Talk:August 2010 in sports

Length issues
As you could see, it is 372 kilobytes long, and it must be split. Please leave some comments ASAP.

Lamp301 (talk) 18:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Glitch
bobrayner (talk) 03:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm getting intermittent proxy errors when trying to edit the article; this just gives me a 502. Is this related to the size?
 * Also: Do many readers actually use these big old monthly list articles, or are they largely a write-only medium where wikipedians add awkward hierarchies of bullet-points and flags?

One article per date?
Would you suggest one article per date, or perhaps 3-4 articles for the month?--Jax 0677 (talk) 04:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I would suggest moving the whole article, and any like it, to another site. BigJim707 (talk) 15:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This article is obviously someones labour of love, however, it needs a bit of a prune, preferably using a flame thrower. Splitting to one article per date would just make it impossible to find anything. Here are some ideas:


 * Races currently show 1st 2nd and 3rd. If the race's article is linked then just show the winner, no time. Do not show the then standings in a championship. The reader can look in the article if needed. It may be possible to add any really notable events, a fictitious example.

Motor Racing, Formula 1, German Grand prix, Winner Lewis Hamilton. There was a 12 car pile up on lap 2.


 * Sports tournaments just need the name of the tournament and any notable occurences. Tournaments with a small number of competitons e.g. Wimbledon could include the winners and possibly on upset results e.g.

Tennis, Wimbledon Championships Mens : Andre Aggasi Womens: Serena Williams (Venus Williams was knocked out by Melanie South in the 3rd round) Mixed Doubles ... In the 4th round, the umpires chair was knocked over by Pat Sampras Dick Dastardly was disqualified for drugs use


 * Athletics tournaments (i.e. large number of competitions), it would be best to just have the competition name and any notable events.
 * It would be as well to remove domestic competions. If you include 1 you have to include them all. Be wary even of cup finals. Ask an American what the Rose bowl is and he will say a football match that the whole nation watches, a Brit would say its what you put roses in.

I trust this would do for starters. If you apply these ideas and you end up with a very small article, then perhaps some details could be re-introduced. I suspect that the article will still be too large. When the article is reduced to say 75k then there is a chance that some of the criticisms leveled above will be no longer valid and the article would in fact be a useful article. Hope this helps. Op47 (talk) 22:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Categories
I recommend splitting the information into multiple articles by category (season, popularity, relevance, type of sport [football & rugby; lacrosse, hockey, soccer, & handball; baseball, cricket, & softball], location, etc...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylanvt (talk • contribs) 18:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I was going to do as I originally suggested, but the article was so dreadful that I have had to split it per sport as an interim measure just so that it is possible to see what is what. I now need to pay attention to the real world. I know the split job is absolutely dreadful, if when I come back, I find someone has started to tidy up then I will know it was worthwile and I need not go to the next step. If not then I will implement my suggestion. Op47 (talk) 19:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Prune
I have given the article a bit of a prune as detailed above. I did try splitting by sport, but at least 1 page was nominated for deletion and it looks like it will get deleted. Rather than wait for that to happen, went ahead with the pruning stage. I noticed that there a lot of inconsistencies, so the article needs more work. At least it is editable now. Once again, the real world demand my attention so the article will have to be as it is. Op47 (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)