Talk:Olympic Games/Archive 7

Requested move 25 July 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn per reasons stated below. Interstellarity (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Olympic Games → Olympics – When deciding on an article title, we strive to use commonly, recognizable names. I believe the proposed title fits WP:COMMONNAME. This Ngram shows that Olympics is more widespread in usage than the current title. Let's go through the things that make the proposed title a better target: Recognizability: Olympics is more recognizable than Olympics Games and used more in reliable sources. Naturalness: It is more likely that a reader will search for Olympics than Olympic Games and is more likely to be linked with other articles. Precision: The article is about the modern Olympics since that is what most people are looking for, but hatnotes are in place to link readers to other articles. Other than that, the proposed title identifies the subject. Conciseness: It is shorter than need be. Consistency: Articles about certain Olympics such as the 2020 Summer Olympics use this name. I hope this will be a good move for Wikipedia since I believe this is what readers are looking for. Interstellarity (talk) 20:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC) → Another example of this would be Great Britain. An Ngram may well show that it's most commonly referred to as "Britain" but that would hardly be a valid reason to stop using the official name as the article's title. Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The current primary redirect works fine, "Olympic Games" is in no way incorrect.  Much like Oscars is more common than Academy Awards, but the latter is the article title. 162 etc. (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Similar to the above claims. Nimrodbr (talk) 08:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:COMMONNAME which says that Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used - I see no compelling policy or logical reason to keep the current less common name. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above.  lomrjyo ( talk • contrib ) 12:15, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose The official name of this multi-national event is "Games of the ?? Olympiad" which translates to "Olympic Games" where Olympic is the modifier and Games is the important base noun. "Olympics" may be commonly used but semantically it doesn't really mean anything on its own. If you Google "Olympics" you get (1) Olympic Games Tokyo 2020, and (2) Official website of the Olympic Games. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , have you read WP:OFFICIALNAMES? -- DeFacto (talk). 15:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , yes I have read WP:OFFICIALNAMES but I happen to think it's irrelevant in this case because the full name Olympic Games is far less ambiguous than the single word Olympics and in this instance it's safer to stick with the official name. Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "Games" is key in identifying sport events. For instance, a Pan American Shooting Championship is very different from the Pan American Games. Same thing goes for World Cups or World Championships vs Olympic GAMES. The existing redirect from "Olympics" to "Olympic Games" addresses what you point out perfectly. P.S. Pan American athlete here. TanookiKoopa (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. In addition to the above Support arguments. There really isn't anything else known simply as "Olympics". While "Olympic" (not plural) can relate to the games, the IOC, Greek mythology, etc, but speaking to a common American, Briton, Australian, or any other English speaker would think of the Olympic Games when simply saying either "Olympics" or "the Olympics". Major corporations involved with the games also simply refer to the Olympic Games as the "Olympics", including but not limited to CNET, CBS , Rolling Stone , Chinese State Media via CGTN , and BBC.
 * I think there's a difference between Tokyo Olympics and Olympics. The city name qualifier makes games unnecessary (however, the Guardian are referring to 'Tokyo Olympic Games', Also, note that on BBC, the tab refers to 'Olympic Games'. When it comes to generic references, the two terms seem to be used interchangeably, although Olympics seems to be slightly more common in my research. Local Variable (talk) 11:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose WP:COMMONNAME is of little moment here, as Olympics and Olympic Games are used about as often as each other. I'm a little sceptical of the ngrams use here - if you look at reliable sources, they will mention Olympics about as often as Olympic Games - the reason for the disparity may be that, for example, where 'Olympic Games' is mentioned, 'Tokyo Olympics' will also be mentioned, and so on for earlier events. I am applying more of a subjective criterion than a Google search count. If a move is to be justified on this basis, I think we need to see some more evidence or justification that it is the more common name, ideally more than a hit count. A quick look at the reference list of this article is telling. This issue aside, there are other reasons why a move is not ideal, applying WP:CRITERIA. For 'consistency', it enjoys harmony with Paralympic Games. Another pressing issue for consistency is that we may need to look at Summer Olympic Games and Winter Olympic Games. We already specify that the games are occasionally referred to as Olympics in the lead, per WP:OTHERNAMES. I also like the consistency with Ancient Olympic Games. It also just in general seems to be a more precise description of the subject. In summary, even if the common name is Olympics, which is contestable, 'the most common has problems'. I see no compelling reason for the move and several problems. A reasonable request for comment, however. Local Variable (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Further, have a look at the title and content of Category:Olympic Games. Consistency really is an issue here. Local Variable (talk) 11:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose the proposed title is common but Britannica uses the current title and this one seems slightly more formal.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:40, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Both are good common names. But the existing name is less ambiguous and similarly common. As a remark, we have a myriad of WP:WELLINTENTIONEDRULES. However, they need to be applied thoughtfully. In this instance, WP:OFFICIALNAMES is invoked by some above as discouraging "Olympic Games" (as "official") versus the proposed name. However, a closer read of that page makes it clear the rationale at WP:OFFICIALNAMES is not really applicable here, so I feel comfortable giving it fairly minimal weight in this instance. Martinp (talk) 02:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per TanookiKoopa. They're both common names, so we might as well go with the more descriptive and formal option. As a side note, I wish that proposals like this weren't always held right when a page is most in the spotlight. Even supports here should agree that there's nothing urgent about the move, so we could've held it sometime when the games weren't actively taken place and a lot fewer readers would've had to encounter the ugly requested move banner. (I also still want us to redesign the banner, but that's another matter.) &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with Sdkb completely. This discussion is untimely.TanookiKoopa (talk) 21:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. Overwhelming opposition. Propose a snowclose. Rodney Baggins (talk) 21:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose per above. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 04:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Withdrawn - Because the 2020 Olympics are ongoing, I withdraw my move request. I might propose it again when the Olympics are not in session. We can usually get better opinions on article titles when the events are not happening. I request that an editor close this discussion at their earliest convenience. Interstellarity (talk) 22:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2021
Edit last sentence of paragraph 4 of section 11.3 ("Host nations and cities") to read the following:

"The 2020 Summer Olympics was held in Tokyo in 2021 due to postponement from the COVID-19 pandemic. Tokyo became the first Asian city to host the Olympics for the second time." 165.166.11.26 (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2021
Edit last sentence of paragraph 4 of section 11.3 ("Host nations and cities") to read the following:

"The 2020 Summer Olympics was held in Tokyo in 2021 due to postponement from the COVID-19 pandemic. Tokyo became the first Asian city to host the Olympics for the second time." 165.166.11.26 (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Adding oxford stuff
Adding about expulsions and gentrification. Many people are expelled from some sectors of the city in olympic games. Which contributes to even higher prices for houses and such.

Also mega-event in the text of the articles should be turned into a link. To Megaproject (There is no mega-event). Many of the olympic games feature massively built things.

Also...Olympic Games might be a recurrent 4-years boondoggle. (A useless project, or of few benefits). With an opportunity loss in other domains. Chicago was a candidate city for the 2016 Summer Olympic games, but it lost the bid with Rio DE Janeiro getting the highest vote tally. Perhaps this would be a good case study of how not hosting the Olympic games can be an unexpected benefit. 2603:6000:C305:78DF:EC07:767D:CF4E:451B (talk) 02:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC) Neenah, WI, USA

Permanent Location(s)
This wikipedia article is missing content about the growing concern to pick permanent sites for Olympic games. Either rotate between two or more permanent sites, or host at some location for two or more times before going to another location, or some other variation. See article and google searched articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.117.127 (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Summer & Winter Games different treatment of cancelled games.
Perhaps we could point out, that the Summer Olympics does numerically count its cancelled 1916, 1940 & 1944 Games, while the Winter Olympics doesn't numerically count its cancelled 1940 & 1944 Games. GoodDay (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Mario and Sonic at the Olympic games, related games.
In my opinion, the addition of Olympic Sponsored games should be considered. Games such as Mario and Sonic at the Olympic games 2012 and others should be added due to their cultural impact.

Loljack1 (talk) 02:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC) Jackson S.

Update as of 2022
This sentence near the end of the article needs to be changed: "The most recent Winter Games were held in Pyeongchang in 2018,"...

Epistemophite (talk) 20:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

"Hell bah" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Unannounced Olympiads and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 5 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 01:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

This article (a Featured Article) needs significant work
This Featured article was promoted in 2009, and is not up to FA standards. There are tone/MOS, weasel word, and NPOV problems throughout. Unless someone is willing/able to bring this article to standard, it should be submitted to Featured article review.

For two weeks in August 2016, this article was the 10th- and 14th-most viewed article on Wikipedia. We can anticipate that there will be many readers this summer as well.

I've made some initial changes, but there's a lot to be done. I'm inclined to put a Cleanup and/or Tone tag on this article, but as it's a Featured Article, I'd prefer someone more experienced to tag it as appropriate.

Below, I've listed a sampling of problems in this article:


 * Above, I discussed the term Olympic Movement as NPOV. There is language throughout the article which reads as promotional and/or informal.
 * Encyclopedic tone:
 * The conclusion of the lead section reads "The Games have grown so much that nearly every nation is now represented... Every two years the Olympics and its media exposure provide athletes with the chance to attain national and sometimes international fame. The Games also constitute an opportunity for the host city and country to showcase themselves to the world."
 * From the "Changes and adaptations" section: "After the success of the 1896 Games, the Olympics entered a period of stagnation which threatened its survival. The Olympic Games held at the Paris Exposition in 1900 and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition at St. Louis in 1904 were little more than side shows. This period in Olympic history was a low point for the Olympic Movement." (I partially revised this.)
 * The whole first paragraph of the Economic and social impact on host cities and countries section (version at time of writing) is a showcase for the problems of over-reliance on primary sources (see WP:PRIMARY and WP:BALANCE) -- it is an assortment of primary journal articles thrown together in opposition to each other, qualified with weasel words. Not to mention WP:TONE and WP:WEIGHT. Jeepers.
 * "Many economists are sceptical" ... "Conversely hosting (or even bidding for) the Olympics appears to increase the host country's exports, as the host or candidate country sends a signal about trade openness when bidding to host the Games." ... "which seems to benefit the local nonprofit sector." ... "This finding suggests that hosting the Olympics might create opportunities for cities..." Oof.
 * The article's section hierarchy could be improved, with sections 2.1-2.5 being a history of the modern Olympic Games, and sections 2.6 and 2.7 being Cost of the Games and Economic and social impact on host cities and countries respectively.

The whole cluster of articles around the Olympics have similar problems (e.g. "Coubertin is the instigator of the modern Olympic movement, a man whose vision and political skill led to the revival of the Olympic Games"), but this one, being the central article (and a Featured Article no less), should probably come first. SSSheridan (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * and I am unsure how this happened; this article has been tagged as needing a WP:FAR for almost a year, and it wasn't on User:Gog the Mild/Blurbs for February 2022 when I reviewed it, so this was missed, and the notification above went to archives.  If you can remember, it would be good to check WP:URFA when doing a last-minute schedule change.  Bst, Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  03:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, is there a page or whatever at Urfa which has a list of FAs which you would prefer not be TFAs? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , I will put a broad answer to that for everyone's benefit over at the talk page of WP:URFA/2020A, where it is more likely to be seen by more people. Bst, Sandy Georgia (Talk)  16:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Response at Wikipedia talk:Unreviewed featured articles/2020 Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:17, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Still deficient. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  03:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Explain new concept of olympic
Vc 117.98.106.156 (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

monkes are cool
theyree cool 199.192.107.18 (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Summer Games before 1924?
the Winter Olympics are a relatively recent creation and to call the Olympic Games before 1924 the "Summer Games" is completely anachronistic. Arorae (talk) 18:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , please see Talk:1896_Summer_Olympics. Primefac (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)