Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athletics (overview)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Athletics (disambiguation). Frankly, there is no consensus. However, I see no virtue in relisting because I see no likelihood of any better consensus developing. Looking at the content, it is based on the US interpretation of the term 'athletics', that is already covered at Athletics (U.S.) (which should actually be called Athletics (United States) but that is another matter :-)), and is not, in fact, an overview hence the title is misleading. One of the suggested targets Athletic sports has, as it happens, also been redirected to Athletics (U.S.) so it no longer exists as a target. What we have are two definitions of 'athletics'; one used in the US and one for the rest of the world. The narrower definition, I would add is not the exclusive province of Europe since it is also the IOC usage. Consequently, a redirect to sport would give unjustifiable primacy to the US interpretation. My inclination, initially, was simply to delete the article since the content is contained elsewhere. However, since the last commentator says that they have merged the content, outright deletion may have GFDL implications. Consequently, I think that my retargeting is both the best solution and one which will enable searchers on the title to find the information that they are seeking. The content is under the redirect for the benefit of any editor looking to carry out any further merge. TerriersFan (talk) 22:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Athletics (overview)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD: we already have articles athletics (sport) and athletic sports, another article is hardly needed. But despite it's title and lead it has little on athletics, but is mostly a list of criteria for what makes as good athlete. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 19:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Athletic sports is a stub. Athletics (overview) is a new page, approved directly by the project manager, SillyFolkBoy. The new page is clearly much more developed and referenced than the extremely weak stub, and it links to many pertinent Wikipedia pages. JohnBlackburne's suggestion to delete the much stronger page seems to be worthy of ridicule, as Athletics (overview) was a much-needed page to elaborate on the general topic of athletics, whereas the existing WP pages all fall under the more general topic.TommyKirchhoff (talk) 22:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * At the suggestion of Tesscass, I have also posted a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation to escalate the ambiguity of "Athletics" and "Athlete."TommyKirchhoff (talk) 22:31, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think this page deals with a notable topic, but it is one which we are struggling to find an appropriate disambiguation for. I had hoped to cover this (chiefly American) topic when I created athletic sports, but this title ignores the fact that athletics goes beyond just the sports and include the ideas of physical training, games and fitness. This problem is further complicated by the existence of the more narrowly defined European idea of "athletics", which can be found at athletics (sport). I do not think "Athletics (overview)" is the best title we could find – perhaps we should merge the ideas found here with those at athletic sports under a different title? SFB 13:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, I exalt SillyFolkBoy for his ongoing efforts in this project, and apologize for any skinned knees I might have caused. Considering User:Earthlyreason's talk point below; and links I posted at the end of the Talk:Athletics (sport) page (i.e. Gaelic Athletic Association has football and coaching http://www.gaa.ie/); the fact that North America and Asia use the term "Athletics" in the same general way, I agree that Athletics (overview) is a clunky name, but believe the page should just be called Athletics with a tophat link to Athletics (disambiguation) and perhaps Athletics (sport) which is another ambiguous page name (I still believe "Athletics (games)" would be more clear). Based on Earthlyreason's citation from Collins, Sportsperson should also be called Athlete in an effort to reduce the ambiguity.TommyKirchhoff (talk) 15:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * User:Earthlyreason posted this on the discussion page of Sportsperson:
 * As 'athlete' has a single major meaning, which this page aspires to describe, that should be the page name, with a separate disambiguation page for the other minor related terms, such as the band. 'Athlete' is much more common than the ugly and rare 'sportsperson' including in the UK (I speak as a Brit who defends British English against marginalisation.) As a start to improving this page, I've removed the inaccurate reference to AmE, and - in a first for this page - included a reference to back it up. Here it is in full (note that order of meanings implies importance):
 * Collins English Dictionary (Millennium Ed) - a British publication
 * athlete (1) a person trained to compete in sports or exercises involving physical strength, speed or endurance. (2) a person who has a natural aptitude for physical activities.  (3) Chiefly Brit. a competitor in track and field events.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:48, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Redirect to sport. Needless, duplicative article with too many flaws that are not worth fixing. Alex Middleton (talk) 23:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:37, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Move Following on from my comments above, the best solutions I have for this situation are (a) Move these ideas to athletics (activity) or athletic activity, (b) Merge this with athletic sports.
 * I think the first option is the best because, primarily, it acknowledges the broadness of the term beyond its application of just sport (i.e. inclusive of non-sporting activities/exercise etc). Furthermore, it maintains the word athletics as the first in its title, which is desirable because that is likely the word that most (American) people will be using to find information on this topic. Contrary to Alex, I don't think a redirect to sport is the best option because sport has so much more of a competitive slant and includes activities with cars, boats and animals. In comparison, athletics is an idea which more encompasses the systems of human physical activity. SFB 10:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/about+the+ncaa/diversity+and+inclusion/gender+equity+and+title+ix/facts.html (Third paragraph, and down...)
 * The NCAA is probably the largest athletics association in the world, governing more than 400,000 athletes http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_college_athletes_are_there
 * Though similar, the sport page has much weaker references (mostly dictionary), is poorly-organized, and admits the IOC recognizes Chess as a sport.
 * The reason Athletic sports is still a stub lies in the fact that it perpetuates the existing ambiguity surrounding "athletics." Clearly, no one wants to edit this page.
 * Athletics (overview) has been needed for a long time. It has excellent potential to be a informational cornerstone of WP, and also dissolve much ambiguity. I believe that if the name were changed to simply Athletics with an immediate hatnote to Athletics (track & field & footracing), this will best allow users to quickly navigate to the information they seek. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 13:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe it is also important to recognize that Athletics (sport) (25 references) exists as a smaller, weaker duplicate of Track and field (120 references). The primary difference here is the European semantic inclusion of footracing i.e. walking and climbing stairs. "Track" as it is commonly known in N. America does not imply a circular path, but a "track or path," as in Cross country running.TommyKirchhoff (talk) 13:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * These are important points, but we should use this page to debate whether the article in question should be deleted or remain, not whether it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Athletics. I have responded to your comments at Talk:Athletics. SFB 17:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to sport per Alex Middleton. The page name isn't useful and the information generally seems to be redundant with what should be covered at sport. I would also like to see Athletic sports merged into sport, but that's another discussion. Location (talk) 21:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The word "athletics" is used hundreds of times in this link: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D111.pdf
 * The NCAA governs over 400,000 student-athletes. Perhaps this specific passage from the NCAA manual will clarify "athletics" in general usage and as a "useful page name:"
 * 3.2.4.5 Application of Rules to All Recognized Varsity Sports.
 * To be recognized as a varsity sport, the following conditions must be met:
 * (b) The sport officially shall have been accorded varsity status by the institution’s president or chancellor or committee responsible for intercollegiate athletics; (Revised: 3/8/06)
 * (c) The sport is administered by the department of intercollegiate athletics;
 * (d) The eligibility of student-athletes participating in the sport shall be reviewed and certified by a staff member designated by the institution’s president or chancellor or committee responsible for intercollegiate athletics policy;
 * TommyKirchhoff (talk) 13:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Try this link: http://www.mgoblue.com/
 * Right under "tickets," it reads "give to athletics." Athletics is used as a broad term encompassing sports & games like golf & football. And please notice "NCAA Rules" right next to that. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

(undent) I think it vitally important to recognize the traffic Athletics (overview) received in the month of June 2011. It exceeds 5000 visits. http://stats.grok.se/en/201106/athletics_%28overview%29 TommyKirchhoff (talk) 18:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is irrelevant. A page that is currently the subject of both a deletion debate and a proposed move will see a spike in page views. It means nothing. older ≠ wiser 19:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Given that I live in the U.S., I am fully aware of the American usage of "athletics". The term is virtually synonymous with "sports". Location (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sport includes Chess. Athletics does not. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 19:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.mgoblue.com/ Right under tickets, it says, "GIVE TO ATHLETICS" The University of Michigan calls its teams "Wolverines," not "Athletics."
 * Hence the reason for Athletic sports which refers to the American English usage of "athletics". An article with "overview" used for disambiguation simply does not clarify matters. Location (talk) 20:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * And clicking through it takes you e.g. here where it's clear they are using 'Athletics' as short for 'Michigan Athletics'. Such usage is hardly unusual or even unique to the US: there's a Premier League football team (here) in the UK called Wigan Athletic, popularly known as 'The Latics'. But it's irrelevant. There is an article on the broad definition of athletics, and one on the narrower definition, and a DAB page for those really unsure which they want. Another article is not needed.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 20:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * (sigh)...and again, Athletic sports is a stub. I guess JohnBlackburne favors minimalist efforts on Wikipedia. Groovy John, but this is a non-profit information site. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 00:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I created that article as an avenue where the broader ideas of athletic sports and the American meaning of athletics, also found at athletics (overview) now, could be discussed (hence the reason from the very first edit it began "Athletic sports, also known as... athletics (AmEng)"). The article was short, not as an intentional insult to the topic matter, but because I was a little tired from having spent two months of my free time reading for and writing about the athletics (sport) and track and field topics. The article is not final and remains open to additions. SFB 20:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest merging this article with Athletic sports as both articles seem to cover the exclusively US usage of the term athletics. I wonder if it might then be best to rename the page "Athletics (US)". Whatever is decided this page needs to be renamed as it is not an overview of athletics but rather an overview of the term as used in the US, and is therefore confusing for the non-American reader. Dahliarose (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * In light of the international adamance to distance the ubiquitous "athletic" from the ambiguous "athletics," I must support Dahliarose's suggestion here. We all agree that "athletics" is ambiguous, and as such, naming the broad topic "athletic sports" and the narrow topic "athletics (sport)" only intensifies the ambiguity. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge (I've already done it anyway but) I suggest that this article be merged with athletic sports and placed at Athletics (U.S.), to denote the American meaning of the word. SFB 19:04, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.