Talk:Olympic Games

Template:Vital article

Adding oxfore stuff

Adding about expulsions and gentrification. Many people are expelled from some sectors of the city in olympic games. Which contributes to even higher prices for houses and such.

Also mega-event in the text of the articles should be turned into a link. To Megaproject (There is no mega-event). And many of the olympic games feature massively built things.

Also...Olympic Games might be a recurrent 4-years boondoggle. (A useless project, or of few benefits). With an opportunity loss in other domains.

What is the 'Olympic Movement'?

The term "Olympic Movement" is used throughout this article without being explicitly defined. Olympic Movement redirects to IOC. The collection of entities that "Olympic Movement" refers to does not fit the definition of a social or political movement (as I discuss below). Furthermore, unless I've been missing it, the term is not in common use by those not directly affiliated with the Olympics. Therefore, given the positive connotations of "movement," this is a case of loaded language (see MOS:PUFFERY).

To be fair, it is a useful term, in that it is essentially a more elegant way of saying "everyone involved with the Olympics." It's operationally defined on this page's International Olympic Committee section: "The Olympic Movement encompasses a large number of national and international sporting organisations and federations, recognised media partners, as well as athletes, officials, judges, and every other person and institution that agrees to abide by the rules of the Olympic Charter."

Ideally, we would have an NPOV term to substitute for Olympic Movement. Alternately, we could replace each usage with more specific words (e.g. "the Olympics", "the IOC and national committees"). Or, if we are to stick with Olympic Movement, then it should be defined on first usage -- making clear that it is the IOC's designation. Over on the IOC article, I defined it as "the IOC's term for all entities and individuals involved in the Olympic Games" –- which I find too clunky to add to such a prominent article as this one.

Having run out of ideas myself, I present to you the question: how should we NPOV-ify "Olympic Movement"? SSSheridan (talk) 11:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I think it should be fairly uncontroversial that the "Olympic Movement" is not a social and/or political movement in the common, NPOV sense, so I've relegated my support for that claim out of the above post. But, in case I am mistaken about it being uncontroversial, I will support that argument below:

Merriam-Webster includes the following definition of "movement": "a series of organized activities working toward an objective; also: an organized effort to promote or attain an end."[1] One could claim that the objective is the Olympic Games themselves, but that doesn't pass the smell test: by that definition, FIFA is the governing body of the Association Football Movement, a term that no one has ever used. (Okay, I checked: it's been sporadically used to describe the spread of football in the 19th century.)

Clearly (I hope), the objectives that define a movement are always involve some change to the existing social or political structure. In the 19th to early 20th century, one could make a case for the Olympic Movement. But here, in the 21st century, the objective of the "Olympic Movement" -- the IOC, the national committees, etc. -- is to continue the running of the highly successful quadrennial Olympic games. It's a perfectly good objective, but it's not one that defines a movement. Viva la status quo!

The IOC's own definition of the Olympic Movement understands this, because they state loftier ambitions in their own definition:

The Olympic Movement is the concerted, organised, universal and permanent action, carried out under the supreme authority of the IOC, of all individuals and entities who are inspired by the values of Olympism. The goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised in accordance with Olympism and its values.

Those aforementioned values are "excellence, friendship and respect."

I'm all in favor of a peaceful and better world, I'm all in favor of those values, but there's nothing concrete there. As a single point of contrast, blacklivesmatter.com currently has "End 1033" on the banner of their homepage: a concrete goal. "April 30th marks President Biden’s 100th day as president — and we’ve got a major demand for him before that deadline: Demilitarize our neighborhoods and end 1033."

In conclusion: the "Olympic Movement" is the IOC's term for the collection of all the entities and individuals who participate in the Olympic Games and related activities. How should Wikipedia refer to that collection? SSSheridan (talk) 12:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest that a simple footnote to that effect in the Notes section with source would suffice. I don't think we have to over-engineer this. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:24, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

But -- and this is the tl;dr of all the above -- it's not a movement. If the English Premier League were to refer to all its clubs, media partners, players, and referees as "the Premier League Movement", it would be inappropriate for Wikipedia to adopt that lingo. "The Olympic Movement" strikes me as not-very-different. Am I the only one? SSSheridan (talk) 16:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with referring to it as a "movement" when the IOC itself has described it as such. There are plenty of examples in the Society and culture section of the Movement dab page. I just don't see this as an NPOV issue! Rodney Baggins (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

The Olympic Movement connotes Pierre de Coubertin's original vision of the modern Olympic Games. It is that by periodically bringing the youth of the world together in joyful sporting competition, their collective experience of peace and brotherhood achieved through sport can be spread throughout the world for the benefit of everyone living together on this planet. Jeff in CA (talk) 06:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

This article (a Featured Article) needs significant work

This Featured article was promoted in 2009, and is not up to FA standards. There are tone/MOS, weasel word, and NPOV problems throughout. Unless someone is willing/able to bring this article to standard, it should be submitted to Featured article review.

For two weeks in August 2016, this article was the 10th- and 14th-most viewed article on Wikipedia. We can anticipate that there will be many readers this summer as well.

I've made some initial changes, but there's a lot to be done. I'm inclined to put a Cleanup and/or Tone tag on this article, but as it's a Featured Article, I'd prefer someone more experienced to tag it as appropriate.

Below, I've listed a sampling of problems in this article:

• Above, I discussed the term Olympic Movement as NPOV. There is language throughout the article which reads as promotional and/or informal.
• Encyclopedic tone:
  • The conclusion of the lead section reads "The Games have grown so much that nearly every nation is now represented... Every two years the Olympics and its media exposure provide athletes with the chance to attain national and sometimes international fame. The Games also constitute an opportunity for the host city and country to showcase themselves to the world."
  • From the "Changes and adaptations" section: "After the success of the 1896 Games, the Olympics entered a period of stagnation which threatened its survival. The Olympic Games held at the Paris Exposition in 1900 and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition at St. Louis in 1904 were little more than side shows. This period in Olympic history was a low point for the Olympic Movement." (I partially revised this.)
• The whole first paragraph of the Economic and social impact on host cities and countries section (version at time of writing) is a showcase for the problems of over-reliance on primary sources (see WP:PRIMARY and WP:BALANCE) -- it is an assortment of primary journal articles thrown together in opposition to each other, qualified with weasel words. Not to mention WP:TONE and WP:WEIGHT. Jeepers.
  • "Many economists are sceptical" ... "Conversely hosting (or even bidding for) the Olympics appears to increase the host country's exports, as the host or candidate country sends a signal about trade openness when bidding to host the Games." ... "which seems to benefit the local nonprofit sector." ... "This finding suggests that hosting the Olympics might create opportunities for cities..." Oof.
• The article's section hierarchy could be improved, with sections 2.1-2.5 being a history of the modern Olympic Games, and sections 2.6 and 2.7 being Cost of the Games and Economic and social impact on host cities and countries respectively.

The whole cluster of articles around the Olympics have similar problems (e.g. "Coubertin is the instigator of the modern Olympic movement, a man whose vision and political skill led to the revival of the Olympic Games"), but this one, being the central article (and a Featured Article no less), should probably come first. SSSheridan (talk) 15:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

2021 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, and future Summer Olympics elsewhere

From the beginning of the "modern" Summer Olympics in 1896 C.E., they have been scheduled for the "wrong" years, as compared with the classical Olympic games in Olympia, Greece. All "modern" Summer Olympics have taken place ony year too early, compared with the ancient Olympiad reckoning. Most probably, Baron de Coubertin and his associates were unable to count, or else they would had started the "modern" Summer Olympics in 1897 C.E. instead. This year, the "First year of the 700th Olympiad" (or "Ol. 700.1") will begin on 22 July 2021 C.E. (11th day of the Attic month Hekatombaion), and the "modern" Summer Olympics are scheduled to begin just one day later, on 23 July 2021 C.E. [This reconstruction of the ancient date is based on the well-known assumptions that 1) all the Hellenic months began - in principle - when the youngest Crescent New Moon was visible soon after sunset from Greece, 2) the classical Olympic games were held during five days around the Full Moon, from the 11th to the 15th day of the Hellenic lunar month, and 3) this "Olympic" Full Moon was always the second Full Moon after the Summer Solstice.] Now, the "International Olympic Committee" have a great opportunity to "put things right" and correct the wrong years of Baron de Coubertin, by simply for the future schedule every "modern" Summer Olympics for the Gregorian years congruent to 1 modulo 4 (i.e. the years 2025 C.E., 2029 C.E., 2033 C.E. 2037 C.E., 2041 C.E., 2045 C.E., and so on). In this way, the "modern" Summer Olympics will always begin at appoximately the same time as the ancient Olympic counting of years would have given as the beginning of the "First year of the Nth Olympiad". And now, when we are approaching the 700th Olympiad, let the "Olympic time" be set "right" again with "modern" Summer Olympics occurring in the "right" years; do not let us wait until the 800th Olympiad! /Erik Ljungstrand (Sweden)