these errors – Excel did. But nevertheless, the fact of inconsistencies remains. In other reporting, I once found NUMEROUS errors in the Official Olympic Report for the 1924 games, and in a series of a few emails to and from the International Olympic Committee, I not only enumerated them, but took screen captures of the affected pages in the reports with the inconsistencies that I highlighted. Although my IOC correspondent was polite, the essential bottom line from her was that they knew errors were in the reports and they basically demonstrated to me that they didn’t care too much about them. It is partially with keeping this authoritarian satisfaction in mind as well as also perhaps laziness on my part that I don’t make any actual notations within the articles themselves detailing these inconsistencies. However, if anybody is actually curious enough and clicks on the “Talk” section for this article, then they can read what I’ve written and make a mental note. QuakerIlK (talk) 14:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)