Template talk:Infobox Olympic bid

Olympic Rings image
I removed the Olympic Rings image because this is a Fair Use image, and is therefore only allowed in the article namespace. Let me know if there are any questions. tiZom(2¢) 19:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * You did good. I was the one who added the image as default forgetting completely that it could only be used on articles. Thanks!  Parutakupiu  talk 19:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Broken
This template has somehow been broken - look at the Bids for the 2012 Summer Olympics article. violet/riga [talk] 18:31, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Visual changes
I would like to propose some changes in the Infobox Olympic bid style. Currently, it seems heavily colored and would be interesting to add some neutrality to the template. Without excluding the Olympic colors and with some restructuring, the Infobox becomes more clean and organized. I made the changes in one of my subpages – User:Felipe Menegaz/Template:Infobox Olympic bid – and you can preview it on the proper pages to know how it looks like. Here is one example. Due to copyright issues we cannot display logos in pages other than those with fair use. If there is no objection, I will update the Infobox soon. Best regards; Felipe Menegaz 01:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I've implemented the changes since there were no replies to this topic after more than 24 hours. Any problems can be still be discussed. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 01:26, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you could've posted this at WT:OLY if you wanted to have replies under one day, as this template is hardly on the watchlist of editors other than those which edited it. Anyway, I really appreciate your work here, the chromatic palette was becoming a bit saturating. My only comment is about the map with bidding cities which is too small. Imagine if Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg were bidding... the dots were impossible to distinguish. Parutakupiu (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I did it: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Olympics. I agree with you about the size of the map, it is too small, but the limit for the this infobox is 200px. Anyway, comparing to the previous maps, I think they got more visible and functional. Here is a comparison:


 * The idea was just to display a simple map in the infobox, leaving room to a more comprehensive map on the articles, larger and with details. Felipe Menegaz 17:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry then, I did not notice your post. Maybe you can increase the infobox width just a little? Even if it's just a simple map the dots are functional links and their superimposition would render them difficult to use. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I personally didn't like the tests that I made using a 240px map. I didn't see much difference and I think the infobox current width is ideal. There is also the possibility of reducing the dots width, but it would make them more difficult for clicking... Some case like that of Belgium-Netherlands-Luxembourg has actually occurred? After a quick look, it seems that there is no possible case of superimposition. Felipe Menegaz 19:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Later Olympics bids
Maybe it's nice to include in the infobox besided the history also for which Olympics the city placed a bid (if any) for later Olympics. So that for instance the bid for Madrid 2020 could be added in the infobox of Madrid bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think there would be no problem to mention the 2020 bid on the "Previous games hosted" section. Like this:

None • Bid for 1972, 2012 and 2020 Spain hosted the 1992 Summer Olympics
 * Felipe Menegaz 22:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

1976 Winter Olympics
In the infobox of Bids for the 1976 Winter Olympics is written that the selection for the 1976 Winter Olympics was made at the 70th IOC Session (see here). However the infobox is showing 69th. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 09:05, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Parutakupiu (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

YOG Roman Numerals
It looks like the template treats YOG bids the same as it would with a Winter Games or an Olympiad, in terms of the roman numerals used. Is there any way that this issue could be corrected? Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about editing templates. *grins sheepishly* Sierrak28 (talk) 07:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Bids for the 1998 Winter Olympics
This template is used in the article Bids for the 1998 Winter Olympics. The "winner" field creates two links, one in the Overview section that links to the winning city's bid article (in this case Nagano bid for the 1998 Winter Olympics, which is a self-redirect), and one in the Decision section that links to the article for the winning city. The problem is that the city of Nagano is not the primary topic for the term—the correct article is Nagano (city)—so the link created by the template goes to the dab page Nagano, and I couldn't find a way to disambiguate the link without making a mess. All the other recent host cities are the primary topics for their names, so this isn't an issue otherwise. Is there any way to link to the correct article, or to alter the template so disambiguation of the winning city link is possible? — Shelf Skewed  Talk  05:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)