Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/Manual of Style (Games summary – Nations)

Team sport medals
Are we still using the Brazil method of indicating medals in team sports? We could add an example under WikiProject_Olympics/Manual_of_Style_(Games_summary_%E2%80%93_Nations)

Example (from Brazil at the 2008 Summer Olympics):

Final



or maybe:

Final


 * Final rank:

--Jh12 (talk) 18:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Personally i have no particular preference for either style, i'd imagine it may well vary between the exact situation of use. Go with what ever looks best. Basement12 (T.C) 04:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * So apparently we're fighting this war again, it would be nice if we could actually come to a consensus here. I'm in favor of the medal icons, other users cite lack of consensus. May we discuss? Torlek (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Dates on Medalists section
The guidelines also don't say if dates should be included in the medalist section like Great Britain at the 2008 Summer Olympics or left off like at United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics --Jh12 (talk) 03:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I would say adding them is interesting but not essential. I doubt they would be readily available for most Olympics. It was really done at GB as an alternative to the medals by day table that appeared as a way of showing what dates, if any, were particularly successful (the media here began labelling one day as "Super Saturday" for instance). Basement12 (T.C) 04:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess I'll just add them to the US article since we currently have the information. It does seem optional to me at best. Thanks for the responses, --Jh12 (talk) 04:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Individual sport sections
I've just done a GA review for a 2008 Olympic article and wondered why there are images in the section titles for individual sports. You shouldn't really have special characters or images in section titles, partly because when you edit a section, it doesn't return you back to that section but the top of the page. Is there any reason for the difference in WP-wide policy here? Peanut4 (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Pictograms
It might be worth considering removing the Pictograms from the section headings. My understanding is that they are not readable by screenreaders, for those who have vision problems. If that's the case, removing them can make it friendlier towards vision impaired users. --LauraHale (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Decathlon and Heptathlon results tables
There's an ongoing discussion about Decathlon and Heptathlon results tables at Talk:United States at the 2012 Summer Olympics and WT:WikiProject Athletics that would benefit from the input/attention of Olympics project members. I would think to eventually defer to the decision that comes out of the Athletics project but since I'm not an Olympics project member I thought you all should know. Torlek (talk) 21:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Games or games
This project MOS seems to diverge from MOS:CAPS, though it isn't explicit. Is there some reason these articles need to speak of "the 2014 Games" vice "the 2014 games"? Certainly the PR materials pushed out from the IOC and its contracted and tributary agencies would have it capitalized, but that doesn't seem to be a good enough reason for the encyclopedia to do so.LeadSongDog come howl!  18:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Results tables against a field
Clarification is needed for how results tables for athletes against a field should be sorted. The provided example table under the records section seems to support a single entry for each athlete with all their events grouped in that block (ex. Great Britain at the 2008 Summer Olympics). However it seems a majority of tables in most articles follow the convention of grouping athlete results by event (ex. United States at the 2012 Summer Olympics).

I prefer the second method as it allows a snapshot of the country's performance in each event. Additionally, the second method makes for smaller articles on the server as links to athlete names will be shorter than links to events. This request stems from a discussion occurring at Talk:United States at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Torlek (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Headings
Per this MOS headings are to be kept to a minimum, and a user keeps reverting my edits when I remove the unnecessary headings on the different nation pages. So who is in the right here? Also can the policy be changed without discussion? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Results heading
i.e. use ;Men, not ===Men===. Bad idea, worse to enforce that via the MOS. I've edited Olympic results extensively for almost a decade, fortunately I have NEVER seen this policy applied there. However, on United States at the 2016 Summer Olympics‎ suddenly Raymarcbadz pulls this MOS issue. On that page is some of the most complex wikiformatting I have seen. The more complex the formatting, the fewer users will be able to figure out where to edit, even where the are on the page. They will still try and formatting mistakes will follow, usually just as the page is busy when results are coming in and readers are looking at wikipedia for information. By having distinct headers, breaks to reduce the amount of oblique code to sort through, it will greatly reduce the chance of mistakes. Many events duplicate information, that is, there are events of the same name for both genders in many sports and some sports have combined events, meaning even word searches will not get the user to the correct location. Trackinfo (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * ; to reduce cluttering. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 05:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * To remove the little edit tabs all over the page? That is clutter?  Still a bad idea.  And terrible to enforce it with the MoS.  We must have literally thousands of successful, clean pages of results without following this badly conceived guideline addendum.  User:Basement12 snuck it in at the beginning, fortunately ignored for years, now it is screwing up new pages. Trackinfo (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * . MOS:PSEUDOHEAD explicitly tells us not to do this: Do not make pseudo-headings by abusing semicolon markup. The options are to use  (though again, MOS:PSEUDOHEAD says  try to avoid using bold markup.) The more sophisticated option is to use the TOC limit template described in the guideline, though this is not always possible. In any case,   should never be used. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I've changed it to read: use in order to reduce TOC cluttering. Where this is not possible due to lower-level headings elsewhere in the article, use bold markup. i.e. use, not. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:49, 10 March 2018 (UTC)