Talk:Olympic Games/Archive 1

Politics
quote: "In 1936, the British Government asked London to withdraw its bid to host the 1940 Olympics so that Tokyo could win this honour. This was done to promote Anglo-Japanese friendship at a critical time in British imperial history. London and the British Olympic Association agreed, and Tokyo got the bid. These Games were subsequently cancelled."

... it is possible that London withdrew its bid, because the British Government asked for it, but that doesn't mean, that this is the reason that Tokyo got them - maybe London would have had lost against Tokyo if it had bid...

Citius Altius Fortius 19:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Boycotts
The text says that the Games of Mexico-City were the first, which were boycotted - that is WRONG - NED, SWI and ESP boycotted the Games of Melbourne 1956, because of the invasion of the Warsaw Pact States in Hungary and EGY, CAM, IRQ and LIB boycotted the Games of Melbourne 1956, because of the crisis about Suez.

Citius Altius Fortius (German wikipedia)

Colours of Rings
The text states "These colours, white (for the field), red, blue, green, yellow, and black (for the rings—red represents the Americas, blue represents Europe, green represents Oceania, yellow represents Asia, and black represents Africa) were chosen such that each nation had at least one of these colours in its national flag." However, the main article at Olympic Rings correctly suggests that there is no official correlation between continents and colours and at least three competing unofficial ones. Should the quoted statement be removed from the main article?
 * Certainly, this is a common misconception, neither Coubertin did, nor the IOC does associate colors with continents. You are welcome to remove it (or I'll do it, when I'll be sure, what text should be the replacement). Fixed. Cmapm 14:52, 15 May 2005

Budo
Budo is not a sport, but a general term for Japanese martial arts. Maybe there were demonstrations of varous types of budo in the Tokyo olympics - is is this a case of confusion with judo? 130.237.122.245 18:41 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * Judo was a full Olympic sport in 1964; the demonstrated disciplines were Kyudo, Sumo and Kendo.

Hi I am a high school student and I wrote my senior research paper on the Olympics. I added some information into the Growth portion of the page. Please consider using it. I also will include my works cited page for your reference.

Works Cited

Anderson, Dave. The Story of the Olympics. New York: William Morrow and Company, 1996.

Arnold, Peter. The Olympic Games. New York: Optimum Books, 1983.

Atkin, Ross. ?Olympic Leaps.? The Christian Science Monitor. Aug. 2004: n.p. SIRS Discoverer. SIRS Mandarin, Inc. Newark High School Library, Newark, DE. 17 Nov. 2004. .

Currie, Stephen. The Olympic Games. San Diego, CA: Lucent Books, Inc., 1999.

Douskou, Iris, ed. The Olympic Games in Ancient Greece. Athens, Greece: Ekdotike Athenon S.A., 1982.

Johnson, William Oscar. The Olympics, A History of the Games. New York: Bishop Books, Inc., 1996.

McKay, Jim. ?A Century of Olympics.? Sport. July 1999: p. 76-79. SIRS Discoverer. SIRS Mandarin, Inc. Newark High School Library, Newark, DE. 17 Nov. 2004. .

Miller, David. Athens to Athens. Edinburgh, Great Britain: Mainstream Publishing Company LTD, 2003.

Senn, Alfred E. Power, Politics, and the Olympic Games. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999.

Amateur Sport
Request for content: The article needs to talk about amateur versus professional sports. Thue 19:57, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * No mention that the Olympic Games are supposed to be a competition for non-professional athletes. Anybody has more on this topic ?

Olympic Games
(Uncontested -- July 8) 

Self-nomination. My (personal) objective is to have this article featured on the main page the day the 2004 Olympics start in Athens, 13 August. There should be plenty of time to resolve objections. I think the current article gives a sufficiently detailed overview of the Olympic Games, and I've already provided links to other articles for more details (some of them do not exist yet). There's still several "dead" links, which I hope to fill with at least stubs in the next few days/weeks. Jeronimo 20:33, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Object for now. Sorry to get so nitpicky, but this will get a lot of readers. All the best, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 23:19, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The table at the bottom of medal winners needs formatting; the number of golds runs into the year.
 * No mention of the "amateur" requirement, or famous controversies over it, or why it was dropped
 * No mention of criticisms of the Olympics (i.e. cost, doping, etc.)
 * The section on "Summer Olympics" and the stuff about the founding of the Winter Olympics should be folded into a section called "Modern Olympic History", and the Summer Olympics should then have another page describing them (what sports go on, etc.)
 * Inconsistent capitalization, esp. of "De Coubertin". Which is correct, de or De? You learn something every day
 * No please, get nitpicky, we need that to get good articles. I will look into your objections. A few remarks: 1) I included a section on amateurism, but it disappeared, probably because I was edited the page concurrently myself. It should be back right now. 2) I'll look at the capitalisation, but if I'm not mistaken, it is normal use in France to capitalise "De" when the name is used without a given name ("De Coubertin"), but use lower case for the full name ("Pierre de Coubertin"). (This is also the case in my native language, Dutch). If this is incorrect, or if I should not use the French method, let me know. 3) As for your fourth point, I'm not sure what to do. I could make the Summer/Winter sections subsections of a new "Modern Olympic History" section. Would that accomplish what you envision? Jeronimo 06:34, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, people I know generally use lower-case 'd' in all cases (so, "John de Smith" and "de Smith, John"). Maybe this is a British thing? There's some recent discussion of this in the MoS... James F. (talk) 10:40, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be a start. Currently, the section on "Winter Olympics" is almost all history, except for one paragraph beginning with "The sports conducted...", while the "Summer Olympics" section is almost all history as well.  These two sections could be merged into a new section, called "modern olympic history". Then, perhaps, general details about the actual summer and winter games could go into one smaller section, perhaps called "summer and winter olympics", which would compare the two and draw in some details from the relevant articles.


 * Also, the table does need formatting--unfortunately, I don't know table markup. Also, there probably should be a section called "Criticisms and scandal"--no article on the Olympics would be complete without those East German swimmers. Brrr. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:07, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * I think I've addressed all your above points now. 1) I slightly reformatted the table. 2) I've added a section on doping and one on criticism on the IOC; there was already a part on the costs in the modern history section. 3) I have refactored the organisation of sections on the modern history. – Let me know if you think I have addressed your concerns sufficiently, or if they still require work. Jeronimo 10:01, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

subjective), so I haven't changed it. You're welcome to change it if you like. Jeronimo 08:28, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. A much better article now.  Oh, and good use of images.  That said, I hope that Revival of the Olympic Games gets made into an article by the time this gets on the front page. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 17:18, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Object. 1. The article uses "Baron Pierre de Coubertin" and "Pierre de Coubertin"&mdash;both of these should be replaced with "Pierre, Baron de Coubertin." The article also uses just "Baron de Coubertin" without the definite article - this does not sound correct, for it is like suggesting "Contrary to what Baron of Coubertin had hoped"; obviously, in such cases, the sentence sounds better with "the Baron" rather than "Baron." Also, the article uses "De Coubertin" in the middle of sentences. To summarise my reccomendations on the naming: for the first reference and as the caption for an image, use "Pierre, Baron de Coubertin," with the capital B. For all subsequent references, use either "Pierre, Baron de Coubertin" or "de Coubertin" (with the small D, except of course at the beginning of sentences). One could easily avoid "the Baron de Coubertin," the "Baron," etc. 2. The article uses inappropriate dashes (for instance: "Either way, the 1906 Games again attracted a broad international field of participants in 1904, 80% had been American  and great public interest, thereby marking the beginning of a rise in popularity and size of the Games." Em dashes (&mdash;) would conform to standard practice more. 3. The article makes awkward use of certain words: for instance, "The perhaps darkest chapter" as opposed to "Perhaps the darkest chapter." One sentence ends in "however", which sounds rather unusual: "Most contemporary Olympic historians consider them to be official Olympic Games, however." (Not an objection: To be pedantic, some sentences begin in "however"; these howevers can also be reworked into the middle of sentences.) 4. The article rather inconsistently uses "Olympics," "Olympic games," etc., as both plural and singular: "The first modern Olympic Games were a success ... it was the largest international sports event ever." One should consistently employ the plural; this involves using "they" rather than "it." Also note the sentence "Many athletes have become celebrities or heroes in their own country, or even world-wide, after becoming Olympic champion." 5. The article uses both "while" and "whilst"&mdash;one could just employ the latter. 6. The table could perhaps use solid borders. - - Emsworth 02:38, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * I would like to note that small grammar fixes can usually be done by the person objecting. Snowspinner 05:21, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * I went through Emsworth's remarks, but I have some notes: 1) There are two issues here. First, the formal name is indeed "Pierre, Baron de Coubertin". However, as far as I know, it is perfectly acceptable not to use this formal form at every occurrence. The name "Pierre de Coubertin" is used commonly in both English and French; both in books sources and the internet; I think we can safely use it here as well. Second, de vs. De. I explained my view on this in my answer to Meelar above. If you disagree, let me know. Changes made: first occurrence/image caption changed to "Pierre, Baron de Coubertin", changed "Baron de Coubertin" usage. 2) Done. 3) Done. 4) Done, although the occurrence you mentioned is the only one I could find. 5) I've replaced whilst by while, but as far as I know English (not a native speaker), there's nothing wrong with using them both. Whilst is just a British alternative for while, right? 6) This is actionable, but I don't see why this makes the table better (I guess this is pretty
 * My objection is based on the article's inconsistency. Both "whilst" and "while" are acceptable, but the article should use one or the other, not both. -- Emsworth 14:35, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've looked up the Baron de Coubertin on Encarta: it appears that the correct reference is just "Coubertin," not "de Coubertin." This assertion is consistent with the rule that "de" is used for collation purposes only when the surname includes one syllable.  -- Emsworth 14:42, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: I took a shot at improving the captions, and while I was there, I noticed many passive sentences throughout. Active sentences would help, though when I try to fix them, I sometimes presume an incorrect actor. -- ke4roh 00:15, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)

The article could use a careful treatment of the difficulty of sex determination in some cases. At one time (perhaps there still is and it is a common, but not often spoken of practice) there were random testing of female athletes to make sure they were in fact female. The greatest difficulty is of course for Intersexuals, which used to be more commonly known as hermaphrodites. The tendancy is of course to try to qualify as a female because of the typically slower times, weights, etc, needed to qualify or win. I read a past article that discussed this difficulty, though I have no other knowledge of it. - Taxman 00:50, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Taxman, women's sex-testing was indeed practice, it started in 1968, but has halted now. I'm not that sure though that sex tests belong in the article on the Olympic Games; after all, this happened in international sports, not just in the Olympics. I think a separate article on this topic (about which I know way too little) would be better; it could of course be mentioned in the See also's here. Jeronimo 06:26, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Ah, good point. it is not just an Olympic issue, but an international sporting one. I still think it should be at least mentioned here with how it does affect the Olypmics.  The Olympics after all are the focus of international "amateur" athletics, and the issue did arise at the Olympics first I believe.  Of course then the mention would point to the full article. I found a good summary by googling at  I'll include a link and quick summary in the article, and have created a stub article at sex determination in sports.  I'm not sure if thats the best name.   Feel free to move it to a better one. - Taxman 13:10, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Well on second thought, there is not even a mention in this article of the fact that men and women compete in separate contests, so I have no idea where to work in the sex determination issue. - Taxman 17:17, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

Locations of Olympic Games
At 15:52, 2004 Aug 19 I reverted a list of Locations of Olympic Games because it was alredy included in Summer Olympic Games. At 15:56, 2004 Aug 19 User:62.189.12.209 reverted it back saying that «This is a combined list, so is a useful addition». I will noy reverse it again because I can now see some of its merits: It is a combined list as User:62.189.12.209 stated and, most of all, it is IMO much better organized than the one in Winter Olympic Games. I still don't like having similar lists but have no better solution, by now, than keeping both, maybe you do... As it is a further reading topic maybe it should be moved closer to Related topics. I propose a sequence of: ''10. Locations of Olympic Games, 11. Related topics and 12. References'' --Nabla 16:40, 2004 Aug 19 (UTC)
 * Well... I just found out that my intuition on keep it to avoid a conflict is a policy: Abundance and redundancy. Nice, let's move on!--Nabla 16:53, 2004 Aug 19 (UTC)

Fair enough (sorry for the delay in replying). I prefer what you did with the war years, too.


 * I've taken the liberty of removing the list, and replacing it with the Olympic footer template. I think the list is too long (and ugly, too) for this article. The locations themselves are not vital here, and the detailled information is in the Summer and Winter Games articles. The current footer still provides quick links to all the celebrations. Jeronimo 20:46, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Jeronimo, I certainly understand your concern, and I do believe that the list caould be aesthetically improved. However, this is the major "portal" for olympic information in Wikipedia and the footer, though very useful (it remains), is not enough as reference. A student who comes to this page must readily know what games were hosted in, say, Los Angeles or Lake Placid, with no need of browsing further and further. --McCorrection 16:36, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Rome 1908
As I understand it, Vesuvius was the reason given. It may be that the financial problems were really caused by something else, but unless absolutely certain, I'd rather reserve this for London 1908. Aliter 08:14, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) OK, so should we change to "officially because the outbreak of Mount Vesuvius"? Gives the reason given originally and yet also indicates this is not the exact truth. Aliter 18:44, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) I did. Now it's up to you to add a prelude about Rome 1908 on the London 1908 page. Aliter 01:33, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm quite certain about this. The Italian organisation already faced financial troubles. The Vesuvius was given as the reason, although by then it was already clear they could not organise the Games. It was a "face saver", so to speak. I could give you reference for this if you want, but I don't have these present now. Jeronimo 08:45, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Jeronimo 22:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Table of host cities
I don't care for this table, nor do I think highly of the way it was introduced. However, for the sake of giving it our best shot, I'll note some things that one might look in to: Aliter 16:16, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * There are no such things as Host Countries; adding the name of the country to that of the city is merely a way to distinguish it from similar named cities elsewhere.
 * According to the latest revision of the Olympic Charter: All sports must take place in the host city of the Olympic Games, unless it obtains from the IOC the right to organize certain events in other cities or in sites situated in the same country.For the Olympic Winter Games, when for geographical or topographical reasons it is impossible to organize certain events or disciplines of a sport in the country of the host city, the IOC may, on an exceptional basis, authorize the holding of these in a bordering country. Is it clear enough now, that mentioning the country is not only a way to distinguish it (host city) from similar named cities elsewhere? But the IOC "is not the office" for Olympics, isn't it? Cmapm 17:46, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * For Summer Games, indication by year is not correct; they are nowadays identified by the Olympiad they start.
 * The order on the page gives the impression the Winter Games were organised later in the year than the Summer Games.
 * It appears each line represents a separate year, rather than an Olympiad. If so, naming that year only once per line ought to be enough.
 * The table as it is now, gives the false impression of a continuous series of Games, uninterupted by war. (More in general: What should we do with the information no longer given?)

No, the table isn't great, but at least it takes less space than the list before. I actually think the entire list is unnecessary, but others found this information vital. This is just a first attempt to present it a bit better, but feel free to make changes. As for your specific remarks: Finally, I think it is important to note that is article simply cannot contain all information there is about the Olympics. That's why there are many sub-articles which can contain a lot of this information, and it would be better off there. Remember that this article was "awarded" featured status. Jeronimo 17:14, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * To me the country in which the host city lies is the host country, but feel free to change that.
 * I don't care for the order
 * The year links to the Games, actually. Of course you can put the year in front and change the name to the ordinal number of the Games.
 * I don't think this table claims to be continuous. It's very clear to see that 1916, 1940 and 1944 didn't host any Games. The title of the section is "Locations of Olympic Games", and there were no Olympics in these years. Nor were there in Chicago 1904, Rome 1908, Denver 1976, etc. Such information   - in my opinion - clutters the table. Moreover, some of this is already mentioned in the article (see "Political interference").
 * One more strange thing for the featured article: for US and Canada the state or province is mentioned, for other countries is not. Why? Because they held the Games more than once? Why then Australian adm.unit is not mentioned (Australia held the Games more than once too)? Because there are other cities with similar names? But firstly: this is true for e.g. Moscow (there are two Moscows: in Moscow Oblast, Russia and in Mari El, Russia); secondly, all wikilinks point to right cities. Cmapm 17:46, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This is the American convention: giving city,state for US cities and city,country for "foreign" cities. I don't like this, but didn't want to delete it unilaterally.  See also Naming_conventions_%28city_names%29 for related bickering. Joestynes 04:27, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've just
 * put the winter games' columns before the summer games' columns as suggested
 * added a year column and replaced the games links with the roman numeral as suggested
 * &lt;small&gt;ed a couple of deviant cells
 * amended name of 1908 host country - I think the distinction of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from United Kingdom is less significant than that of Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, considering London was in both of the former pair whereas Sarajevo was in only one of the latter pair. I don't believe any events were held in Dublin. Joestynes 01:30, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Summer Games inquiry
What I don´t understand is why are the Summer Games not in the first column? They are older and they are more "important" than the Winter Games...

Citius Altius Fortius 08:03, 24 June 2005 (GMT)

Addition to politics section
"During the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, politics interfered with the Olympics when the IOC received word from Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy that former Canadian prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau died at his home in Montreal on September 28 at the age of 80. Axworthy ordered that the Canadian flag at athletes' village be flown at half-staff through October 3, since that was the day of the state funeral. However, the Olympics ended on October 1."

This doesn't seem a very major incident, I don't think it should appear on the main Olympic Games page. Perhaps a seperate page could go into more detail about political interference. Matthewmayer 18:44, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I have removed it for the time being Matthewmayer
 * I, too, have removed it for the time being. Aliter 16:22, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

NPOV for Boycott
Either we say both side did this because of or we say both argued. We can't describe the one as fact, and the other as just an argument. Aliter 22:43, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I totally agree, although I consider it as a minor flaw. Therefore, if you change it, I personally will not protest, for sure. Cmapm 11:52, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Taiwan and Montreal
Under Boycottwe have ''Also in 1976, Canada told the team from Taiwan that it could not compete at the Montreal Summer Olympics under the name 'Republic of China', despite a compromise that would have allowed Taiwan to use the ROC flag and anthem. Taiwan refused and did not participate as a result.''.
 * Should we regard this as a boycott or as Taiwan being refused without an accepted compromise?
 * Does anyone know what this is about? I'm not sure what it says here, probably because of the word "despite". As it reads now, there was already a compromise that allowed Taiwan to use the ROC flag and anthem, which means it wasn't a compromise, after which the government stepped in and told them they could not compete. But then we'd get stuck as there is nothing for Taiwan to refuse. What did happen?

Diet
The goose article is getting fat. What do we do to slim it? Aliter 14:54, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The most successful athletes
By whom Ray Ewry is considered to be the most successfull? At least not by the IOC (it states, that he won just 8 gold medals, see ). Intercalated Games, where he won other 2 medals even aren't included in subsequent count, when counting Summer Olympics since 1896. They are even not mentioned on the main page of the IOC website. The most successful athletes by gold medal count IOC considers four ones with 9 gold medals, and if considered not only gold medals, but also silver and bronze medals, the most successfull is definitely Larisa Latynina with 18 medals.

To summarize, the main article should be corrected. Four athletes with 9 gold medals should be on top. In the remarks section could be mentioned, that Ray Ewry won also 2 gold medals in Intercalated Games. The only photo with "may be considered most successful athlete" should be removed or at least it's caption appropriately edited.

Sorry, I have no time to do it myself now. But when I have one and nobody will have done appropriate changes before, I'll do them for sure. Cmapm 18:16, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * What you say is we have now: The table of athletes gives Ewry as winning 10 titles, but has a note that not counting the intercalated games would move him to the 10th spot. On the page on the Summer Olympic Games you'll find the IOC currently doesn't see those as official, while most historians do. (I agree this is a bit hidden; that could probably be improved upon.) We sided somewhat with most historians, yet we didn't contradict the viewpoint of the IOC. The image caption does not read "With 10 Olympic titles, Ray Ewry is the most successful Olympic athlete in history.". To me, it's al fairly NPOV. Aliter 01:03, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Please, read what I wrote attentively: what I proposed, you haven't now. I'll say more exactly, if it's not clear yet:I proposed to place Ray Ewry in the end of the table with 8 gold medals, officially recognized by the IOC (and other "purists" ) and write in the remarks section, that he also earned 2 gold medals on the Intercalated Games. What "most historians" you are speaking about, sources, please? I've found only two POVs: that of the IOC (official) and that of the Guinness Book of World Records (unofficial, it also, at least its 1988 edition, places Leonidas from Rodos with 12 wins between 164 BC and 152 BC on top, should we do it here?), but I don't believe, that GBWR should be considered serious historians, rather IOC should be. But even if most historians should say so, there should be two POVs: of the most historians and of the IOC. In this article prevails a POV of unsourced and abstract "most historians", and the POV of IOC is considered minor - mentioned only in the remarks section. You said: We sided somewhat with most historians, yet we didn't contradict the viewpoint of the IOC. But contradiction is not the point! The point is: one POV (of GBWR as well as unsourced and abstract "most historians") is placed on top of the table and in the caption of the photo and the other (official, of the IOC, which is not incompetent and is not abstract, POV), is placed into the remarks section. So, one POV prevails and the section is not NPOV. Another question:who are those "we", do you mean that "we are many and you are alone"? But even if it would be so, my POV, like that of previous editor(s) also has a right to be reflected in the article. I think that even the main topic of the section:"the most successful athlete" is always non-NPOV item. E.g. in my POV (and not only my, I suppose), the most successive athlete is who won most total number of medals, so, corresponding table should also be there to reflect my POV. Cmapm 02:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Once I'm being told I'm not listening/reading well, I tend to give up on a discussion. Is there someone else to react to this? Aliter 17:15, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was asked to read this debate; I'm not going to even think about entering the debate about whether the 1906 games are more "real" than the other "real modern amature big-biz" games, but I will make one comment. It's perfectly possible to list top athletes (top ten by either count, e.g) alphabetically and give the total and ranking with the Intercalated Games in one column and without in another. And yes, if you have an article titled "Olympic Games" then you probably should take into account the aincient ones. If you don't want to, please consider retitling this Modern Olimpic Games and put an article about the aincient ones in this place with a disambiguation link at the top. Mozzerati 10:43, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)

Sportsmanship
I expected to find at least something on Sportsmanship here! This links to Sportsmanship not even once, Sportsmanship is hardly noted at all even though the Olympic Games, one of the things it preaches is that it teaches or develops or whatever-- sportsmanship. This is unsufficient.Dwarf Kirlston 20:27, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

reverts on footnotes.
Hi, I just reverted a revert of my edit. The main reason is purely technical, the article wasn't in a working state any more since the note template doesn't work like that any more. Please use the more standard an and anb templates (from Footnote3) or fn and fnb.

Having said that, the reason for the consensus on not using footnotes is that they make things unclear. By putting the information either up front in the text or on a separate page discussing the issue, things become much more evident. Mozzerati 10:35, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)

Olympic nations?
Where would I find a list of countries that currently participate in the olympic games?


 * Try List of IOC country codes. As a general tip, clicking a link from the "Categories" bit of the page (Olympics in this case) will bring you a list of related pages and subcategories. Joestynes 04:43, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Qualification
I heard there is only a certain way you can qualify to participate in the olympics, but the whole elimination/qualification process is not mentioned in the article.


 * The qualification process varies widely from sport to sport and from year to year. Check the individual "SPORT at YEAR Summer Olympics" to find qualification criteria, if we have it.  Note that it can be somewhat difficult to find the criteria for earlier Games, so a lot of sports and years might not have anything. -- Jonel 14:29, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

also, I understand that there is sport called "acrobatics on horses" featured in the O.G. but it was discontinued as an olympic event.

National Olympic pages
Following requests, country is about to support IOC country codes (at present the information for a newly used country will have to be created manually). At the moment links are created to the 2004 Games pages: '''. ''' produces:. In the process I noticed that national Olympic coverage in articles is scattered. I suggest that a page for each nation be created, with summary information for each nation's Olympic participation. The format should include a summary near the top of activities related to recent (past or future) Olympics. Perhaps follow a pattern such as Country_at_the_Olympics, Country_(Olympics), or Olympics/Country. I note 2004_Summer_Olympics, Category:Nations_at_the_Olympics, Category:Nations at the Summer Olympics. (SEWilco 05:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * Just interesting, how this template deals with e.g. US 50/49/48 star flags? Also, I personally should prefer convention, used in WikiProject Sports Olympics list of nation pages: Country_at_the_Summer_Olympics, Country_at_the_Winter_Olympics. Cmapm 13:20, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It is a reference to the present nation, so displays the current flag. Or the next flag, when it is changed.  Discussion of variations should be in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template.  (SEWilco 18:46, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * One, the 49 star flag was not used at an Olympic games at all. As for previous flags, some can be used manually. However, I am still trying to fix some pages that has the current national flag used during time periods it did not exist. The USA flag is a good example. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 19:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting. If 49 star flag was official between January 3, 1959 and July 4, 1960, then was it used at 1960 Winter Olympics, held between February 18 and February 28, 1960? I though it naturally was... Cmapm 12:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops. I stand corrected, sorry. Well, at least we can mention on the US page that this was the only Olympics that carried the 49 star flag. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:38, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The present code for country would work for variations. Referring to flag USA-48 would require specification of the appropriate flag file and "United States" as country name.  (SEWilco 19:34, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * How could we do that? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 19:42, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Simply use USA-48 as the country code. Try it and you'll see in Preview that an unknown template name will be highlighted.  Click on it and enter the start of the flag file name; the suffix "_flag_large.png" is automatically added.  Same for the undefined country definition ("United States").  I note that Flag_of_the_United_States shows 48-star is in file Image:Us flag large 48 stars.png, which does not follow the pattern of most flag files.  Either a REDIRECT is needed, a copy, or rename.  Or I have to change how the template works, so entire file names have to be supplied. (SEWilco 03:42, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * I am in the process of uploading and renaming the file, but I need suggestions of a file name. I want to rename it Flag of the United States (1912).png, as I did with other flag files. Any other suggestions? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:41, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * USA isn't the only country this would be important for. Canada under the Red Ensign, the various flags of Germany, South Africa, China, etc, should all be taken into consideration. Gentgeen 20:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I know it applies to other countries. Obviously USA-48 is a convenient abbreviation for one case, but other countries have other names for their variations.  I suggest the standard country code be followed by whatever identifies the appropriate flag.  (SEWilco 03:42, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC))


 * Few things.
 * Displaying the IOC country code in articles is not helpful to most readers. How many of them know which nation "AHO" represents?  "ISV"?  My favorite is "LIB" - Libya?  Liberia?  Wait, no, it's Lebanon.  By my count, there are at least 227 different IOC country codes, many of which don't strike readers as obvious abbreviations for countries (as often, they aren't abbreviations for the English name of the nation).
 * Using the template would make every instance of a nation's name be a link. This is bad style, especially in the results pages of individual events where nearly every single word in the page would be linked.
 * There is a vast number of different flags used at the Olympics. They have a large number of different ways in which the file is named, making the simple addition of "flag_large.png" unhelpful in many cases.
 * Nation names also have a tendency to change once in a while, sometimes without a change in IOC country code. In at least one occasion, a single IOC country code has referred to two different national entities at different times.  Therefore, a template with the country code being attached to a single national name would be inaccurate for many Games.
 * As it currently stands, the template points to the 2004 Games. Of course, those aren't the only Games in which most nations have competed.  If I put the template in the 2000 Summer Olympics article, it would link to the wrong year.  And if I put it on, say, Forrest Smithson's article, it would reference a time long after the man died.
 * Now, all of these issues could probably be fixed by monkeying around with the templates. However, I don't see any way of doing it that wouldn't result in the creation of about a thousand templates, which would be ludicrous.  It would also make actually using the templates somewhat difficult.  If you can come up with some reasonable way of fixing these problems, I would be extremely happy.  If not, I think just continuing to use the current method works fine. -- Jonel 15:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Responses to the above. (SEWilco 17:02, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC))
 * The present template code displays the IOC code (the code given to the template) so as to keep the display compact. The template also has available the aliased country name (the name used to link to the country's page).
 * The template can use the country name as a label for the flag image; many browsers will display that label if you "hover" the cursor over the image.
 * "Hovering" the cursor over the text link will display the country's link URL in the browser Status area.
 * The template could be changed to display the country name instead of, or in addition to, the IOC code. If the IOC code is not displayed, the IOC code would end up being used in the Wiki code but not visible; this may be awkward for people seeing only the IOC code in other sources.
 * Another template can be created with a different display. (countryname?)
 * Not creating a link is a display issue. Following the first-mention-link style is a style issue.  Some editors will link every mention (in a list sorted by athlete, is it reasonable to require searching for the first mention of a country?).
 * Without a MediaWiki change, only linking the first mention requires different template incantations. Another version of the template can be made with a different display (-nolink?).
 * The flag file name issue is being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template.
 * Using different meanings (country names) for IOC codes at different time periods? Hadn't thought of that.
 * A country code "modifier" could be used, such as RUS-SFSR for Russia while a USSR member. Unqualified codes would use the default aliases.
 * If a Games parameter is given, such as 2000, that could be combined with IOC code to address aliases which are appropriate for those Games. This would require definition of aliases for each of the Games thus referenced.
 * Separate names, such as flagIOC-2000, can be created for each of the Games. This would require definition of aliases for each of the Games thus referenced.
 * As I mentioned someplace, at present the template links to one year's collection of national pages. This will undoubtedly be changed.
 * The Winter Games and Summer Games do not have similar national coverage, nor do past Games have similar coverage.
 * The year could be included in the template, but most Games do not have a page for each nation (although if a separate set of aliases is created for each Games, the article link could be to the page for the Games).
 * If a page is set up for each nation, this provides a single place for the template to link to. That page can contain links to all past games.  Including an area at the top for "Current coverage" provides a space for nation-specific updates during Games, or related news such as the "competition" for sites of future Games.  This is this section's proposal.
 * Using the country code modifier, such as RUS-SFSR, is my preferred way to handle country code variations.
 * Using an unqualified country code always refers to the current meaning in the template. If the meaning changes, someone has to edit existing references.  Each reference has to be examined in context to determine which meaning is intended.
 * I recommend a mixture of the above two:
 * Use modified country codes such as RUS-SFSR for most historical references to Games, where most references are simply to the nation.
 * Use separate names, such as flagIOC-2000 for Games which have more detailed coverage. Links can be oriented toward that Games' formatting.  Use such templates for references to the next Games also, and all the national references will not be affected by future changes.
 * Because such separate names will be implemented by creating a new template, each template can use the article patterns used that years' Games. Links to the recent Games can fit those existing articles.
 * Use the flagIOC name only for generic references to nations (and past variations through modified codes). The link would be directed to the proposed page for that nation.  That national page would provide access to whatever more detailed info is needed.  Or the link can, as it does during testing, just point to the most recent Olympics page available.

National pages
The above discussion wandered off, following after the flags. Any opinions about an Olympic page for each country? (SEWilco 04:06, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC))

As User:Cmapm pointed out earlier, the convention that is set up at the WikiProject page is for Nation at Summer Olympics and Nation at Winter Olympics. I would also prefer to stick with this format, as the Summer and Winter Games are different enough to merit separate discussions. -- Jonel 13:23, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Flag templates
Templates flagIOC,flagIOC-2000, flagIOC-2002, and flagIOC-2004 now exist.
 *  :  &mdash; For general national references; links to the nation's page for a recent Games (at present only Summer Games).
 *  :  &mdash; Links to nation's 2000 Games page.
 *  :  &mdash; Links to 2002 Winter Olympics page.
 *  :  &mdash; Links to nation's 2004 Games page.

To create the entry for a new country, call the template with the proper IOC code. Click PREVIEW and the template reference will have one or two undefined links. The first is for the flag, right-click on it, open in new page/tab and enter the name of the flag file (ie, "us_flag_large.png"). The second is for the country name, right-click on it, open in new page/tab and enter the name of the country's Olympics page (ie, "United States"). (SEWilco 01:20, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Flag template editing
There now is another way to edit flag template information, as shown in WikiProject_Flag_Template. It is not yet set up for IOC years, only the current countries. (SEWilco 09:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Example for Chinese Taipei:  

All the current IOC codes have been initialized, so   works:  (SEWilco 04:51, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Clean-Up Needed
This article is worthy of featured status, except for two things.

There is no link from "International Olympic Committee" to this article.

I think that the article is really about the Modern Olympic Games, but I am willing to be corrected on that point.

I went to International Olympic Committee and found no link to this article and so no mention of the amateurism/professionalism issue. That should be rectified.

- -   Robert McClenon

There are two different versions of the page: after entering 'olympic games' in the search box, I got to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_games, an old version. The newer version is under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Games (with a capital letter G). Maybe there's anyone who knows how to fix this...

Table borders
Why does the Olympic champions table have borders when a reader can discern the ordered data without them? &#9992; James C. 14:27, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

copy cat alert
copied this article!!


 * Worldhistory.com is mirroring our content, and has appropriately cited Wikipedia and included a notice that the article is under GFDL. They are not only allowed to do this, but we like them to!  This is the free (as in speech) encyclopedia, after all. &mdash; Jonel | Speak 21:32, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Stockholm, Hong Kong deserve equal billing?
In the table of host cities, previously the host city of the 1956 Summer Olympics and the 2008 Summer Olympics were displayed as "Melbourne + Stockholm" and "Beijing + Hong Kong". I find this quite misleading. Readers may believe that Stockholm and Hong Kong are in equal billing as Melbourne and Beijing, in some sort of co-hosting arrangement. The fact is that they just host the equestrian events. Actually other events, such as football, sailing and skiing are often held "outside" the host cities. So I've moved those cities as footnotes. Chanheigeorge 22:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

What is the correct name of the UK's Olympic team?
Is the UK's Olympic team "Great Britain" or "Great Britain and Northern Ireland"?

see Cfd discussion: Categories_for_deletion --Mais oui! 22:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 21:49, 3 May 2016 (UTC)