Talk:Orienteering/Archive 1

Map image
Re: the map picture: The "Basic play" section notes that "An orienteering course is marked on a map using a red triangle to indicate the start and a double circle to locate the finish. Red circles are used to show the control points"

However, the included example map does not appear to have these elements on it. Would it be possible to get a map that does include these elements (and perhaps is larger when click on as well)? (Oct 1, 2005) Finally started an account, so:  Dxco 20:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * We'd need to find an organization willing to release a portion of a map with a course on it to a Wikipedia-compatible licence. Images in the 'pedia always point to themselves when you click on them, so a 'wider' map would need to be linked to in the description text instead. Radagast 12:01, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, the 'larger when clicked' is now possible, thanks to the new ImageMap trick (which I've put in). We'll either need to modify this within GFDL to add a course, or get a different image, if we want route markings. Radagast 20:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Added some photos from other Wikipedias. Should the competitor be named? 84.230.251.110 17:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Think it would be better if the map used didn't feature advertising for a large multinational oil company. Unless of course they're willing to make a large donation to Wikipedia! (Psmythirl 19:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

Course Difficulty Progression
This is an excellent description but not really appropriate here. Also very specific to USA. If this description is available elsewhere on the Net then we could simply add a link to it instead.

Amateur Radio Direction Finding
I've been working on the Amateur Radio Direction Finding (also known as radio orienteering), article, and would really appreciate peer review and feedback from others with orienteering expertise. --Kharker 00:05, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * ✅ The article is now a Featured Article. Well done, Kharker. --Una Smith (talk) 07:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

City orienteering
There should be an article about city orienteering, which is done in a city rather than in a forest or other wilderness area. It is not a sport as such but it is a popular activity in student organisations. I have given directions to several students who have been city orienteering in downtown Helsinki. J I P | Talk 17:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * You're describing 'Park Orienteering' there, I think; we used to have a section on that distinction, but it's been edited out over time... Radagast 21:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

There is (or at least was) a world championship street/park orienteering that runs parrallel with the world cup.

Another novelty form is metr-orienteering where competitors use a metro system to get from place to place.--Glass90land 15:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

For at least the last 2 years there has been an urban Orienteering sprint race at the JK this has been held at university campuses and the one next year is to be held in a city centre (Leeds) I think ARBAY (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Use of compass
It is inaccurate to say the compass is only used to set the map to north. Compasses are also used to (1) set a direction for fast running where fine navigation is not required thus negating the need for continually checking the map, plot barings for fine navigation in featureless areas, or areas so over loaded with features they are dificult to distinguish. "Tips from the experts" posted at the recent British Championships nearly all inclded advise to use the compass in these ways
 * ✅ --Una Smith (talk) 06:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Sprint orienteering
Should the article at least mention sprint orienteering? There is an official map spec for it:, so it is legitimate and at least partially recognized by the International Orienteering Federation. StevenBell 00:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Edit - I see that the article does mention Sprint-O, in the race types section. My mistake. The "Race types" mentioned are mostly used in Foot-O, so would it make more sense to have that as a sub-section of "Recognized types of orienteering"? StevenBell 13:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Rogaining
The rogaining article could use some help. Someone is trying to add relevant history and someone else is reverting, claiming lack of notability. --Una Smith 13:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Trail-O
I edit the trail-o section to clearify the equal terms for disable and ablebodied in this for of orienteering. kingvald 13:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Find my phone Greg crane (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

GA review
I do not believe that this article was ready to be nominated. Rather than failing it outright, I will make some initial comments and place it on hold for seven days to allow these to be dealt with. If they are addressed, I will look through the article to give a more in-depth review that will allow it to be promoted. Some of the major problems that need to be dealt with first are:


 * 1) Much of the article is unreferenced. Please look through other articles listed at Good articles to see the level of referencing needed for a GA pass. The entire article needs to be referenced in order to be promoted.
 * 2) References should be formatted properly, including at least a title, publisher, url and accessdate for web sources. See Citation templates.
 * 3) Ensure that all images have source information (the address at which they were found, if they are taken from the internet).
 * 4) Stagger images rather than having them all right-aligned (see Manual of style).
 * 5) Address the concerns brought up by the "neutrality disputed" tags.
 * 6) Expand short sections. Many of them are only two sentences long, which is not long enough for some of them to be broad in coverage (particularly the "Governing body" section).
 * 7) Section headers should only have the first letter capitalized except in the case of proper nouns (eg. Governing body, not Governing Body).
 * 8) Where hyphens are used to indicate a range (eg. 70 - 80 minutes), replace them with en dashes (–) by typing &ndash ; (without the space between the h and the semicolon).

That should take care of the biggest problems with the article. Please let me know if you have any questions (I will keep this page on my watchlist, so you can reply here). GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Please add ✅ to the list once you believe the issues to be addressed. Anonymous101 (talk) 09:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Much of the article is unreferenced. Please look through other articles listed at Good articles to see the level of referencing needed for a GA pass. The entire article needs to be referenced in order to be promoted.
 * ❌ yet. Please remove this when it is done.


 * References should be formatted properly, including at least a title, publisher, url and accessdate for web sources. See Citation templates.
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC) Not all done yet Anonymous101 (talk) 10:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ensure that all images have source information (the address at which they were found, if they are taken from the internet).
 * ✅ All images are on Wikimedia Commons. --Una Smith (talk) 06:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Stagger images rather than having them all right-aligned (see Manual of style).
 * ✅ --Una Smith (talk) 06:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Address the concerns brought up by the "neutrality disputed" tags.
 * ✅ - there seems to be no more "neutrality disputed" tags so the isse is probably addresed. --Anonymous101 (talk) 20:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Expand short sections. Many of them are only two sentences long, which is not long enough for some of them to be broad in coverage (particularly the "Governing body" section).
 * ❌ yet. Please remove this when it is done.


 * Section headers should only have the first letter capitalized except in the case of proper nouns (eg. Governing body, not Governing Body).
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Where hyphens are used to indicate a range (eg. 70 - 80 minutes), replace them with en dashes (–) by typing &ndash ; (without the space between the h and the semicolon).
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 09:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I withdraw my nomination. I am busy this week and I do not have time to make the required edits. Anonymous101 (talk) 09:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I hope my comments are helpful in preparing this article for a future nomination. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 13:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Polish article is a Featured Article
Take a look at pl:Bieg na orientację. It has nice examples of a map, legend, clue sheet. --Una Smith (talk) 06:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

History
With creation of History of orienteering, I removed all but the most important chronological information from the history section. Now that it is cut down, a number of themes can be seen:
 * spread of orienteering to nations, as reflected in dates of first meets, formation of national sanctioning bodies, and first national championships
 * formation and development of IOF
 * formation and development of international and world competitions
 * formation and development of new sports within the scope of orienteering

So, how about reorganizing the history section along these major themes? Leave the more chronological account for History of orienteering. Perhaps even title that article Chronology of the history of orienteering. --Una Smith (talk) 16:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I made a first pass at the reorganization, and will relocate some content to other pages. Also, I worked History of orienteering inline.  --Una Smith (talk) 20:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Tasks for improvement
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Orienteering. Your help is requested in improving this article to get it to GA status. Anonymous101 (talk) 12:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The list is here now. --Una Smith (talk) 16:32, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Seven references are not properly formatted. Please format them. - formatted some. Anonymous101 (talk) 15:24, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Please add references to the Basics section. - (I've added some refs but its not quite done yet . 安東尼   TALKies  15:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)). I've added more refs to the sections so every fact in the sectio is references.
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 16:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Adventure racing section needs references - started adding references to this section. Anonymous101 (talk) 17:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Anonymous101 (talk) 05:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Radio orienteering section needs references
 * Military orienteering section needs references
 * The section entitled Map and control details needs references. Note: This task was added at 16:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC) by Anonymous101 (talk), as an addition to the original list.
 * The section entitled Personal equipment and clothing details needs references. Note: This task was added at 20:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC) by Anonymous101 (talk), as an addition to the original list. Task updated by Una Smith (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC).
 * Clarify An electronic punch card, or "punch-card holder" for hands-free orienteering. Task added by Una Smith (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC).
 * Do orienteers supply their own electronic punch cards? Or do they just supply a holder?  --Una Smith (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Badly worded question (and section). Digital cards can be bought - regulars have their own card - clubs have a stock to rent out (UK but I assume elsewhere). The holder is for a card card. At this point the equipment list should just say 'Control card' with the detail in the stub. I will rewrite this section - I just need some time.Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll just remove it from that section. --Una Smith (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Please add  directly below the improvement once it has been addressed

Eg.

Expansion
I don't agree that every section listed for expansion must be expanded; instead, the sections could be consolidated into more readable summary paragraphs. The current division among sections is not entirely natural. Here is a suggestion: start by mentioning that IOF sanctions several styles of orienteering, and put those in a section by themselves. Then, provide one section about other variants of orienteering. Much detail really is not needed in this article; each of those variants probably should be expanded on in separate articles. --Una Smith (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, anyone object to me removing must of the expansion tasks for some of the sections which probably do not need expanding? Anonymous101 (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've decided to be bold and remove the expansion tasks, as all the sections seem to be fine Anonymous101 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Good. The pending reorganization may take care of it.  --Una Smith (talk) 16:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflicts
This improvement drive is really moving, with lots of contributions. Wonderful! To minimize edit conflicts, how about tagging the article during edit sessions? See Template:Inuse. --Una Smith (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Good idea, also, section editing really helps. Anonymous101 (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree re section editing. --Una Smith (talk) 16:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I have just joined and am not sure where to post comments. I don't think the article starts off right. The article should be about orienteering not about olympics. That section would be better at the end after international. It also presents a ski orienteer as the first image - that can only confuse beginners. The next three sections (basics/map/equipment) would probably be better organised as competition and sub-sections (basics/map/course/cds/card/results ...) to allow the reader a logical flow through the race. I think we need a section on terminolgy - NOT a glossary but a simple table listing the main UK/US differences e.g. event/meet. I am willing to write these. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Good ideas. I agree the article structure needs work.  The sections Race types, Recognized..., and Other variants are somewhat overlapping.  Also, content about IOF probably should come before Recognized...  Do Australians have any terms of their own?  Maybe re-cast the table as dealing with terminology variants within English, ie don't assume all differences have a UK/US division.  --Una Smith (talk) 01:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will start a small table. (As a beginner here I will need to find out how to do it). I was going to start with UK/US to keep it simple. It could then be extended by columns if people think it is necessary. We need to decide on a lead language - can I propose UK english (on the grounds that BOF is bigger than USOF). Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the IOF uses the UK terms but I'm not 100% sure!! 安東尼   TALKies  17:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree to using whatever terms IOF uses. --Una Smith (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Lead language is IOF English Twiceuponatime (talk) 10:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted from the article the sentence about how we agreed; such editorial comments do not belong in Wikipedia articles, and the fact that we agreed in no way requires future contributors to comply. --Una Smith (talk) 13:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just a short notion. I think it would be good to separate Jukola from its Swedish counterparts, the competition takes place in Finland anyways. I didn't do any mods as I am not sure about the facts: orienteering is very popular in Finland as well, but I don't know how it compares to Sweden. Should it say something like "Sweden and Finland", or have a separate section? I think Jukola is worth mentioning however, as the largest orienteering relay in the world, even if it's not the oldest. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.248.98.153 (talk) 06:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I did this, better? --Kslotte (talk) 12:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

History
I removed from this article a lot of content that is in History of orienteering; now some content there is being duplicated here. Please let's not duplicate content unnecessarily; that leads to Content forking. --Una Smith (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, good idea. Anonymous101 (talk) 05:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Better now, though could use more pruning. Mind if I do it?  History of orienteering is far from complete and far from GA quality (it especially isn't global), so the history section in this article should mention only the most important points.  --Una Smith (talk) 05:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The claim that "orienteering" was coined before "orientering" is not supported by the source. --Una Smith (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is the problem text: the actual term 'orienteering' was first used in 1886  and meant the crossing of unknown land with the aid of a map and a compass.  --Una Smith (talk) 05:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The IOF reference supports the statement in the article, in the Past & present section (but not in the About us section that was pointed to). I fixed that citation, but then there is still the problem with crediting Killander with first using of the word orientering (much later, 1918 or 1919?). Oceanh (talk) 17:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC).
 * 1918, in promotional materials for the 1919 meet he organized. --Una Smith (talk) 01:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Lead
I rewrote the lead, moving numerous tangents into related pages (Orienteering map, Course (orienteering)), and adding a paragraph about how foot-O is the foundation. I do not intend this as the final lead; for one, I do not like the paragraph about sport governing bodies. For one thing, it introduces information not otherwise mentioned in the article. Also, it is somewhat out of place in the lead. --Una Smith (talk) 03:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This is nicely written BUT I thought the article was about foot-o (with information about the IOF approved variations). It is now about everything. That might be correct but does mean that every variation has to be included which is likely to create a lot of confusion. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * An article titled Orienteering that is all about foot orienteering has a POV problem. How about we solve it by creating Foot orienteering, where the foot-O world championship and world games info would belong. --Una Smith (talk) 14:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The trouble is that they are all related and need to be linked. I think I might prefer a top article e.g. with little more than your lead, and then branch to the specific sports. I worry about trying to pack too much into one article. It is not easy. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's what I am thinking too. The top article should describe only the essence of each type of orienteering, and compare and contrast them.  Separate articles for each type can then describe that type in isolation (ie, without comparing and contrasting the other types).  I also think we need another navbox, but I will bring that up on the WP Orienteering talk page. --Una Smith (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have created Foot orienteering, Mountain bike orienteering, Canoe orienteering, and removed the details from Orienteering, leaving behind a list. Better?  --Una Smith (talk) 01:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks ok, but I will need time to consider the ramifications. Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have had a quick look and cannot see anything to complain about. One point would be that readers may search for (say) 'ski orienteering' and not find a great deal. There probably needs to be a link back to 'O'. In a banner(?). 'This article is part of a series of articles about the family of orienteering activities. For a more detailed description of the sport see orienteering.' Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The orienteering pages need a navbox. Template:Orienteering at the moment is being used as a redirect to Template:WikiProject Orienteering.  Once someone has edited all the pages that link to Template:Orienteering I will make it a navbox.  --Una Smith (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Article structure
Looking at the TOC, I think the article would be much improved if organized around two themes:
 * mode of travel
 * foot
 * ski
 * mountain bike
 * canoe
 * horse


 * format
 * staggered start race (foot O, ski O, mtb O, radio O?)
 * mass start race (sprint O, relay, NACMO style mounted O, adventure racing, score O)
 * score O types (night O, rogaine, canoe O)
 * pace race (TREC style mounted O)

I am not sure how to handle trail O and string O. --Una Smith (talk) 03:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I will need to consider this but off the top of my head: Competitors only compete in one activity so information should be arranged by that (foot-o, ski-o, mtbo, trail-o). Readers are likely to be seeking information on that topic, not e.g. mode of travel. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Queries
My apologies if this is not the right way to do it. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever works for you. --Una Smith (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

IOF Rules. Reference [3] links to the IOF Rules for the 'organisation' not the rules for the sport i.e. competition rules. Is that what was intended? Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * ? The current link is to here, where, at the moment I write this, I see links to competition rules for foot, MTB, ski, and trail Os.  Should we link directly to the competition rules for each? --Una Smith (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah. I see what I did. Having just read 'IOF' I clicked on IOF. I was expecting to see foot-o rules. Since this article is about the sport, not the organisation, it should link to those rules BUT that means linking to all which is likely to be messy. Easier to leave it as it is. Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Relay. This has an image of a finish. It is a nice image but we do not discuss finish, and it does not relate to relay. Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I wondered about that photo. There are some relay photos on Commons;  I will pick one. --Una Smith (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Military orienteering. The way this is worded is untrue. The British Army does not have an O club. Military personnel have set up a club (actually 3) which is affiliated to BOF. They put on orienteering events (open and closed) rather than land navigation events. Easier to leave it out - it does not seem to add much to the section. Twiceuponatime (talk) 13:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the information belongs in Wikipedia, but not where it is now. The import is that some O clubs are military, sort of.  It belongs together with other content about orienteering clubs. --Una Smith (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The same argument could be applied to University clubs. Do we want to get involved in describing clubs? Although, it is related, sort of(?) Twiceuponatime (talk) 08:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed the section on Military orienteering and added a sentence about mil, uni, etc clubs to the lead. Better?  Possibly that sentence should be merged with the section now titled Governing body, and that section should be about O orgs in general.  --Una Smith (talk) 16:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That was next on my to do list - combine governing bodies. I will do it over the weekend. Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Governing bodies rewritten. Note that I have done this by hierachy rather than sport. Both are valid. Also, I was going to suggest that olympics be moved to ski-o; or do we need to leave it here to promote that aspect at the top level? Twiceuponatime (talk) 12:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I would move most of the content about the Olympics to ski orienteering, leaving here only a one or two line mention of it. History of orienteering needs a similar mention. --Una Smith (talk) 14:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Competition - rearranged
I have rearranged this to try and give a logical flow through the event for the general reader. It describes foot-o but should be sufficiently vague to include the others. If the article is to be all-inclusive where do we put the exceptions? Here, at the end, or in the stubs? And apologies to Una Smith for overwriting her two changes. Chaps should not be in, they are equipment for riding a horse, not for orienteering. Twiceuponatime (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)