Talk:2022 Winter Olympics/Archive 1

Citations Really, Really, Really Needed
Despite the fine WikiTradition of slapping up anything and everything that even the wackiest contributors generate, in cases like the assertion that Greenland is considering a bid for the Winter Olympics – shouldn’t something so questionable be relegated to the discussion page until proper citation is generated? If I were to dream up something equally as illogical, say…. Guatemala City is going to bid on the Winter Olympics in 2034… shouldn’t a citation be attached before the hallucinations are made pubic? The Nuuk tourism Board web site lists a total of ten options for accommodation:


 * Hotel Hans Egede
 * Seamen's Home
 * Bed & Breakfast
 * Nordbo Hotel Apartments
 * Sleep in sporthal
 * Grandmorther Turf Hut
 * Botel Paarnat
 * Barakki
 * Qeqertarsuatsiaat
 * Camping

Ten options and one is camping? Is this an Olympic venue?

The same web site claims, “Getting to Nuuk is easy.”


 * "From Denmark there are 5-10 weekly connections from Copenhagen to Kangerlussuaq, Greenland,  operated by Air Greenland. From Kangerlussuaq, you get a domestic flight further to Nuuk.


 * From Iceland there are three weekly connections from Keflavik to Kulusuk and onwards to Kangerlussuaq and Nuuk. The route between Iceland and Greenland is operated by Air Icaland (sic).


 * Travelers between North America and Greenland need to fly via Reykjavik/Keflavik, Iceland, or via Copenhagen, Denmark.”

With a population of 14,500 people in Nuuk, and a total of only just over 57,000 in all of Greenland… why would anyone ever expect Nuuk to stand a chance when competing with more accessible and more prepared bid cities? I have cut the offending words out of the page and made a special little place for them between this paragraph and the next…

Nuuk, Greenland is also considering a bid. The artic danish country has never hosted the Olympics.

… there they are, all nice and comfy. They can stay there until the original contributor finishes his or her LSD-induced hallucinations and returns to the planet earth where such silly ideas are not possible.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.62.27 (talk) 09:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

speedy declined
WP:CRYSTAL is not a reason for speedy. the article does not seem to have been deleted before --It was nominated for afd in April 06, one and a half years ago, nd there was no consensus. This is a year later, and I would think there would be now more reason to keep the article, which is being actively edited. But if you like, you can send it to afd again. DGG (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Citations needed
I deleted the following cities from the potential bids list since they do not have any references and may be not factual. xero-7 21:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Denver, Colorado USA
 * Reno, Nevada USA
 * New Zealand
 * Santiago, Chile


 * Denver, Reno and Salt Lake City; and New Zealand are back on the list and article. Being in Southern California, I have been informed on the Big Bear Lake, California USA bid was removed from the IOC candidacy long ago. Santiago, Chile needs to be readded, unless they had withdrew from the 2022 contest. They were also in the 2018 contest, and if they were granted the games: Santiago were expected to be the first Latin American or Southern Hemisphere, and the most populous city to hosted the Winter Olympics. The most feasible site would have to be Munich also contending for the 2018 contest, but could be given the 2022 if the Pyeongchong site is chosen instead of them, and that the IOC vote for Annecy, France continues to decline. The threat of war between the two Koreas (the North) could have the IOC not want South Korea to have the games, and a not-so-developed country status of Chile proved to be a barrier for hosting a pricey sports venue. This is probably why New Zealand has a better chance to host. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

New Zealand?
New Zealand does have some ski areas, so it would be feasible to hold the games there.

But when? The cited article doesn't address that little detail. The winter season runs from June through September, which doesn't fit in well with the seasons for most winter sports (aside perhaps from the two most popular events, figure skating and ice hockey.) Timothy Horrigan (talk) 02:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Swiss bid
I don't understand the idea of the Swiss bid in 2022 if they support Annecy in 2018. If any European country is approved to host the Olympic Games in 2018, then most probably a city in another continent is hosting it in 2022. It is even unclear if the European cities have a slight chance in 2018, because Sochi is hosting it in 2014, but there's still hope. It would be something completely different for the European countries if Salzburg got the right to arrange the games instead of Sochi.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.162.196 (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Romanian bid
A valley cannot bid for the Games, it must be a city. Hektor (talk) 22:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1960 Winter Olympics, were held in Squaw Valley; doesn't have to be a city at all. Basement12 (T.C) 22:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Read the Olympic Charter. 1960 is fifty years ago. Hektor (talk) 23:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Brasov will be the host city (skating, hockey etc), Valea Prahovei is very close to Brasov, and there only some ski events will be host. Also in the town of Rasnov ski jumping facilities are being build as we speak (for the 2013 youth Winter Olympics). So the host city will be Brasov but some events will be host in the Prahova Valley and in other small towns around Brasov, just like Vancouver did this year - the ski events were held outside Vancouver - (for exemple Whistler Blackcomb resort is 125 km away from Vancouver but hosted some events).

Winter Olympic games 2022
Upper carolina- slovenia Slovenia wants to bid 2022 olympic winter games after losing in fight with slovenian olympic comite for biting 2018 olympic winter games —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btomy4 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This is absolutely correct, the Slovenia national bid based in the capitol of Llubijana symbolizes the restoration of peace, prosperity and democracy in the former Yugoslavia, whom hosted the 1984 Winter Games in Sarajevo before the city became capitol of the republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Two other countries Sweden and Switzerland has long wanted the Winter Olympics, but they lack a standard site or cannot handle the event in their country. The Davos, Sion, Gothenberg and Ostersund sites are world-class skiing and winter sports facilities. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed Bids Section
I noticed that Lviv, the Ukraine is listed as a confirmed bid. I believe that title is misleading. I do not doubt that Lviv will definitely bid for the 2022 Olympics and that they have the backing of the Ukrainian government, but the official IOC process for hosting in 2022 will not start until 2013. I do not believe anything can truly be classified as "confirmed" until that time. I believe until 2013, when the IOC officially accepts applications, every bid should be classified as "potential". Is there anyone who agrees or has a different suggestion?--SargentIV (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Totally and completely agreed. Furthermore, it still should not be listed as "confirmed" until the mid point when the bids are, ahem, confirmed, not just when the bidding process starts.--Cbradshaw (talk) 04:59, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * There still is an issue though. The Ukrainian bid is "confirmed" in the sense that they will be submitting a bid when the process is open for bidding.  This is different to every other city on the list which is either "exploring" the possibility, or is some rumour or speculation by some person.  In some way the Ukrainian bid needs to be highlighted in that they are confirmed in their intention to bid; whereas none of the others are. Ravendrop 05:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Ravendrop - you used the word 'intention'. I like that and I think it perfectly describes the status of the Lviv bid at this point. I also agree with Cbradshaw that nothing is truly confirmed until the IOC accepts applicant cities into the candidature phase of the process.--SargentIV (talk) 13:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

2022 USA?
"They hope that forgoing a bid for the 2020 Games would give them a greater chance of hosting the Winter Olympics in 2022."

I don't see anything in the article that would even lead to this speculation? They've said publicly they will not bid for another games until they've been told they will win for sure. If someone else can come to this speculation from the article and justify it here, I'd be grateful otherwise, I'm removing this speculation. 98.28.68.59 (talk) 19:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You're entirely right, looking at that source it doesn't say that and unless an alternative source is found that phrasing should be removed - Ba se me nt 12  (T.C) 23:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Switzerland 2022
The part of the article containing informations about the Swiss bid is not correct in this context: Switzerland definitively decided during the session of Swiss Olympic on 11 August 2011 to put forward the bid of "Davos/St. Moritz 2022", a proposal that was renamed "St. Moritz 2022" on 22 December 2011. Information about the other candidates therefore should be moved to the "Cancelled bids" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma75k (talk • contribs) 07:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

A boy deleting Zaragoza every time
{{User there is a boy deleting zaragoza every time i added it. why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.47.192.162 (talk) 04:28, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Zaragoza might been dropped out of the bid for the 2022 Winter games. The only European city left is Munich whom held the 1972 Summer Olympic Games about half a century ago, then the high-rated yet dropped bid by Denver for the 2026 USA 250th anniversary event and the largest population bid city Santiago, Chile. Already in Spain, Madrid is one of three most probable sites for the 2020 Summer Olympics where the country hosted the 1992 Summer Olympics in Barcelona. The country of Japan held the IOC olympiad 3 times: Tokyo 1964 (bids for 2020), Sapporo 1972 and Nagano 1998. 71.102.21.238 (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Munich 2022
München bewirbt sich nicht um Olympia 2022 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.64.131.89 (talk) 04:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Munich and Santiago are the two favorite cities by IOC officials whom studied the highest likelihood. I thought Denver would fit the profile, then again the USA won't apply for the 2020 and 2022 Olympics, when the IOC does not favor North America this time. I have a feeling Madrid, Spain will host the 2020 summer games, but I sense Tokyo, Japan whom hosted the 1964 Summer games will receive it for 2024. 71.102.21.238 (talk) 15:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Chile
Chile was introduced recently as a potential bid. Based on the two references given, it looks like Chile is planning a bid for 2022. The second reference speculates about a Chilean bid in discussion at a meeting in London. But a third article written later about the discussion hold in London shows it is not the case:. Specifically: For these reasons, I remove Chile from the potential bids of 2022.
 * Mark Adams, spokesman for the IOC, says that he has no information about a bid from Chile for future Olympics.
 * About the possibility of Olympics in Chile, the president of Chile's NOC said that now, the focus is Odesur 2014 and Panamericanos 2019.
 * Santiago is nowhere in the discussions.

Beside of this, the information on the third article is interesting (in Spanish, but translators exist on Internet). It comes out that the IOC wishes that southern countries submit bids for Winter Games, and that they would have the same chance as northern countries if the bid is done professionally. LeQuantum (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Potential Bids: dead or alive?
As of July 2012, some potential bids on this article seem to be dead. At this time, serious candidates should be already engaged in preparing a bid: have a website, commitments at each political level, making a budget, hiring organizers... But now, some potential bids in the list look more like inconsequential announcements and do not show any sign of life since:


 * 🇷🇴 Romania: nothing heard since 2007. (I finally found a reference showing interest in 2011)


 * 🇵🇱 Poland: nothing heard since 2010. (new reference: a meeting is expected in autumn 2012)


 * 🇫🇮 Finland: no announcement, only a suggestion made during the 2010 Winter Games.


 * 🇭🇷 Croatia: the vision of a architectural studio in 2011.

I suggest to move them to the "previously interested" section and remove Croatia, unless someone could confirm that they are preparing a bid during 2012. LeQuantum (talk) 05:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I tried to find information about the Croatian bid, and I cannot find any announcement or commitment from any relevant person (mayor, member of government, NOC). Even the web site from the architectural studio Produkcija 004 doesn't show any information about it. This proposal seems nothing more than other private initiatives like Bozeman 2022, Anchorage 2022, Christchurch 2022... Unless an influential person like a politician or someone from the National Olympic Committee of Croatia show support to this proposal, Split has not the support and commitment shown in the other potential bids. Personally, I would prefer to delete it, but someone someone didn't like my deletion so so I move it into an other section ("Unofficial proposals to bid"). I move also New Zealand with it. LeQuantum (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I tried to find new references about Finland, but the sole source that can be found on internet is still this article made during the 2010 Winter Games:. The article was not a formal announcement of a bid, only enthusiastic suggestions and discussions during the Winter Olympics. After two and a half year, after Pyeongchang was elected to host in 2018, after the 2012 Summer Games, nothing was said about a potential Finnish bid. I could add many new updated information related the other countries, and the information is easy to find for them. But nothing show me that Finland prepare now a bid. It is dubious that Finland would secretly prepare a bid: as for any normal European country, the population needs to know where their politicians want to spend the money, and application must be filled by next year with the backing of mayors, government and NOC. Moreover, the heightening of Tahko Hill (proposed in the article) did not progress since 2010 due to environmental concerns (see the the dates of the News on the right side of ) and no Nordic countries indicated an interest to bid with Finland since the discussions in Vancouver. So I move Finland to "previously interested" (because the interest was in 2010) and I would also be happy if someone could find newer information. LeQuantum (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Potential bids after Pyeongchang 2018 was chosen
Pyeongchang was elected to host the 2018 Games on 6 July 2011. The place where the previous Winter Olympics is held is important for any country interested in bidding, since the IOC has a tradition to alternate between continents. An Asian country such as Kazakhstan has shown an interest before the selection of Pyeongchang, and many references (before July 2011) are easy to find on internet. It is now more than a year after the selection of Pyeongchang, I tried to find new references about Kazakhstan with dates after July 2011 and I cannot find. My understanding is that Kazakhstan has lost any hope for 2022 after Pyeongchang won 2018. Otherwise, it should be easy to find a recent reference like all other cities in the list: all have some references after July 2011.

If you believe that Kazakhstan is still interested, please, try to add a reference made after July 2011. Also, if someone wants to add a new potential bid, I invite you to put references which takes into account Pyeongchang: references with dates after July 2011. LeQuantum (talk) 17:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I found this link from August 2012 from Kazakhstanlive.com, which is run by the Kazakhstan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that has a small one line saying "Kazakhstan’s city of Almaty intends to bid for the 2022 Winter Olympic Games." While South Korea will host the 2018, continental rotation is not "official" policy of the IOC and besides Kazakhstan is sometimes considered to be closer linked to Europe, e.g in UEFA and not AFC.  If we're talking about past host locations as a hinderance to Kazakhstan's bid, I think 2014 in Sochi is a much bigger problem since Sochi is so much closer.  The other thing that we should take into mind is that Kazakhstan has consistently said it will bid, not something like it is looking into, or may.  (For a dated example see this).  So this lack of news could also be interpreted as the fact that they're simply working on an application (though, again, the other side may argue that an announcement of a committee or something should be available).  However, considering virtually every reference to Kazakhstan potentially hosting is from Jan/Feb 2011 and arose because Kazakhstan hosted the 2011 Asian Winter Games at that time and that these kind of 'potential' and 'fluff' pieces always come out at that time (i.e. the huge number of "x may/should/could bid for 2022/future" that occurred during the 2010 games - Finland, Kazakhstan, Switzerland, Ukraine, Croatia, etc.) I agree with keeping Kazakhstan in the previously interested section unless someone can find a more recent reference (meaning a new statement by a prominent official, not a throw away comment at the end of an article like I linked above) or a Kazakh source is found.  Ravendrop 08:28, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Too soon
Doesn't anyone here, think the creation of this article is a tad premature? We haven't had the 2014 Winter Olympics yet, let alone the 2018 games. GoodDay (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Not really, but the USA and virtually most of European cities dropped out of the race to host the 2022 Winter Games. The lone 3 cities are Astana, Munich and Santiago (the possible first city in the southern hemisphere) awaiting the vote by the IOC whom approved South Korea to host the 2018 Winter Olympics. The 2020 Summer Olympic bid cities are Istanbul, Madrid and Tokyo, while the cities of Denver, Seattle and Tulsa, Oklahoma in the USA discussed hosting the 2024 Summer Olympic games pending IOC approval (and 2028 is too soon). 71.102.21.238 (talk) 15:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it is too soon. I think it is best for these kinds of pages to be opened up shortly before the bidding process starts (i.e 2 months before) These pages on future games just turn into a huge back and forth between users. I actually had these pages organized and then all of a sudden they were thrown into disarray. Then other users were telling me that I was wrong, when I actually had things organized. At this point it just makes sense to only start a page on a future olympic game two months before the bidding starts. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 13:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Multinational bids
On this page there is a section on a joint Polish-Slovakian bid between the cities of Kraków and Zakopane (both in Poland) and Poprad and Tatry (both in Slovakia).

IOC rules do not allow for multinational bids. Is there anything indicating a potential bid from a Polish bidder alone and a Slovakian bidder alone? --MusicGeek101 (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Kazan 2022
Kazan,Russia is interested in bidding for 2022. From GamesBids:"'Mayor Ilsur Metshin of Kazan, the Russian city hosting the World University Games, vowed Wednesday to hold a city-wide opinion poll on whether Kazan should bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games.

Russian Olympic Committee chief Alexander Zhukov put forward the idea in the run-up to the student Games earlier this month with the close confidant of President Vladimir Putin noting that the scale and format of the events were very similar, reports rsport.

The Mayor said, "it is the most serious of issues and requires a thorough work-through by the leaders of the country and the (Tatarstan) republic. We also need to ask the advice of the people. I want to conduct a survey to find out what our citizens want, what kind of party they want to see.

"Only having worked with them can we find a solution. If such a decision (to bid for the Games) is taken, we will be ready to push for this too", he said.

Kazan has been praised for how it hosted the logistical side of the July 6-17 student Games, which attracted in excess of 10,000 athletes taking part in about 27 sports.

The Mayor added, "by the quantity of sports and of participants and the burden on hotels and the airport, our Universiade differs in no way from the London Olympics for us, the organizers. Time will tell'".(link here) This seems like a declaration of interest to me. Kazan should be added.Mhoppmann (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Sorry, wrong year!Mhoppmann (talk) 17:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Andorra
Why is Andorra la Vella not listed as interested in bidding? It says on the 2014 bids page that Andorra la Vella was interested in bidding in 2014, but now is targeting 2022. At the very least Andorra la Vella should be denoted as previously interested.Mhoppmann (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Applicant cities
I suggest we wait for the official announcement by the IOC mid November before talking about applicant cities. 83.163.5.82 (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Joint bids
Let's wait until the IOC confirms the bids before changing the names of the bids. However the IOC recognizes the bids is the way we should recognize them. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 00:15, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

FIFA World Cup
Anything about the potential conflict of schedule with the FIFA world cup ? Hektor (talk) 08:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

It might be worth mentioning it at some point. However, let's just see how this ordeal plays out first. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 04:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Potential Swedish bid
Just a heads up; there will be a decision about a potential Swedish bid within the next few days:

http://www.thelocal.se/20131109/sweden-considers-winter-olympics-2022-bid

--MusicGeek101 (talk) 15:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Remaining "Potential bids"
If no more bids get submitted before the deadline, then we can add the remaining "potential bids" to the section titled "previously interested in bidding" section similar to how it was done on the Bids for the 2020 Summer Olympics page. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 05:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Should the information about planned bids be kept?
Dear all, I've just reverted this edit by User:MusicGeek101, by which any prose dealing with proposed bids that did not materialize was removed. I think that (as long as it's properly referenced and adheres to other policies like WP:CRYSTAL), this information should be kept, because notability is not temporary. Reporting about things that were planned but did not come true still has an encyclopedic value. What are your thoughts and comments on that matter?--FoxyOrange (talk) 07:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I would say no because in these cases there was never a bid. There is interest in bidding but it is not a bid unless an actual bid is submitted. Most cities that talk about bidding never bid. Out of all the cities who talk about bidding, only a percentage of them bid. This is why I do not create articles for proposed bids. A proposed bid is not a. I'd if no bid is submitted. As far as I am concerned, Munich never had a bid because no Munich bid got submitted. By having a long detailed section on proposed bids, the article gets way too long. The article becomes more about speculation. This is fine before the bids are due because there are discussions. After the bidding deadline passes, there is no point in a section about the speculation that took place leading up to the deadline. --MusicGeek101 (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * A brief description of planned bid is appropriate, particularly in the case of Munich or other cities that worked on bids, but did not ultimately did not do so. You might write: "Munich investigated a bid but was defeated by lack of local support in a referendum." If a city was only rumored to bid, for example, the local mayor mentioned it but there was never any wide support, it should have only the name of the city mentioned as "Other cities that expressed interest." I haven't looked lately, but other Bid pages had this minimal summary in the past.--Cbradshaw (talk) 05:04, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Oslo, Lviv and Krakow for Candidates
David, you got the dates wrong by the IOC! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.9 (talk) 01:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Discussion of usage of non-free content
There is a discussion about the use of non-free images, which is taking place at WP:NFCR. RJaguar3 &#124; u &#124; t 01:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment
There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited! Becky Sayles (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The insanity of the list of demands manual
I added a bit about the ridiculous demands made by the IOC which forced Norway outEricl (talk) 18:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Very good. I had read something about demands on the Norwegian King which was not appreciated. I find it also interesting to read about volunteer drivers, essentially unpaid labour. It is helpful, of course, if they speak French or English, but when you do not pay, you don't make demands. Where did the IOC learn manners? 121.209.56.11 (talk) 05:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * A little is also written in Oslo bid for the 2022 Winter Olympics. The IOC demanded a cocktail party with the King as host, paid by the organizers, in reality by Norwegian tax payers. To invite yourself to the King was considered rude in Norway. Free alcohol in also considered excessive in Norway which is moderate on alcohol.--BIL (talk) 09:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Concerns and controversies section
Hi, I just reinstated the "Concerns and controversies" section, which had been deleted by User:STSC. I wrote in the edit summary, "revert whitewashing by long-term agenda editor" and thought I should explain myself here.

This user has engaged in long-term, low-level agenda editing that consistently advances a particular political view (specifically: the viewpoint of the Chinese Government on controversial issues such as Hong Kong, the 2014 Hong Kong pro-democracy protests, Falun Gong, etc.) He maintains POV edits through a variety of strategies:


 * using talk page warning templates to bully and deflect attention from valid, content-related concerns raised on talk pages and edit summaries


 * frivolously making serious allegations of misconduct, i.e. that I am harrassing him, to deflect attention from valid content-related grievances


 * instead of directly addressing allegations of POV editing, invents different flimsy rationales to maintain the POV edits with zero willingness to compromise


 * disingenuous edit summaries: POV agenda editing obfuscated under innocuous edit summaries

Based on past behavior, I expect STSC will accuse me of personally attacking him, but my concerns are purely over content, censorship, and agenda editing. He has also accused me of harassing him – though I am not following his edits, I merely stumbled across this instance of censorship by chance.

Based on my past experience with this user I feel I must explain myself here to preempt the usual bully barrage of allegations that I am engaging in a personal attack. Such allegations are meant to divert the discussion away from content. There may well be some problem with the content, but the pattern of editing suggests that the primary motivation for blanking this section is WP:ADVOCACY. Besides, Wikipedia is a work in progress and blanking this section is not constructive. Regards, Citobun (talk) 06:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Vancouver Largest Winter Olympic City?
Isn't Turin a good bit larger? 168.215.102.34 (talk) 14:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Our articles list Turin with a population of 911,823, and Vancouver at 603,502.  → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 20:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Also, In the 2011 census, the City of Calgary had a population of 1,096,833 (from its article), and Sapporo infobox has 1,918,096 in 2013. Oslo is also bigger.


 * It could be that the contributor meant metropolitan population, which is around 2.4 million for Vancouver. However, List of metropolitan areas in Japan by population has Sapporo with 2.58 million. So it should be Sapporo anyway. 2001:999:0:923:30B7:FE17:6835:BD5F (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Broadcasting edits: Super Bowl clash with Winter Olympics
Well that's a first! In all my years of working as a technical author, no-one has ever before described my writing as "awkward" – and in my honest opinion your rewrite has only succeeded in making it sound even more awkward! With all due respect, I don't believe you have managed to explain things in simpler terms. There are still the same amount of details and you've just completely reworded it to make things confusing again. It might have been better if you'd just reverted it back to your own previous version, which did make marginally more sense than this current one. Specifics:
 * You said "most-viewed" is an obvious fact mentioned in all other sources already, so why does your version still say that the Super Bowl is the "most-watched" television program in the U.S annually? It doesn't make sense to bring it up in the edit summary and then put it back in.
 * Your third sentence ends with the word "history" and the next sentence starts with the word "Historically" – that's my definition of awkward!
 * I think those long dashes you use are horrible. I removed them but you've put them back.
 * You've specified that the footy game is likely to compete with NBC primetime coverage of the third day of the Olympics – is that not a bit over-detailed?
 * My wikilinks pointed to NFL on CBS, NFL on Fox and NFL on NBC because they seemed to be the most sensible articles to link to, seeing as we're specifically talking about NFL broadcasts. But you've changed those too.
 * You say "Super Bowl LVI will be broadcast by CBS, meaning that the game would likely have to compete with NBC primetime coverage of the Games' third day." which implies that the football game will compete with the NBC Olympics coverage because of the very fact that CBS have been chosen to show the Super Bowl...!?
 * Your final sentence is out of place and ends with an awkward clause "and also broadcast by NBC".
 * Why did you remove my reference to the Nielsen Media Research article on Super Bowl TV viewing statistics? I thought that was quite relevant.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect you might be trying to pitch me "off your turf" but when I first read this paragraph I found it so confusing that I just had to do some editing. So joking apart, let's reach a consensus. If you agree, then I'll come up with a new version that you can pick apart, and we might arrive at a final version that makes some sort of sense. If you disagree, then I'll go away (for now) and probably revisit this at a later stage when things have developed a bit further.

What I'd really love to know is why the heck did the NFL schedule a Super Bowl to coincide with a future Olympics – they must have known! And if it wasn't for their insane scheduling, we wouldn't need to have this constructive conversation in the first place :) Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:41, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I meeant obvious fact as in, that it did not require its own separate source. I'm also having to explain this from an international perspective as this is not a U.S.-oriented topic. ViperSnake151   Talk  15:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the changes. I've made a few more: Finally, is it worth mentioning the time difference between LA and Beijing and how it will affect this situation? LA is around 16 hours behind Beijing so the end of the Super Bowl will just about coincide with live coverage at the start of day 3 of the Olympics. Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:33, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Is it OK to use parentheses instead of those ugly em dashes?
 * repetition of 'scheduled' / 'scheduling' in 2nd/3rd sentences – I've combined the two sentences with slight reword
 * "Super Bowl games have been among the most-watched television broadcasts in the United States." is a bit of a blunt sentence, needed fleshing out slightly
 * the word 'alternate' means to switch between two different things, not three, so a better word here is 'cycle' or 'rotate'
 * Added wikilink to NFL on CBS for proof of Super Bowl LVI schedule
 * No offence, but speakers of UK English don't recognise "will likely have" as correct English – we would say "is likely to have". As a compromise I've changed it to "is expected to have". Also, we would not say "viewership figures" we would use "viewing figures", but I know this article is written in American English so I've left that alone.
 * repetition of "held" in final sentence – needed a slight reword
 * The Super Bowl always begins at around 6:30 p.m. ET regardless of host city. It is scheduled to run into primetime at end around 10:00 to 10:30 p.m. ET., and the halftime show (by far the biggest draw for casual viewers) always occurs around the 8:00 p.m. hour. During the 2018 Olympics, NBC almost always started the primetime block at 8:00 p.m. ET ViperSnake151   Talk  15:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Coronavirus Impact
Back in 2003 during the SARS Outbreak, the 2003 FIFA Women's World Cup was relocated to the United States. Is there a possibility of the Coronavirus impacting these Olympic Winter Games? I am curious as to what others think.Subman758 (talk) 02:29, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If there is a source that discusses this, it would be of interest. Otherwise I suggest a discussion forum website like this one would be more appropriate.18abruce (talk) 22:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Iffy edits
The latest series of edits by look iffy. In particular, this edit made up stuff that is clearly nowhere to be found in the RS. Normchou  💬 05:09, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Reverted to the version before their first edit. Normchou   💬 05:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There does appear to be a crop of editors who are genuinely uninterested in what the sources say or participating in consensus making. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Economic coercion
Hi : Could you at least read the articles WP:NPOV when you recite "not NPOV"? "Economic coercion" is the exact phrase that RSes used to describe the situation, and it is a view whose weight should be proportionally reflected in the article regardless of what editors believe are "neutral". Normchou  💬 16:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They also objected to the use of Coercive diplomacy on another page without realizing that is literally the term of art... They don’t appear to understand either how the word coercion/coercive is used or how NPOV works. I wouldnt worry too much about it. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Politicization of the 2022 Olympics lead section
No other Olympic articles have had the controversies and boycotts placed in the lead section, that has always belonged in the controversy subsection. Why is the 2022 Olympics held to a different standard? I understand Anti-China sentiment is very high right now in a lot of English speaking countries, but if you're going to put it in the lead section then this standard has to applied to all other Olympic articles as well. No one has offered a reasoning for why the 2022 games are an exception. Stonksboi (talk) 09:24, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In 2018 Winter Olympics the "Concerns and controversies" section includes "North–South Korean relations" and "Russian doping", both of which have been placed in the lead. In 2014 Winter Olympics the issue is "Russian doping scandal" and it is duly reflected in the lead. Normchou   💬 22:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Changes to the last sentence of the lead
this is the section for you to get consensus for the changes you want to make. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Do you care to offer an opinion on the matter? Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No. But note that IPs are human too; you cannot write off another editor's edits purely on the basis of their background.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thats true, but the current spate of humans with IPs, socks, and SPAs pushing the CCP POV has me near my wits ends. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

All Olympics since its inception has its controversies. There's never been an Olympics Games where certain individuals or groups want it cancelled or boycotted. I mean heck, the now postponed 2020 Tokyo Olympics is highly controversial too. Even so, an article just a few days ago mentioned that "a majority of Japanese public want Olympics cancelled or postponed" and one a few months back where "More Than Half Of Tokyo Residents Don’t Want City To Host 2021 Olympics". However, it's not on the lead. Remember how controversial Rio 2016 was? Exactly. But, we do have Concerns and controversies at the 2016 Summer Olympics, Concerns and controversies at the 2020 Summer Olympics etc, including this one, right here - Concerns and controversies at the 2022 Winter Olympics. The main article should mostly be focused on the athletes and sports involved, not the controversies that follow it, there's already separate articles for those. 68.228.34.71 (talk) 20:26, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That controversies and concerns page is a daughter page of this one, it only exists because the primary section here got too long. All sections should be reflected in the lead. I note though that you aren’t arguing for a removal of controversies from the lead, you want to change "There have been a number of concerns and controversies at the 2022 Winter Olympics. Calls have been made to boycott the 2022 Winter Olympics due to the 2019 leak of the Xinjiang papers, the 2019–20 Hong Kong protests, China's hostage diplomacy and the Uyghur genocide.” to "There have been a number of concerns and controversies at the 2022 Winter Olympics. Calls have been made to boycott the 2022 Winter Olympics primarily due to the 2019–20 Hong Kong protests." Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 20:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * " All sections should be reflected in the lead." That is frankly a lie, no other Olympic article does that and that is not the consensus. It appears you have a strong editorial bias against China especially when it comes to politically neutral articles which you edit to include anti-China or anti-CCP stances. Stonksboi (talk) 21:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Its not a lie, the lead is supposed to be a summary of the entire article. Please dont engage in personal attacks, lets stick to the topic at hand. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 00:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

fis alpine standard
There are several countries that are meeting the minimum standard for Olympic Qualification, but I am concerned about WP:OR. Does anyone have access to a succinct source that indicates, without sorting and checking, who have met the standards so far?18abruce (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * There are actually more qualified countries than I thought, but no simple way to evaluate who has, and who has not met the minimum standards. I don't have the time or energy to try to properly source this, or create the related articles, so I have no issue if anyone wants to hide or delete the countries I have added.18abruce (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

participating NOCs
Since there seems to be frequent assertions of more nations qualifying (hopefully not all of it is vandalism), I wanted to open up the opportunity for a discussion. All sports that have already qualified athletes have sourced tables documenting them, if a particular NOC has been overlooked please explain where.18abruce (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Torch relay
When exactly will the torch relay begin? Nate-Dawg921 (talk) 05:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

"India at the 2022 Winter Olympics" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect India at the 2022 Winter Olympics. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 20 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:08, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It was a mistake, they have actually qualified in Alpine, along with three other nations in today's update.18abruce (talk) 15:17, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

List of Countries participating in the boycott - Kosovo
I wanted to ask why is Kosovo added as a country participating in the boycott when due it's current status it's not currently an independent polity de jure. Shouldn't there be a reference stating that it is solely partially recognised?

China itself doesn't recognise Kosovo, so their diplomats would not been invited eitherway, how is it a boycott then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.221.198.77 (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The link goes to Kosovo at the 2022 Winter Olympics, not to the state. Maybe, it should say "The following delegations" at most (Great Britain is not a country either). (CC) Tb hotch ™ 21:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Does the whole world really know what the NHL is?
This article is about next year's Winter Olympic Games, NOT about ice hockey. I added a clarification to mention of the NHL in a section of the article about boycotts to point out that it is in the USA and Canada. I did this because not all countries play ice hockey, especially at the Olympics. My country, Australia, participates very strongly in both the Summer and Winter Games, but here, ice hockey is a very minor sport. The name National Hockey League doesn't tell us which country it's in.

reverted my addition with the Edit summary "Notable league and doesn't need this".

If the article was about ice hockey, and hence had a readership of primarily ice hockey fans, I would agree with that comment, but it's not. It's an article about the Olympic Games in China next year, involving seven different sports, and televised probably in lots of countries where ice hockey is not a significant sport. It would be classic US (and Canadian) centrism to assume all readers of this article about an event in China would know which nation(s) the NHL represents. (Even in writing this, I note that the fact that it actually represents two nations makes this even less clear.) HiLo48 (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The NHL literally redirects to the National Hockey League on Wikipedia. I also clarified it a bit by spelling out the NHL as the National Hockey League, which in my opinion is more than sufficient enough. There is zero need to say what country they are form, especially since there are no other leagues worldwide titled "National Hockey League" . Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:35, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You haven't responded to half of what I wrote. I will assume good faith and simply ask you to read it again. HINT: The article is NOT about ice hockey. (PS: In which countries would you find the NATIONAL Basketball League?) HiLo48 (talk) 05:02, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Does it matter if the article is about ice hockey or the Olympics? Either way the NHL is the only "National Hockey League" and therefore it does not need a location qualifier. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 05:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think I'll await the views of others on this. You are missing my point completely. HiLo48 (talk) 05:15, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you are trying to make things overly complicated here. There are other pressing matters on Wikipedia, and I encourage you to tackle things in your area of interest. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 05:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * My area of interest is the Olympic Games, which is the topic of this article, but not ice hockey, which is NOT the topic of this article. Do try to see things from that perspective. HiLo48 (talk) 06:01, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Here are other articles, , among others that have no qualifier. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 05:31, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Can't see the significance of the first two articles. They aren't about the Olympic Games. This suggests you really don't see what I'm getting at. The third has the same problem I see with this article. HiLo48 (talk) 06:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Sportsfan. The NHL is a household name and should not have a geographic area. It's a bit like adding to the NBA that it takes place in the US. The fact that the article focuses on the Olympics and not ice hockey is, in my opinion, not a sufficient reason to add it, especially since there is a link to the extended article on the NHL. Also, I'm from a country that other than a few hockey fans, no one knows we have a hockey team, but NHL is a familiar Ligue.
 * Moreover, although it is a league in the US and Canada, there are quite a few players in the league from European countries as well. Accordingly, the official decision not to allow the release of players does not only affect the Canadian and US delegations.Nimrodbr (talk) 06:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to say this but you are just plain wrong!! The NHL is NOT a household name in my house, nor in most houses in my country, and no doubt in many other countries. This conversation has become stupid. Can you people PLEASE broaden your perspectives!!! HiLo48 (talk) 08:49, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If the discussion is ice hockey, the NHL is clearly a household name. It is the primary source of talent for the tournament in both world championships and Olympics.18abruce (talk) 13:51, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The article is NOT about ice hockey. It's about next year's Winter Olympic Games. They will be watched by millions of people worldwide, many of whom will know nothing about ice hockey. HiLo48 (talk) 22:18, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @HiLo48 Clearly your Australian centrism is clouding your judgment. I think its time to close this silly discussion. The fact is the NHL is the premier hockey league of the world, and it would not create confusion by just listing the league without location. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As I wrote earlier (and you have repeatedly ignored), if the article was about ice hockey, and hence had a readership of primarily ice hockey fans, I would agree with that comment, but it's not. HiLo48 (talk) 22:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, as mentioned by Nimrodbr, the NHL is known worldwide to an extent that qualifying its location is not necessary. The WINTER Olympics would pertain to the (ice) hockey (NHL) being contested. This discussion is now over. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The discussion requires editors not obsessed with ice hockey, as will be the case with a lot of people who watch the Olympic Games but never that sport. I can assure you that in my country there will be very little coverage of that sport on TV. HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yea, I think a country that makes up less than 0.5% of the world's population should dictate how articles are written. /s Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Pleased drop the disparaging language. It's not helpful. HiLo48 (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Pot meet kettle. "This conversation has become stupid." Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:22, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The fact that you won't address what I actually write proves that. As I said before, this discussion requires editors not obsessed with ice hockey. HiLo48 (talk) 00:40, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * HiLo48, I have no idea how you decided which of the editors is obsessed with ice hockey and which is not. I'm not really interested in ice hockey, and my area of interest is the connection between the Olympics, international sports federations, politics and international relations. Nimrodbr (talk) 09:49, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Then please address ALL that I wrote in my initial post. (Not just bits of it as has happened so far.) HiLo48 (talk) 09:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * We addressed it. You refuse to accept it. The NHL is a well-known league, and there is no need to specify the geographical area in which it operates. Moreover, I mentioned before that it is also not accurate to try and define that the non-participation of league players only affects the delegations of the United States and Canada since the league has quite a few players from European countries. Mainly Sweden, Finland, Russia, and the Czech Republic. But also Slovakia and Germany. This decision significantly affects eight of the 12 teams participating in the Olympic tournament. Nimrodbr (talk) 10:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, that's ALL about ice hockey, not THIS article. This article is about the whole of the Olympic Games, NOT ice hockey. Many readers with absolutely no interest in or knowledge of ice hockey will come to this article. If the article was about ice hockey, your comments would be perfectly valid, but it's not. So it's irrelevant to them how well known the NHL is in the ice hockey world. The fact hat you ONLY spoke about ice hockey in that response shows that you have not understood my point. HiLo48 (talk) 10:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Fake news about a boycott by Estonia
Various IPs and the users Sangjinhwa and Drmargi are trying to spread fake news about a diplomatic boycott by Estonia.

Just like US President Biden sent only his wife to Tokyo, our President would anyway not have travelled to the 2022 Olympics.

The source states clearly that Tiit Terik has not even decided about his own participation.

LoveToLondon (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be blunt, but the source literally says: "President of Estonia Alar Karis has announced he will not be attending February's Winter Olympics in Beijing, citing political factors, daily Postimees reports. Karis' announcement follows news that political representatives from the U.S., the U.K. and other countries will not be visiting the games, which start February 4." This is also confirmed by Estonian news site Postimees.


 * The burden is upon you to say that ERR is not a valid souce. Until then, bring one source, valid, that explicitly says that Estonia's President Alar Karis is not boycotting due to political reasons. Until then, there's a boycott, by President Alar Karis, and it's due to political reasons.


 * Also, Tiit Terik is NOT Estonia's President. He is just a member of the Harju district of the Defence League and the Culture Minister. We are talking about the President, not the Culture Minister. The news is about the President. The source is valid and backs it.
 * 201.22.73.156 (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * To correct the current omissions of relevant information from the source, I have now added the information from your source that this is only the President and that the government of Estonia is not boycotting the Olympics. LoveToLondon (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * LoveToLondon, the text you inserted is, really, unecessary, as the previous version stated just about President Alar Karis, not the government in general. However, we can agree to not include Estonia in the list of boycotting countries, due to the uncertainty of the rest os Estonia's Government. 189.35.4.101 (talk) 12:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)


 * We can also agree that it misrepresents the position of the country of Estonia when describing only the personal position of our President, while omitting the statement in the same source that our Government does not plan any boycott. LoveToLondon (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * First, this is 189.35.4.101 (my IP is dynamic and I can't deactivate it). The news was about the president; the entry on Wikipedia was about only the President's decision. Also, the complete boycott is still undecided, not denied (for now, until another source describes, it would be WP:OR to say either the Government, not Estonia's President, is boycotting or that it's not boycotting). Nevertheless, leave just as the Alar's personal decision, reflecting the source and the entry. 2804:14D:880:9641:B127:7A23:9913:E73E (talk) 16:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The best solution to a dynamic IP address is to register. You actually end up with greater privacy that way. HiLo48 (talk) 02:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cecilia haha.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

X at the 2022 Winter Olympics
Are we putting the number of sports (up to 7) or disciplines (up to 15) in the nation at the 2022 Winter Olympics pages infoboxes? I think there should be uniformity. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I prefer using the number of disciplines, not convinced there is a right or wrong answer to this.18abruce (talk) 01:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Same, but in the infoboxes writing 15 sports is incorrect. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

bobsleigh "Ap" athletes.
For quota and confirmed qualified athlete numbers how do we want to handle the alternates, or Ap athletes. NOCs could potentially have as many as four accredited alternates travelling with them that are not counted as part of the quotas, do we add them only if they participate? I don't know what has been done in other sports.18abruce (talk) 17:57, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think we include them only if they participate. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, seems to be inconsistently applied in the 2018 articles so I was hoping for a bit of a consensus.18abruce (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you point out some examples? The only one I can think of is Nigeria. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Canada notes who they were, not included in totals, Germany article adds them in the totals. There was disagreement over a few others I recall based on the NOCs official statements of numbers of athletes.18abruce (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh okay, I think it should be standard across all articles. So maybe for 2022, we can agree (perhaps with others here) that only if an athlete competes, that they should be included. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with that. Nimrodbr (talk) 06:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * And ap athletes have been added into France's total (with a source). Not the biggest problem, but when the rules say that they get a specific quota of two women and we list it as three it looks bad.18abruce (talk) 23:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * We need to update indicating that its two, but the source says 3 because of xyz. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2022
Change the number of athletes from Brazilian NOC from 10 to 11. 177.154.44.236 (talk) 11:32, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2022
In the Diplomatic boycotts section, it is missing that the Czech Republic has also announced a diplomatic boycott of the Olympic Games. Source: https://www.irozhlas.cz/zpravy-domov/fiala-olympijske-hry-2022-diplomaticky-bojkot_2201281320_pj KrystofKanyzak (talk) 00:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like someone has carried out this edit but hasn't marked the request as complete, so I'm marking it as answered. – numbermaniac  12:37, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Uyghur name

 * 1) "Èr Líng Èr'èr" should be "Èrlíng'èr'èr"
 * 2) Change "Dinigeer Yilamujiang" to "Dilnigar Ilhamjan" or at least append the latter. Her legal name according to RFA is Dilnigar (although China didn't say she was an Uyghur in the ceremony, she is, according to that RFA report). By Chinese law, Uyghur name should be directly transcribed via SASM/GNC romanization, i.e. Dilnigar Ilhamjan, which seemed also to be her registered name in previous games per media. It seems her legal name has been sanctioned by IOC for political correctness. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 17:30, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Or maybe their predecessor should be mentioned instead, as they technically didn't light the flame but placed it. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Chinese law is not a reason. Also, the numbers seem interchangeable, and google translate gives "Liǎng qiān èrshí'èr", which is probably wrong but different. casualdejekyll  18:25, 4 February 2022 (UTC)


 * As I said, RFA gave her legal name correctly:, and that's how she has been known to the world until IOC reads her name in Mandarin. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Well, this seems like a bit of an issue. As for Èr Líng Èr'èr, I'm pretty sure that's staying. But Dinigeer Yilamujiang/Dilnigar Ilhamjan seems to be a complicated and political issue, so I think the best thing to do here is to try and get a bunch of editors together to see if we can find consensus for either variation.  casualdejekyll  22:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Please actually discuss the changes rather than refusing to discuss them and simply reverting my compromise edit without explanation.
How is it not a compromise? If you have issue with it, discuss rather than not discussing for some time only to revert it once i make a compromise. Corinal (talk) 15:50, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, you did not at all bother to include all the unrelated edits both I and other editors have made since my compromise edit, don't simply revert it, those should be included (unless you take issue with those also, if so explain why) Xoltered (talk) 15:51, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Xoltered, if the user did not agree to the "compromise", then that would be considered a unilateral change, not a consensus. While you may feel justified in doing so, it does not align with Wikipedia policy. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 07:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)