Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rowing/Archive 1

Project start
Hello all and welcome to the project. It's good to see people joining up already. I'm hoping this trend will continue, but in order to help it along I've made a template. If you see an active user has made edits to one or more rowing articles then start a new topic on their user talk page and add the tag:.

As for the project itself, I started it out because there seems to be quite a few rowing wikipedians around and a co-ordinated effort can do great things compared to individuals working solo. Most of the project page I copy edited from other succesful projects. Feel free to change it as you wish and suggest new ideas/areas to work on, the only rules are the policies laid down by Wikipedia.

Other than that, have fun contributing--The Spith 16:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Rowing terms template
I'm tempted to make a template describing the abbreviations of boat classes. One person asked on the talk page of the Rowing World records what they meant and rather than having to type it out time and again, a template could be quickly inserted on relevant articles.--The Spith 16:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Rowing Sub template
The template currently produces the page it's on as the main article (see cox box I'm guessing this is not how it's supposed 2 work but don't know how to fix it. --Nate1481 21:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Categories and templates are different things. If you were trying to add the article to the 'rowing' and 'coxes' categories then you would type and , using the square brackets. Using the funny shaped brackets will produce a copy of the page you are linking to, which is why the contents of the rowing and coxes categories were being added to the article. These brackets are only used for templates e.g..

I've fixed the page for you. Hope that clears things up--The Spith 15:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ahh right, still new 2 some of the bits on here --Nate1481 16:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Indoor Rower
Some has questioned the NPOV of the article (too focused on concept2), might be good for people to look over it, and the rowperfect one. Also someone added what read like an add for the 'rowbike' anyone heard of this? --Nate1481 00:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems Ok to me. Concept2 pretty much hold a monopoly on the market, and organise all the indoor rowing events, so its naturally going to focus on concept2.--The Spith 19:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I think so two the row perfect could prob do with some minor bits, just mentioned it here in as its prob worth keeping an eye on, the guy who added the tag seems to go round adding them as a hobby --Nate1481 00:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Rowers
I'm still pretty new to wikipedia, so ignore me if I'm taking nonsense, but a few points occur to me on articles about specific rowers:

1) Categories and sub-categories of roweers look like they could do with a sort as they appear unwieldy and confusing. Cursory examination suggests many articles are mis-categorised or at least that categorisation is not being applied consistently.

2) Presumably all articles about rowers, coxes and coaches should also form part of the Biography Wikiproject and should be tagged accordingly?

3) Would it be useful to have an infobox for wins at Henley Royal Regatta, to sit below the standard box for Olympic and World medals? Particularly for the first part of the 20th century, a Henley win was arguably a greater achievement than an Olympic medal.

James of Putney 13:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree about Henley Royal Regatta box

09er 20:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Anatomy of a stroke makes 'Did You Know?'
Whilst trimming the rowing (sport) article down to size I moved some of the content to seperate sub-articles to reduce the size. One sub-article was the Anatomy of a stroke. I made a submission for DYK, and today it was placed on the main page.

Should stay up for the rest of the day, so you can have a gander.

P.S. Merry Christmas everyone.--The Spith 10:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)