Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Running/Archive 1

speed of running?
What is the usual speed of running? dash, short-distance, and long-distance, for average persons and for athletes? I am trying to come up with a list of speed in the page for speed so this information will be useful. --Leo 15:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, varying speed is a consequence of "running", but speed does not define "running". Non-aerobic jogging is what I call "running". To consider one's self as "running" is to surpass 80% of one's maximum heart rate (MHR). In other words, a gait which creates between 40% and 80% of MHR is, in my opinion, called aerobic jogging because both the heart and lungs best process oxygen (necessary for burning corporal energy) at these percentages. To calculate MHR, substract your age from the number 220. For example, if a person is 30 years old, then that person's MHR is 190. Thus, this 30 year-old is considered to jog when the gait forces the heart to beat at a rate of anything between 76 and 152 beats per minute, but if that person's heart attains more than 152 and under 191 bpms, then the heart and lungs can barely process the oxygen. The result is that muscles produce lactic acid. You would then witness a lot of violent exterior corporal movement, but, inside, no energy is being burnt. So, to answer your question, varying speeds would depend on muscle fitness. That is to say, speed depends on those muscles' ability to function, inspite of the presence of lactic acid. I guess bigger muscles can function with X amount of lactic acid present, than smaller muscles with the same amount. When the owners of those two muscles compete against each other, and they have both entered their respective non-aerobic zones, then it is obvious that the person with the bigger muscles is capable of attaing a higher speed. Please note that some sources consider aerobic jogging not to surpass 70% of MHR.

Categorization
Several of the categories under Category:Running were changed around without edit summaries and/or discussion. Because no reason was provided for the change, I've reverted everything back as it was. However, I'm open discussing the matter so we can decide how to best categorize the articles here, and then rearrange appropriately based on consensus. -- MisterHand 04:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * At first I was confused, but after looking it over I see what is going on. SilkTork replaced the Category:Foot races category with several sub-categories, all under Category:Running. Makes sense to me now! So, do we want all foot races categorized together like it is now, or simply put their categories under Running as SilkTork had it? I'm torn about it myself...I think I'd like to keep the "Foot races" category around for races that may not fall under any of the sub-categories. -- MisterHand 05:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. The foot-race category seems inappropriate. Many entrants are in wheelchairs. Unless the intention was to seperate wheelchair entrants from those running on foot and have two categories for each distance: "Wheelchair middle distance races" and "Foot middle distance races", etc. Such a categorisation is possible, but as such cats would be tagged onto the same articles, then it starts to look unnecessary. Also, it seems awkward to have a category Running, and also have a category Foot races, which seems to cover the same thing. It looked to me that it was more helpful to have the category Running broken down into distance: Middle distance, Long distance, Marathon, etc. SilkTork 07:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for putting it that way. I hadn't thought about the wheelchair aspect of things...most of these races aren't 100% "foot" races. I'm going to revert myself on this one. -- MisterHand 10:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Stub tags
runningbio-stub and runningbio-stub are on WP:SFD again, reflecting perhaps a lack of clarity from previous occasions on what exactly to do with these, particular as regards their relationship to athletics-stub. It's probably not strictly a sub-type, but are there many stubs that relate to "running", but not to "athletics"? Alai 18:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Categories
I was about to start writing some marathon and half-marathon articles, when I realised that it would be appropriate to group them by country and/or region (Europe/Australia/North America, etc). But then I noticed that we have the cat Category:Sports by country. And there is a cat Category:Athletics by country. So there seemed some duplication. And I wondered where to place the articles. Sports by country leads to the cat Category:Sport in the United Kingdom which is broken down into various sporting activities, like Swimming in the UK and Athletics in the UK. We also have the cats Marathons and Half marathons, which are subs of Running. So there are a series of interwoven cats. Research on marathons in a particular region would be helped by appropriate categorisation, but how best to proceed? SilkTork 15:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC) There's also the cat Category:Sport by city. SilkTork 16:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC) And Category:Sport in the United Kingdom by locality. SilkTork 16:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Two new categories
Two new categories Category:Running by distance and Category:Types of running. See what people think. SilkTork 17:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:29, 25 October 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)

Road race infobox
I wanted to make an infobox for road races, so I made up a draft at User:Leebo/Infobox roadrace. Suggestions, critiques, opinions, and help are all welcome. Most importantly, I want some input on all of the parameters that should be included, right now I only have a few.  Leebo  T / C  13:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

List of winners of the Boston Marathon
I've nominated this article for featured list status. Feel free to drop by with suggestions and/or comments. Geraldk 00:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Rock n Roll Marathon coming to San Antonio TX
News for San Antonio TX runners - a Rock N Roll marathon is coming to San Antonio in Nov 2008! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogirlrun (talk • contribs) 20:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Athletes
The running project seems to be one of the few sports that does not generally get tagged to athetes of its sport. I have created the Adriana Pirtea article this weekend and was involved in the creation of the Patrick Ivuti article. I wanted to add this project's tag to their talk pages, but it does not seem that that is the common practice for this sport based on looking at article talk pages for Frank Shorter, Michael Johnson (athlete), and Berhane Adere. Do you know of a WikiProject that focuses on track athletes?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 05:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for Notability of Runners
The following is an explaination of age-graded results posted on active.com: Age-Graded Results "AGE-GRADED" results are calculated using tables developed by the World Association of Veteran Athletes (the world governing body for masters track and field, long distance running and race walking). These tables were first published in 1989 and are frequently updated. The tables can be used in two ways: first, by comparing your time to a standard for your sex and age, you can determine your Performance Level Percent. These percentages can be interpreted as follows:

I would propose that only runners with age graded performances of 85% be deemed worthy of including as the subject of articles in Wikipedia. WP:BIO sta "Competitors and coaches who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)." The problem is that in the running context, the "highest level" is hard to apply. It could mean more than the Olympics (perhaps the Olympic Trials or the NCAA National Championships).
 * 100% = Approximate World-Record Level
 * Over 90% = World Class
 * Over 80% = National Class
 * Over 70% = Regional Class
 * Over 60% = Local Class

I am worried that runners are starting articles about themselves or their friends that are not world-renowned, and because there is trivial local coverage in a local newspaper, AfD discussions become confused. The 85% test could end a lot of needless debate. Xcstar (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you worried based on any other articles besides Dane Rauschenberg? If you are, point them out so others can see what you're talking about.  If it's just the Rauschenberg article that causes this concern, there's not much point in worrying about it.  CruiserBob (talk) 05:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I could see the "age-grade" as one of many potential indicators of whether someone competes at the "highest level", but I would be reluctant to endorse it as a litmus test. If we relied primarily on the "age-grade", people who have never participated in a major race but who can run at 85% would theoretically be granted articles. Kaldari (talk) 15:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Possible concerns might include Dean Karnazes and Don Kern. I am worried that we don't have an objective standard, so that when the next Dane Rauschenberg comes along, we won't have an objective standard to apply in the AfD discussion. Xcstar (talk) 13:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I can see your concern about Don Kern, although his two near-misses at the Guinness record for shortest time to complete marathons on all 7 continents would make a somewhat tenable argument for notability. With regard to Dean Karnazes though, looking at the biography that Runner's World has on their website http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-243-362--10915-0,00.html along with their other coverage of him, there's no way to deny notability, both as an author and as an ultramarathoner.  The problem with your 85% criteria is that there will always be people who don't have world-class speed who are still notable - the best use I can see of such a criteria would be to say 'Anyone who meets this criteria can be defined as notable without any further evidence.'  Even that isn't particularly useful - if you take a look at http://www.mastersrankings.com/rankings.php?dispcategory=Distance&sex=MEN&pseason=Outdoor&cyear=2007 (for example) you'll see dozens of people who meet that standard but aren't really 'notable' as runners.  I'm certainly in favor of developing criteria, but the age-graded tables don't seem to fit the bill.

Help request: GA backlog
Hello. There has been a large backlog at the Good Article Nominations page for a while, and some articles wait up to 50 days for a review. Since most of my editing is in the Sports and Recreation category, that is the area that I am currently focusing on. To try to cut down on the backlog, I'm approaching projects with the request that members from that project review two specific articles over the next week. My request to WikiProject Running is to try to find time to review Barry Bonds and Jeff Hardy. If these are already reviewed by someone else or you have time for another review (or you'd rather review something else altogether), it would be great if you could help out with another article. Of course, this is purely voluntary. If you could help, though, it would help out a lot and be greatly appreciated. The basic instructions for reviewing articles is found at WP:GAN and the criteria is found at WP:WIAGA. I recently began reviewing articles, and I've found it fairly enjoyable and I've learned a lot about how to write high quality articles. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Running
The article Running deals with the human activity and also with the running gait (in humans). I would appreciate help disentangling these two topics, perhaps with a new article Running (gait). Thanks. --Una Smith (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

TOC
Why is the table of contents on the Project Page so far down, and why is it labeled "Autism Assesment?" 206.53.197.12 (talk) 14:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No idea why it was like that but I've fixed it. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 04:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Dwain Chambers
The article on this sprinter is currently at FAC, aiming to be the first featured article for a sprinter. I would really appreciate help with read throughs for prose problems and minor editing or missing info. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 03:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Shannon Rowbury
Her article could possibly be speedy deleted right now because it's basically copyright infringement of her official bio page. http://www.shannonrowbury.com/shannon_rowbury/biography.html. Someone please rewrite this! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessment etc
Hi I've just joined. Is the project going to join Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment, only I've been doing it on another wikiproject and it's quite fun? Or to the ratings given on the wikiproject page, we could add start and stub class., it might be helpful? Sticky Parkin 00:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Athletics
Due to reasons of inactivity here and broadening of scope, I have proposed WikiProject Athletics which will cover all track and field events as well as the marathon and road running, and most other running articles too. I hope that people are interesting in improving these articles in which there is much work to be done! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!  11:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that this will advance the cause. Perhaps we should make clear that the scope of this project includes track and field. Racepacket (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Dane Rauschenberg
I have nominated the Dane Rauschenberg article for deletion. In general, we should develop criteria for what is a noteworthy runner. Self-promotional articles on 3 hr+ marathoners will detract from the credibility of this project and from Wikipedia in the eyes of runners. Also, we might want to develope criteria for what are suitable sources for establishing the noteworthiness of a runner.Racepacket 17:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It is unfortunate that the AfD failed. However, project members should remain vigilent for WP:COI violations where runners attempt to post their (non-noteworthy) running achievements in a self-written biographical article.Xcstar 22:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I have nominated the fiddy2 article for deletion. This article is about Dane Rauschenberg's fundraising web site, and his running 52 marathons in calendar year 2006 (only one of which was faster than 3 hours.  Please weigh in with your views. Xcstar (talk) 09:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This article continues to be a problem. It has received so many edits that it has been listed on .  Are there any project members who seriously believe that this runner meets notability standards? Xcstar (talk) 19:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If there is anyone here -- including User:Xcstar -- who believes that the Dane Rauschenberg article does not satisfy the Notability standard, I strongly encourage and invite the submission of a new AfD. Alansohn (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This article continues to be a problem, because of WP:COI violations. The subject of the article is trying to use it to promote a vanity-press published book as well as a race that he wants to organize this summer.  The article continues to draw snickers at meetings of local running clubs. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is rather humorous that all of the sockpuppets have gathered here in one place. It is even more humorous that an editor with a rather clear axe to grind raises issues of "WP:COI violations" from other editors. You have already been caught red-handed with your User:Xcstar sockpuppet, and blocked for your abuse of User:Runreston yet another banned sockpuppet. Can we get an explanation of why you are pushing your agenda regarding Rauschenberg here using an IP address and not your real user ID. An explanation of this abuse might help with minimizing the length of the block (or the well-deserved ban) that should result from this continued agenda pushing. Alansohn (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Spirit of the Marathon
Just created this article, would love review/help. Thanks --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

IAAF.org website changes
There seems to have been a lot have changes made on the IAAF.org website - mostly over the last few days. This means that in many Wikipedia pages with footnotes/references that link to running events on IAAF.org, those links no longer go anywhere useful. Instead you get an error page.

For example:


 * 2006 IAAF World Road Running Championships main page used to be http://www.iaaf.org/WRU06/
 * 2006 IAAF World Road Running Championships new page: http://www.iaaf.org/history/WRU/season=2006/eventCode=3491/index.html

I'm going to take a look at some of the footnotes/references on pages I have edited and fix the links where possible. Hopefully everyone else that has used links to the IAAF.org can find these dead links and replace them with the new ones. In most cases google doesn't yet know about the new links, but hopefully that will change soon. Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 00:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This reinforces the importance of using templates like to reference the IAAF website. Racepacket (talk) 16:04, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion attempts

 * David Ayoub, MD, who one year as a high schooler clocked the third fastest time in the entire world for 800 meters, a feat on par with earning an Olympic bronze medal, has been deleted via AfD. He accomplished the rare feat of being published, while still a college undergrad, as the first author of a paper in the journal Science.  Ayoub's biography needs to be restored and updated to include mention of the two papers he recently published that shed light on the vaccine controversy that has escalated exponentially in concert with suppression of information about skyrocketingvaccine injury rates and related controversies in autism.


 * The biography on Don Paul, an accomplished polymath who held the unratified US and world 50k record for many years, needs to be restored in the wake of an AfD. He was the youngest recipient ever of the prestigious Stegner Fellowship at Stanford University for his writing.  Virtually every other recipient of the Stegner Fellowship has a WikiBio, but Paul's bio became collateral damage in an ongoing effort to cleanse the Wiki of articles and bios related to the poorly explained collapse of the 7 World Trade Center building.  He is one of the main contributors to the widely acclaimed WTC7.net website, which is often recognized as the leading authority for information about the rarely discussed collapse of a third building at the World Trade Center.  WTC7 was detroyed along with surveillance records maintained by the FBI, CIA and NSA, which had major offices there to monitor events at the WTC.  Although Paul retired from a successful second running career in masters competition earlier this year, he has continued his pursuit of many significant projects as a musician, publisher, poet, and activist in both the 9/11 Truth Movement and Hurricane Katrina recovery effort.


 * Dane Rauschenberg has been voted down for a first nomination for deletion. There are serious WP:COI concerns with this article and its companion fiddy2.  The policy question is whether any runner is free to post his running history on Wikipedia as if this were facebook.com or letsrun.com.  The self-promotional nature of these articles has provoked vandalism and nasty comments on various running bulletin boards.  Perhaps Wikiproject Running can establish some objective notability criteria to avoid 3:20 marathon runners from posting their racing histories and autobiographies.


 * The fiddy2 article is being debated for deletion. It is a separate article about  Dane Rauschenberg's fund raising website.  Efforts to fix the NPOV problems are met with further edits that have obvious WP:COI problems.  The project should adopt notability standards regarding marathon performaces.  Otherwise every member of the Marathon Maniacs club will post his/her race list as a Wikitable in an autobiographical article.

Articles needing improvement

 * Association of International Marathons and Distance Races - this is a stubby article which has been marked with maintenance tags since Oct 2007. It's an organization that regulates some of the largest and most widely publicized events in the world, and deserves a better entry on Wikipedia. Is anyone up for improving it? NSH001 (talk) 23:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This one appears to have been deleted. The reason cited was Blatant copyright infringement. So I'm guessing that someone went to www.aimsworldrunning.org and copied and pasted text into the article. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 05:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Delilah DiCrescenzo AFD
Hello Wikiproject Running. An article that you may be interested in, Delilah DiCrescenzo, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Delilah DiCrescenzo. Thank you. -- --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of running?
Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation
As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

List of marathon races
If anyone has some free time on their hands, I could use some help filling in the blanks with the list of marathon races. Thanks! Location (talk) 22:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Blanks. Reference tags.  And perhaps, even truncating the list by eliminating list items that either (a) don't have their own article, or (b) cannot be supported by site links. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 08:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have many thoughts on this. I'll post further down to draw in some conversation.

New Year, New Opportunities
With the new year, it is time to renew our commitment to the Wikipedia coverage of running. Please renew your involvement with this wikiproject. If each of us could mentor just one of the project's articles to a Good Article during 2010, we would make a significant improvement to the encyclopedia. Racepacket (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Just want to say that I was really dissapointed that no one ran with (no pun intended) Meb's article after he won NY. Myself included, but I don't have the time now. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Copyright concerns related to your project
This notice is to advise interested editors that a Contributor copyright investigation has been opened which may impact this project. Such investigations are launched when contributors have been found to have placed copyrighted content on Wikipedia on multiple occasions. It may result in the deletion of images or text and possibly articles in accordance with Copyright violations. The specific investigation which may impact this project is located here.

All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to CCI clean up. There are instructions for participating on that page. Additional information may be requested from the user who placed this notice, at the process board talkpage, or from an active CCI clerk. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:RUN --> WP:Athletics task force
What do members think of integrating the athletics and running projects? This way (as a taskforce) the running project won't be bogged down with other track and field articles, will be able to focus its scope in this way, and will inherit a quality and importance scheme through the Athletics project. Running and Athletics seem inherently related and the large majority of running project articles naturally fall within Athletics. What do people think of this idea? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!  17:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If this is going to produce an active, consolidated project that involves middle/long distance runners and races with an evaluation process, I'm all for it.  --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speaking here as a WP Athletics member: WP:RUN has nothing to lose, and has much to gain. After only five days of fairly light work by several editors (including myself), we already have 180 or so articles assessed. All these assessments could be instantly applied to WP:RUN, and yet articles related to running would still be tagged as such, and would not be drowned in non-running related athletics articles. Even finer grain is possible, with multiple taskforces suited to individual interests. (WP:MILHIST is perhaps the best example.) In our case, people interested in sprints tend to be less interested in long-distance running, and vice versa, so splitting these into two taskforces is perhaps also a possibility. GregorB (talk) 17:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a decent idea, but I would hold off branching out into numerous task forces just yet – MILHIST has a large number of members (900 and counting!) who can support these task forces. The Athletics WikiProject should expand to multiple taskforces when there are, say, at least ten different editors who would support each task force. I think there's a bit of cross-over at the moment so keeping things centralised has its advantages. My own interests include sprinters, field events, and Marathon-related material. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!  18:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, this can't be more than an idea at the moment. What we know right now is that WP:RUN is feasible as a single taskforce of WP:Athletics; whether running can be split into more taskforces or not, remains to be seen. GregorB (talk) 10:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that WP:RUN has always included track and field and that "Athletics" when used as a synonym of "track and field" is very confusing to the general public. So I would just keep WP:RUN and invite the people who had just signed up to start a new WP:Athletics to join our on-going project. Racepacket (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that most people signed up here to write about running, not track and field. Indeed, no Running project articles reflect a scope of track and field articles and you have only just added "track and field" to the scope definition a couple of weeks ago. This seems like a misrepresentation of the project, given that none of the listed project members joined when this was the scope. Besides, "WP:RUN" is hardly an appropriate name for track and field: Shot putters don't do too much running... Furthermore, the very premise of the new Athletics project is that track and field and athletics are not synonymous. See WikiProject Athletics/Proposals for more info. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!  20:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There were 47 athletic events at the 2008 Summer Olympics. Of these 47 events, 20 did not involve running at all (unless e.g. long jump run-up is considered "running"), while 2 (decathlon and heptathlon) had some running and some non-running events. Hardly synonymous... GregorB (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Those of us who worked long hours to reflect the results of the Olympics on Wikipedia, actually did it very cooperatively under the scope of WikiProject Olympics and did not bother to worry about the name of the project. I think that the important thing is to keep the Bureaucracy to a minimum.  WP:RUN has always included track and field. Racepacket (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that things might have been less complicated if User:Sillyfolkboy had set up his track and field group as a taskforce of the pre-existing WikiProject Running instead of own proposing to do it the other way around. The fundamental problem which has not been addressed is that in the United States, the word "athletics" means all sports, not just running and track. Racepacket (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Mk V to tag articles in project scope and/or auto-assess unassessed articles
A request has been made to tag & auto-assess articles in the scope of this project based on  and/or auto-assess the project's unassessed articles.

To auto-assess, looks for a stub template on the article, or inherits the class rating from other project banners (see here for further details).

Feel free to raise any questions or concerns regarding this process. The task will commence after 72 hours if there are no objections. I have listed relevant categories on the page: WikiProject Running/Categories

Racepacket (talk) 19:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The bot increased the number of articles under the project to 6,233. Let's all jump in and classify them all. Racepacket (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Article tagging template name
Historically, we have marked all articles within the scope of the project with Running project. Someone has suggested changing the name of the template to WikiProject Running to make it similar to the names of similar templates used by other Wikiprojects. Runners being quirky and individualistic may not like changing a name that has been in use since 2006, well before many other Wikiprojects were established. I thought I would raise the issue for discussion here. If we establish a redirect, either name could be used. Alternatively, we could also name it: Project running, Wikiproject running or Running WikiProject. Or we can forget the suggestion and get back to working on substantive articles.

Whatever the name of the template, if you review the assessment or importance of an article, be sure to delete the auto parameter to let everyone know that a human has visited the article and agrees with its ratings. Racepacket (talk) 12:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Project page
I know that we want to devote our energy to the substantive articles covering running on Wikipedia. However, in recent years, there has been an escallation in the graphic design of WikiProject pages. Would it be worth our efforts to redesign the project page in the hope that it would attract more new contributors to our project? I could post a proposed redesign and get your comments. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Sports Notability
There is discussion ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:BIO debating possible changes to the WP:ATHLETE notability guideline. As a result, some have suggested using WP:NSPORT as an eventual replacement for WP:ATHLETE. Editing has begun at WP:NSPORT, please participate to help refine the notability guideline for the sports covered by this wikiproject. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 03:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Stop tagging non-runners
Hi! You can now stop tagging track and field athletes who are not runners. There is an own project, WikiProject Athletics, for them. Thanks, Geschichte (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment. Actually, since 2006 we have covered all of track and field as a part of this project. We do not include triathletes because they have their own project.  Last May someone did try to start a splinter group but we have never had formal discussions to parse out our relative responsibilities.  I think the main reason for the schism was that a British editor preferred the term "Athletics" to "Running" and wanted to change the name of this project, but we objected that in the United States, athletics includes football, baseball, basketball, etc.  Many "field" sports such as high jump, long jump, and pole vault involve running as a key element in overall performance. Racepacket (talk) 12:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Then why are hammer throwers being tagged via this listing in WikiProject_Running/Categories? Am I this "British editor"? If so then that is a bit of a misrepresentation of my position. It's quite parochial that you object to the European-style definition of athletics – it is quite a strictly defined idea which never comes with an intention to "replace" the American term athletics (which has a different meaning – much in the same way that the term "America" may have a different meaning depending whether you're an English speaker or a Spanish speaker). American editors' complete lack of awareness/understanding of the European meaning has meant progression on the track and field athletics article has stopped dead for the last four years.
 * I'm aware of the American meaning of athletics but no one has ever proved to me that its meaning is anything but a synonym for "sports" (hence why the American term athletics has never had an article of its own). The European meaning of athletics is the one used for every single major championships of the sport and governance at all levels. Does this not suggest to you that I am not just promoting a narrow-minded "British" idea? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) Join WikiProject Athletics!  12:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This confusion is probably all down to the fact that the scope of WP:RUN has been extended beyond plain running events since racepacket added all of track and field to the project scope definition on March 20. This was not the original scope, indeed the Assessment table section still shows the project's original theme prior to 2010 – middle and long distance running. The idea that this project always concerned track and field is not true – Long jump and Carl Lewis were only added to WP:RUN this week (April 7). If this really were a track and field project from the outset, why would it take four years and an automatic "bot edit list" to finally bring in articles which are so key to track and field?
 * From my point of view, it seems WP:RUN was more about running from a runner's perspective, rather than an armchair fan perspective. I think a good scope for the project would be a focus on the topic of: "running for both competition and leisure". For comparison, the science and culture of running (e.g. Barefoot running, running shoe, jogging) are things which are certainly outside the scope of athletics – which by definition only deals with the competitive aspect. There is obviously much cross over between the two as road running, cross country and a large number of track and field events are running events, but this overlap is nothing out of the ordinary (consider WP:WikiProject Economics and WP:WikiProject Finance for example).
 * The recent inclusions of track and field athletes who specialise in running events (e.g. Carl Lewis) and events solely based on running (e.g. 10,000 metres) is a logical and welcome progression for the project scope. Given the name, this WikiProject should be about running, and that's what I expect most readers and editors would think. The inclusion of articles such as throwing and jumping events is not such a good one (especially hammer throw!). The idea that the athletes run a little bit before jumping or throwing is somewhat disingenuous to the scope of the project – by the exact same reasoning WP:RUN should also include baseball, basketball, football, rugby and cricket (amongst others) as running is also a primary feature of those sports. I don't think anyone believes they should be added, so why should track and field events which aren't running competitions be any different? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) Join WikiProject Athletics!  15:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is interesting to finally have this discussion. In the United States, many "running clubs" organize track and field meets as well as road races. Although a few field events involve motions other than running, many field events include a running component. Also, WP:RUN has covered track and field since 2006, (Feb 2006 Feb 2008 May 2009 June 2009) not since 2010. The advantage of having WP:RUN be a broadly defined project that covers the sports space between WikiProject Cycling and WikiProject Triathlon is to avoid having to parse which track and field events are predominantly running vs. non-predominantly running.  Again, rather than waste time on non-productive turf fights, let us focus on producing substantive articles and improving their quality.  Racepacket (talk) 10:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You haven't really answered anything I've said at all. You say "many field events include a running component", yet this was precisely the logic I was questioning – baseball could be classified under WP:RUN by the same logic. As far as "track and field since 2006" goes, the links you give show:


 * the outlook of WikiProject Sports Results (not sure what the relevance of this is?)
 * the addition of Athletics (track and field) to the assessment scheme in 2008 (certainly within the scope of a running-centred project anyway, but no non-running events were added)
 * You adding track and field to the project scope – without consultation with project members – in May 2009 (immediately after WPAthletics was set up)
 * You stating that WP:RUN has "always included track and field" just a month later
 * The only one who thinks this is a track and field project is you Racepacket. As I've already said, it makes much sense to add more track running articles to the scope. Adding field events doesn't make much sense. It is not hard at all to parse which track and field events are non-running – they are the events which you could never start with "X is a running event" – They are all the events classed as field events!
 * You say we shouldn't waste time on non-productive turf fights, yet you are the one changing this long-established project's scope to match that of WikiProject Athletics and then suggesting that that project be deleted.
 * You suggest that "we focus on creating substantive articles and improving their quality", yet there is only one of us that is doing this on running articles. I struggle to even think of a single running article that you have written the majority of.
 * I have suggested that we focus WikiProject Running on articles whose topic is predominantly running, both as a taskforce of WPAthletics and as a fully-fledged project on its own. The only solutions you have suggested are (a) delete the Athletics Project or (b) make WP:RUN cover exactly the same topics as the Athletics Project. What is this meant to achieve?
 * NB: If you are also racepacket on Wikirun.com then I suggest you stop stealing my work and infringing my copyright (and the copyright of others). Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) Join WikiProject Athletics!  11:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Sillyfolkboy has been blocked at his own request.

Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Running to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at WikiProject Running/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 02:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

RacingThePlanet
The 2009 leg of this race is up for deletion here. Feel free to comment. --Pgallert (talk) 09:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons
The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at WikiProject Running/Unreferenced BLPs. As of May 17 you have approximately 79 articles to be referenced. The list of all other WikiProject UBLPs can be found at WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 17:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

New track and field article started
I've been (very) bold and separated the topics of "Athletics" and "Track and field" so that we now have articles for both. For more discussion please see Talk:Athletics (sport) where I have moved the article that was previously at track and field athletics. All thoughts and ideas welcome. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) Join WikiProject Athletics!  12:06, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Assessment request for Julie Brown (athlete)
Hi,

Julie Brown (athlete) was a quicky stub. It has been well-expanded beyond a stub. I wonder of somebody from this project could do a re-assessment. Thanks, -- Whpq (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ Did a little clean up as well. NSH001 (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!

Quality Assessment
Wikipedia has added some good tools to track quality assessment ratings of articles within a wikiproject. Is there any objection if we upgrade our templates to include a quality assessment parameter? Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 13:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It has been almost a month since I have made the proposal. We have done quality assessment on the project page, but it is more efficient to do it on the templates placed on the talk page of the individual articles.  So I will redefine the template to allow for those assessments.  I will also create categories to collect the articles in each group. Racepacket (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Assessment and importance have been added to template. Racepacket (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As an experiment, I am also requesting that we generate a sub page which uses the popular pages tool. Racepacket (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The assessment robot seems to be working well collecting our articles, of the 508 articles currently tagged, 378 do not have assessments. Could you please lend a hand and help us place quality and importance assessments on these articles?  Also, would anyone object if we remove the incomplete assessment table which lists specific article names that is below the statistics table  that is being generated by the robot? Thanks again, Racepacket (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * We have now added an importance rating to all articles that already have a class assessed. We have over 150 rated articles but 378 are still unassessed. Racepacket (talk) 04:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please join our assessment efforts, because we have 338 articles still awaiting your attention. To get a list of the unassessed articles, just click on the number in the Assessment Table. Pick an article, click on its name, read it and then edit the template on the discussion page.  The Assessment Table will be automatically updated. Racepacket (talk) 14:18, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Running articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Running articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Outline of running
There is no Outline of running.

To create one, click on the redlink above and add this line:

 running 

Then press Save page and start adding relevant subheadings and links.

For the whole set of outlines on Wikipedia, see Portal:Contents/Outlines.

For a relevant discussion see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/archive 40

Here's the outline they created: Outline of birds.

The Transhumanist 20:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have taken a quick stab at it, and other members of WP:RUN are welcome to add to it. Racepacket (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing
I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge?
It might be a good idea for Category:Fell running events to be merged with Category:Mountain running competitions. "Fell" is a British term not applied or generally understood outside Britain, whereas "mountain" is well-understood wherever English is spoken. Androstachys (talk) 10:12, 19 November 2010 (UTC) I thought that fell running was more like cross country running. Racepacket (talk) 00:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Curtis James
The article on Curtis James claims that the guy is "a four-time USATF AT&T Professional (now Visa Championship) Series champion,[1] three-time All-Star winner, and the only rookie to lead the point standings." Supposedly, he has sponsorship deals with "Adidas, Coca-Cola, Timex, Dunlop, and Intel."

The references don't match up, and preliminary Googling indicates that much of the information in the article is not true. A mail to OTRS (#2010111110004613) claims that the entire article is a fabrication. I've tagged the article hoax.

Can someone more knowledgeable about American athletics please have a look at it, and tag it for deletion if it's a hoax (or add some reliable sources as references, if it's not)? utcursch | talk 09:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

It was definitely a hoax. Racepacket (talk) 05:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Good Articles
March is sweeps month at the GA review process. That means that the waiting line is at an annual low point. Please consider cleaning-up and nominating your favorite article and we will try to get it reviewed. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

New template Template:Student athlete
Feel free to help fill in Template:Student athlete by adding new articles or creating articles for redlinks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Your opinions and advice
A recently discussion WikiProject Council/Proposals/Women's Sport. Your opinions and your advice are welcome. --Geneviève (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I have found that our opinions and advice are not welcome. People who question the need for a separate WikiProject to cover women's sports are denounced as "harassment." The facts are that women and men have received equal treatment in organized running since the 1970s.  Both men and women fully participate in the organizational aspects of the sport, and single gender events are a small minority, with most events welcoming participation without regard to gender. Racepacket (talk) 08:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

So what needs to be improved
Records completely outdated! Someone please fix!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmswanepoel (talk • contribs) 10:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Possible amendment to half marathon world record progression

Although the half marathon isn't an official track record...

Here were the existing records before and after the time when Arturo Barrios hit the La Fleche track in 1991:

60:46	Dionicio Cerón 1965	 Mexico 16.09.1990	Philadelphia, USA

59:47	Moses Tanui 1965	 Kenya 03.04.1993	Milan, ITA

Then since the half marathon is 13 miles 192.5 yards, it would appear Barrios broke Ceron's record in 1991 because for 1 hour he ran 13M 196 yards, which seemingly wasn't broken until Tanui's 59:47 in 1993.

P.J. Christman, former editor of Running Stats

Hi, I am gabi71, I made a mistake and somebody made me see it. I was trying to add a translation of the page into Spanish because I couldn't find one...and instead, I edited almost everything... I'M SO SORRY. If somebody can save my translation and make a link to Spanish, it would be great. I am a certified translator and a former athlete...Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabi71 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please change the "1896 olympic marathon" picture on the marathon page to either a picture that is either a true picture from the event, or to at least something less offensive that Vietnamese children running down the street following a napalm attack by US soldiers? (Sorry, i'm not signed in now: rtdonnes) 75.80.217.51 19:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This WikiProject is great and all but it has no info. What needs to be improved? It's pretty broad by simply stating running since there is so much more to running. Sharpdust 01:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, that would seem to be one of the first priorities, figuring out what to do on the open trails ahead. Building articles for the several red links in the new Pre's Trail article would make a relatively easy loop for the short run.  Or perhaps it would be better to simply start drawing up a list of missing running articles, as a point to point route that might really get somewhere.  Ombudsman 21:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Some suggestions I've thought of and also based on Ombudsman ideas.
 * Running in different parts of the world, i.e. Running in Kenya is significantly different than Running in the United States.
 * List of running clubs
 * Improve jogging article
 * Expand Bill Bowerman article, a major player in the technological advances of the running shoe and Arthur Lydiard, man who popularized jogging and the running boom.
 * Sharpdust 04:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I've created a userfied verison of the Running in Kenya article, visible at User:Gosox5555/Running in Kenya. Not finnished yet, but please feel free to expand. Gosox(55)(55) 16:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I just came across Long-distance track event and found that there is pretty much nothing there other than the names of long distance athletes. The introduction is also quite weirdly done. I hope someone could fix it; I don't think I would be qualified to. Chimpionspeak (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

In the stub for Adventure Running there's a link to the commercial site, Adventure-Marathon.com, with hyperlinks to several of their races (described on Wiki). Something about this seems out of place since it is such a direct commercial blurb, but before moving it entirely to the external links sections, thought it best to solicit other opinions. sorry, trying to figure out how to sign this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmbooks (talk • contribs) 01:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 14:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

'Times' character
The template times is now available, to display a typographically correct 'times' character ( in HTML); for eample   renders as 4&times;100m relay. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ...and is up for deletion at the moment.GregorB (talk) 12:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

nominated List of winners of the Boston Marathon for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Lihaas (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Include obstacle racing within Project
Having concluded a Spartan race recently, I wonder why not include Spartan races & other Obstacle racing events within the Project's ambit. Some 7,088 runners participated in the 'my' event over the 2 days, and they all paid an entry fee. These races are becoming quite popular. Project members could help WP keep the particular articles on the events from being used by IP promoters, yet improve general knowledge on the sport.--S. Rich (talk) 03:19, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

RfC on the use of flag icons for sportspeople
An RfC discussion about the MOS:FLAG restriction on the use of flag icons for sportspeople has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. We invite all interested participants to provide their opinion here. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Someone is able to create Infobox athletics event?
As this fr:Modèle:Infobox Épreuve d'athlétisme. --Kasper2006 (talk) 16:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Responded at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Sports is up for featured portal consideration
This is a courtesy message to inform the members of this project that I have nominated Portal:Sports for featured portal status. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sports. The featured portal criteria are at Featured portal criteria. Please feel free to weigh in.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  18:38, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Florence Griffith-Joyner
Can somebody responde in Talk:Florence Griffith-Joyner? --84.245.229.37 (talk) 07:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Photo for aid station
The article aid station was recently nominated for deletion which drew my attention to it. I was able to expand the article quite a bit to cover other examples. But the article started as a running article related to marathon and triathlon aid stations. Unfortunately, that's about the only version of the concept that we don't have a good photo of. If anyone from the Running project happens to be going to a marathon any time soon and can take a good action photo of an aid station, I think it would really help the article. The current one of an ultra-marathon in Japan isn't great - I'm not sure the people in the image are competitors (they might be) and it's not a "traditional" aid station - runners grabbing cups/bottles as they run past. So if anyone has a better picture/can take a better picture, please let me know. Stalwart 111  00:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Improving the "Long-distance running" article
I am an instructor of an Online Communities course at Cornell, and am planning to have my students improve a Wikipedia article as part of the course work. Before I do this, I want to know what it takes, so this is my project for this summer. I would like to improve the Long-distance running article and move it up from Start to C or B class. But I need help - I've never done it before! I know that I need to add references, improve the organization, and add content. Once I do that, what then? Thank you so much, any help would be useful. LeshedInstructor (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * First off: If this will be a collaborative class activity it might be a good idea to start by reading this: Education program. Have a look at other Courses to see if you want to go down this route.
 * I've recently started to rework this article from its original, more narrow topic long-distance track event towards a wider article on long-distance running in general. In the lead section I've touched on areas you might like to create dedicated sections for in the main body of the article (History, Biology, Physiology, Culture, Economy). It is ripe for expansion.
 * This is a relatively broad topic so you should cover some quite generalised points (its role in human physical culture/exercise, its impact upon the body, use in literature, etc). I would also suggest moving the "Notable long-distance track athletes" section off the page and into its own list article. A prose-based athlete section should cover only people who have had the most profound impacts on long-distance running.
 * As far as the C or B assessments go, these are informal judgements of the article by editors interested in the topic area. If you want something more engaging you could use the review processes: once you have started to get more content onto the page you could request a peer review to ask for more suggestions on what needs doing (you'll probably get pointers about style/formatting as well as content). Once you feel you have a strong article that has covered all the obvious bases then you can nominate it for Good Article status. Bear in mind that these processes operate on a backlog so it may take a month before someone starts reviewing the article. I hope this helps! SFB 21:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much SFB! I will start working on it in the next 1-2 weeks and see how it goes.
 * I did enroll in the Education program when teaching the same course last year, and it was quite a success. However, most students did not get enough feedback on their articles from scratch in time to experience the ″wikipedia community″. I believe that by improving articles rather than writing new ones from scratch, students can have a stronger sense of community because they will have to interact with other editors to review their work. Thanks again! LeshedInstructor (talk) 19:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a shame that so many people's primary experience of the Wikipedia community is from editors discussing the minutiae of the manual of style, though there are also plenty of editors willing to help new starters if you can find them. The Teahouse is a new initiative for answering general editing questions. Related WikiProjects (if they're active) can help too. Good luck with your editing! SFB 19:01, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Convert to articles on the races?
Georgios Vamkaitis, Ricardo Pedro Núñez? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Arthur Postle
I've just created the above, but there appears to be a few redlinks that I can't find articles for. Some of them seem to be pretty notable runners so I don't know if anyone here can link them to the articles for me. I'm sure they must exist somewhere. S.G.(GH) ping! 17:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at ~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man ) 05:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Timothy Allen Olson
Hi there. This submission has been hanging out in the troublesome realm of Articles for Creation for quite sometime. User:Chris_troutman was kind enough to review it in January, and now it's waiting to be reviewed - either accepted and moved to the main article space, or declined with an explanation as to why it's not able to be a Wikipedia article (either at this time, or whatever). I'm not that savvy with track and field, let alone running, and knowing if it does or does not pass WP:NTRACK. Can someone take a look? Thank you so much! SarahStierch (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Tristan Thomas assessment
could someone asses Tristan Thomas and it needs to be listed on the to-do list before it haas been assessed NickGibson3900 (talk) 11:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Running at Wikimania 2014
Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014 For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to: Project leaflets Adikhajuria (talk) 16:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

List of people who have run across Australia
There's an edit war/content dispute about the inclusion of Sarah Mycroft to List of people who have run across Australia. If you follow this short of stuff in Australia your input would be greatly appreciated. I have started a discussion on the talk page.-- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 12:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Nurgalieva twins
I have just started drafts about Russian ultra-runners Draft:Elena Nurgalieva and Draft:Olesya Nurgalieva, please feel free to contribute. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:32, 1 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I know practically nothing about them outside of their participation (and frequent wins) in the Two Oceans and Comrades Marathons in South Africa (I'm South African). I can't read Russian so I don't have access to sources from their own country. Please help. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Some more info can be found at marathoninfo . The Association of Road Racing Statisticians documents winners of major races. The Tilastopaja website also has information on major marathons run.
 * For foreign athletes, Google Translate is your friend. I'm lucky in knowing several languages, but I also regularly incorporate info from Chinese and Japanese sources thanks to machine translation. This Russian article has some good bio for a start. Hope this helps! SFB 21:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

George Washington Dixon FAR
I have nominated George Washington Dixon for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 15:09, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Athletics (British) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Athletics (British) to be moved to Sport of athletics. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Boston Marathon bombings listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Boston Marathon bombings to be moved to Boston Marathon bombing. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

suggestion
Hi all...I can't find an article for Browning Ross or the Road Runners Club of America. This would be a significant contribution. KarateLadyKarateLady 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * RRCA article done Racepacket 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm in the right place. So apologies if I'm doing this wrong.

A table for hurdle heights would be nice. I thought the article name should be hurdles - noun eg high jump or long jump or triple jump. Not high jumping or long jumping etc. But I haven't read the rules so likely I'm wrong. 120.21.237.200 (talk) 11:31, 31 July 2015 (UTC) William

Mo Farah
Could someone keep the above athlete on their watchlist pls. Some racists continually try negate his britishness. 78.146.97.233 (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, — Delivered: 18:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

16,000 BLPs moving out of mainspace
Hi. Some of you will be aware of an ongoing issue of BLP articles created by Sander.v.Ginkel. The background at ANI can be found here. The discussion on the cleanup can be found here. In short, 16,000 BLP articles are being moved out of the mainspace to draftspace. This has already started following a Bot Approval. This should be complete in the next 48hrs or so. Articles will remain in draft for 90 days. In that time, they can be checked, and if OK, moved back to the mainspace. Anything not checked after 90 days will be deleted automatically.

So how can you help? The BLPs are broken down by occupational area. If an one of these interests you, please help. Even if it is checking one article. Check the article that has been moved to draft that a) it meets the notability requirement of the occupational area in question and b) that the facts in the article are supported by the sources. This includes, but is not limited to, the dates of birth, who they represented, when they were active, etc. If there are elements that can not be supported by the sources, they must be removed. If you are happy with the article, then move it back into the mainspace. DO NOT move anything until you have checked the sources, or supplied other reliable sources to support information in the article that may not already be cited. More information can be found here.

This is not going to be an easy task. I don't think there's too much support to check 16,000+ articles and I suspect that most of them will be gone after 90 days. If you have any questions, please raise them here. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 11:47, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:


 * Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:12, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

RFC on sports notability
An RFC has recently been started regarding a potential change to the notability guidelines for sportspeople. Please join in the conversation. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Removing gay athletes from gay categories
User:Kevin_McE is wholly invested in removing the entry Colin_Jackson from the appropriate LGBT sportspeople categories, using what I can only describe as a nonsensical argument that Jackson doesn't belong in the category because he's identifying as gay is irrelevant to his public life - despite the fact that he's come out and did so in a public venue (on TV no less). Jackson previously denied being gay, and the entry has covered his denial for years. It makes sense that it must now acknowledge his admission. Kevin insists on not accepting that point. Can you all please add your two cents on the Talk Page to the entry? Thanks. Rafe87 (talk) 16:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know why Rafe87 has thought fit to raise this here: maybe there is grounds for discussion at WP:CATEGRS, the relevant policy. Kevin McE (talk) 21:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at NSPORTS
Hello all. In an effort to finally resolve the never-ending and annoying GNG v SSG issue, I've proposed a revision of the NSPORTS introduction. You are all invited to take part in the discussion. Thank you. Jack &#124; talk page 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Request of reverse redirect from Fell running to Mountain running
Here I invite the participants to the project to express their opinion. --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

List of high school students who have run a four-minute mile
List of high school students who have run a four-minute mile has recently been created, but the list is currently limited to U.S. high school students. Using "high school" as a criterion is a problem if the list will become global, since "high school" is not the same everywhere. Comments are welcome at the article's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

WP 1.0 Bot Beta
Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Fastes Known Times in mountain running
Hi all! Being trail running a consolidated sport around the world, I would like to know if it would be of interest to have a list of FKT for summits and tours all around the world. I started with the pyrynees, but I think it could be interesting to have tables for different mountain ranges or countries. There are a couple of private websites collecting this data. Following @Calliopejen1 suggestion, do you think this draft might be the sort of article to host herein? Zocodo (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Article in need of some cleanup
New article Tom Osler just survived an AfD. He is notable as a mathematician but the article also (plausibly) claims notability as a runner. It would probably help for a member of this project to look over it and clean up its sources and categories. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for Comment on SSN at WP:Notability (sports)
There is a discussion on SSN (sport specific guidelines) at RFC on Notability (sports) policy and reliability issues. Feel free to go there and post your comments. Cassiopeia(talk) 00:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red hosting Olympics and Paralympics
Greetings from WP:WikiProject Women in Red! Starting 1 July, we’re going to have a three-month focus (July, August and September) on the women of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Your participants are warmly welcomed to join us for the event, documenting as many women as possible; additionally if you have relevant lists of red links that we should encourage participants to take up, we’d love to know. Thanks very much!--Ipigott (talk) 15:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Cannabis and sports
New stub: Cannabis and sports. Any project members care to help expand? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Marcell Jacobs sudden popularity led to too much confusion in the article
I created the article year ago and kept it until before the Olympics following the rules of WikiProject Athletics and the WikiProject Athletics/Manual of Style/Biographies. Now I will arrange the article step by step according to the MOS of the project and detailing every single change in the "edit summary" of the article after each modification. But I'll go into more detail on my edits, explaining its, in this section.
 * In the MOS first goes the biography section (which eventually includes the career section) and then the statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:51, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * World, European and National records need a specific section in the Statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Also national titles need a specific section in the Statistics section. --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Add Others international meetings section (why national meetings and not Diamond League?) --Kasper2006 (talk) 22:06, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Mass draftification proposal on Olympians
You may be interested in this village pump discussion on the mass draftification of nearly one thousand Olympians. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:11, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Track and field
Track and field has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:21, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Sport of athletics
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sport of athletics that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Better Tables
Hi All! Great work on adding information about running.

Question: How can we make better tables that list the top three finishers and the masters finishers for each year, but still make the columns re-arrangeable?

Observation: Every marathon page has a different way of listing results.

Comm260 ncu (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:33, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ihor Bodrov
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ihor Bodrov that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:01, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Another RfC on capitalization of all our articles
I thought this was a done deal back in this 2022 RFC but obviously not. A handful of editors did another rfc with no sports projects input at all. And it's being challenged because we just noticed it. This could affect almost every single tennis and Olympic article we have, and goodness know how many other sports. Some may have already been moved it you weren't watching the article. And not just the article titles will be affected but all the player bios that link to the articles. Sure the links would be piped to the right place if thousands of articles moved, but if the wording in a bio still said 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles or Swimming at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre backstroke that would likely need to be changed by hand. There is also talk of removing the ndash completely.

Perhaps this is what sports projects want and perhaps not. Either way I certainly don't want projects ill-informed as the last RfC was handled. Express your thoughts at the following rfc. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)