Talk:2017 World Championships in Athletics: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:46, 7 January 2020

Athletics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Sport of athletics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the discussion.AthleticsWikipedia:WikiProject AthleticsTemplate:WikiProject AthleticsAthletics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Start‑class Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:IAAF World Championships in Athletics which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:World Championships in Athletics which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

qualification period for relays?

There reads: The qualification period for the 10,000m, marathon, race walks, relays, and combined events runs from 1 January 2016 to 23 July 2017.
But, no entry standard is given for relays. The previous games qualification article tells "Top 8 at IAAF World Relays plus top 8 ranked teams". It could be the same, though it is not mentioned anywhere. 85.76.118.86 (talk) 09:01, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, according to 2017 World Championships in Athletics qualification standards, it is the same. But, where are the teams. Not in the relay articles, at least. 2001:999:41:256:3887:3E73:C8AD:7A5 (talk) 16:05, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2017 World Championships in Athletics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:59, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What authorized neutral athletes (ANA) will use at 2017 World Championships in Athletics?

We know Independent Olympians at Olympics use Olympic flag and Olympic Anthem, what authorized neutral athletes (ANA) will use things at 2017 World Championships in Athletics?

Used flag
- IAAF flag
- White flag
- Olympic flag
Use Anthem for ceremony for if get gold medal
- Olympic Anthem
- IAAF Anthem

What use? Why? Simon 1996 (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Simon 1996: Hello, do you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? This exact question has also been raised at Talk:2017 World Championships in Athletics. If you have a question relating to article content, please discuss at the talk page section. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 18:22, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Simon 1996:

You might find what you are looking for in the article Authorized Neutral Athletes at the 2017 World Championships in Athletics. If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps.Template:Z39 Seagull123 Φ 21:43, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ping above corrected by Seagull123 Φ at 21:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Seagull123: I still got the ping, so Simon may not ...depending on whether you (re)-signed the message after altering the ping... Simon has already added content similar to his 'question' to the 2017 World Championships in Athletics page so what his question might be is not clear to me. Eagleash (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagleash: oh ok, thanks for letting me know, I don't know all the technical ins and outs of pinging. I'll leave a message on his talk page though. Seagull123 Φ 22:03, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I created the Authorized Neutral Athletes at the 2017 World Championships in Athletics article today to consolidate the list of athletes who are allowed to compete. I tried to sort through the list of athletes on five IAAF sources, having to delete athletes designated only eligible for the U18 Championships. As far as I see, the pomp and circumstance of the event were not discussed.

This being an ongoing process, the IAAF will only make announcements as and when decisions are made . . .
— [1]

So we will find out. Trackinfo (talk) 06:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note This identical question was also posted at the WP:HD and the responses by me and Seagull123 were copied here by the OP. (He has now asked again at the help desk). Eagleash (talk) 10:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We found out when it happened. Trackinfo (talk) 08:05, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic medal table

Spanish Wikipedia have an external Perl script to update automatically medal table (at 5 minutes periods). I am the author of that script, and I can modify it to update the medal table of this Wikipedia, also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoaquinFerrero (talk • contribs) 03:45, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Libya article up for deletion

Please see this discussion at AfD. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect name appearing for the GBR team

The templates used in this articles are rendering "GBR" as "Great Britain" rather than as the correct name of "Great Britain and Northern Ireland" per the IAAF website. Can anyone advise the best way to get this corrected please? -- de Facto (talk). 12:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DeFacto, a solution would be to use

Great Britain & NI, however, if it's updated here it would also need to be updated on numerous other articles relating to this championships and probably other champs too. Rolapib (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rolapib, but I can't see how to use that in place of the templates in use in this article (Template:flagATHCH and Template:flagATHCHmedalist). -- de Facto (talk). 13:25, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DeFacto, fair point! I'm no expert on flag templates and country data, I assume the proper solution would be to modify/create new flag templates and/or country data, and Template:Country data Great Britain and N.I. does already exist but currently just redirects to Template:Country data Great Britain, but their does appear to be a manual work around:

Template:flagATHCH
- Current:
  - Great Britain & N.I. (GBR)*
- Manual workaround:
  - Great Britain & N.I. (GBR)*
- Proper solution:^[a]
  - Great Britain & N.I. (GBR)*
Template:flagATHCHmedalist
- Current:
  - Mo Farah
    Great Britain & N.I. (GBR)
- Manual workaround:
  - Mo Farah
    Great Britain & N.I. (GBR)
- Proper solution:^[b]
  - Mo Farah
    Great Britain & N.I. (Great Britain and N.I.)

^ Possibly - but would require some changes to Template:Country data Great Britain and N.I. and Template:flagATHCH to make it work properly, I think
^ Possibly - but would require some changes to Template:Country data Great Britain and N.I. and Template:flagATHCHmedalist to make it work properly, I think

Rolapib (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rolapib, I've implemented your workarounds in he article for now. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of them can create/update the appropriate templatessometime. -- de Facto (talk). 07:09, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great Britain and Northern Island is the United Kingdom. Why is this name not being used throughout? Peterwlane (talk) 21:15, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peterwlane, why is United Kingdom not being used throughout? Because the UK athletics team choose to be called Great Britain and N.I. at the World Championships and the IAAF recognise this as per DeFacto's comments above. The United Kingdom is properly called The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but lots of terms are commonly used to mean the same thing: United Kingdom, UK, Great Britain, GB, Great Britain & NI. I think to date it's fairly well accepted that Great Britain (GBR) is more appropriate for athletics articles on wikipedia, but, given DeFacto's observation that the IAAF refer to them as Great Britain and N.I. I think it's worth discussing whether and how to make changes to reflect this.

Rolapib (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is MWR?

When you click on Gatlin's 100 m time, the "MWR" link goes to the athletics abbreviations article, but it's not listed. best, 82.46.64.88 (talk) 19:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

it's masters world record - see the 100m article for more info Rolapib (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of records on event pages

Is listing the previous Gibraltarian and Slovak records together with the area records a tad excessive? The national records are perhaps sufficiently covered by NR in the results, and certainly by the second table. See e.g. WP:BALASP. I'll add that as far as the first table is concerned the previous national records are not listed in the citation given. 62.249.160.48 (talk) 20:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's excessive and should be removed. Also, as for information that is not supported by sources cited, it can (and should) be removed as well. Also, this "Selection" of records is completely indiscriminate. What matters is what records secondary sources discuss in connection to this competition. That should be our selection as well. In articles, preferably, records standing before the competition should be discussed in prose, in any case only when secondary sources also discuss them (such as when a previous record is broken and coverage in news journalism is generated concerning this). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In hindsight, adding the previous national records, which I'd done whilst adding new records to each event article is excessive and un-sourced. I've removed these from all the articles I'd updated to date (all mens + women 100,200,400), along with changing text to "Before the competition records were as follows:" and "The following records were set at the competition:"/"No records were set at the competition.". I'll use the same approach for now whilst updating the remaining women's articles. Rolapib (talk) 00:28, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Event page sections and section order

Now that the competition is complete, I think it would make much more sense to the average reader for the results to be presented in the following order: Final > Semi > Heats.

Similarly the Qualification standards would make more sense to go after the results.

I can also see no benefit to keeping the Schedule sections as a) I assume nobody will be needing to check the schedule anymore, and b) all of the information within it is already presented in the infobox and results.

I've created a mock up here User:Rolapib/sandbox.

Thanks, Rolapib (talk) 05:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to keep the approved and long standing section order according to all the championships articles with chronological structure. F.e. in swimming also articles start with standards and then heats, semis and finals.Montell 74 (talk) 06:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montell 74, I can understand that you prefer that format as it's what your used to and consistent (at the moment) with other similar articles. But do you really think it makes sense for the majority of readers? Rolapib (talk) 06:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do. On top of the article readers are informed about winners. Also official documents don't start with finals. Main articles start with history and process, not medal tables. At least who are the readers you mean? The one who do not have any disagreement over years??Montell 74 (talk) 08:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montell 74, thanks for the input, I think there are a number of distinct questions here:

Taking each event page article on it's own, would it make more sense to change the order of the results subsections to Final > Semi > Heats and to move the qualification standards section to after the results section??

I think it is a fair assumption that more readers are interested in notable summary level information than relatively less notable detailed information
As you point out a small amount of the most notable summary level information (medalists and winning mark) in the infobox at the top of the page
However, the next most notable information, e.g. other finalists, is at the bottom of the article
Looking across different sports both approaches are used, there is no standard across wikipedia from what I can see
I understand it may be good practice to align to official documents, but taking this competition as an example I haven't seen any official documents that cover the event from end to end - have you got any examples?

Taking each event page article on it's own, would it make more sense to remove the schedule section on the individual event pages? Noting that:

I assume nobody on the planet any longer needs to find what time an event is scheduled in order to watch/listen to/monitor it?
All the information provided in the schedule section is already shown in the infobox at the top of the page
All the information provided in the schedule section is already shown in the results section which immediately follows it
All the links provided in the schedule section are already shown in the contents at the top of the page

If it was agreed taking each event page article on it's own changes would be beneficial, would the inconsistency with previous competition, and similar events, and/or the effort needed to change these other articles, negate the benefits of the change?

As you point out, main articles start with history and process, not medal tables:
- But, this information is brief in comparison to multiple detailed tables of less notable results present on event pages before the final results
- Perhaps it would also be beneficial for the majority of readers to move the entry standards and schedule sections to the end of the article (this has already been dealt with to some degree by collapsing these tables)
Regarding consistency with previous/similar events, yes this is a consideration, but I don't think it should be a deal breaker - it's very rare for every event article across all of history to be consistent within a competition, and much less so across competitions and sports - this is probably because over time people realize there would be benefits to change? As such I don't think it is necasary to update all other articles as inconsistency is already accepted, however, given the nature of the changes (re-ordering sections), if people wanted to improve consistency the effort would not be overly high.

I don't understand what you mean by "The one who do not have any disagreement over years??"

Rolapib (talk) 05:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should "ANA" be removed from the medal table

I think so. They were never a team, like IAAF indicated, it was basically every man for himself. Scrabble Scribble (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. there isn't at IAAF official web site medal table. --Kasper2006 (talk) 17:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonia / North Macedonia

The changing of name Macedonia to North Macedonia has messed up the template:flaglinkteam link. It's a red-link in the participants list and similarly for other championships. 86.138.105.254 (talk) 00:53, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article title change

Requested move 4 January 2020

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

– more common name Infinite mission (talk) 03:55, 4 January 2020 (UTC) --> Infinite mission (talk) 03:51, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The others didn't have the proposed titles as redirects Infinite mission (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I think the name change only applied to the latest (and future) events, and should not be done retrospectivly. Compare with the Commonwealth Games - 2018 Commonwealth Games vs 1974 British Commonwealth Games vs 1950 British Empire Games, etc. This was my rationale when these were listed as a technical move a few days ago. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:05, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The official name change shouldn't determine which editions get the name change and which don't. "World Athletics Championships" is more common than "World Championships in Athletics". Infinite mission (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I agree with Lugnuts. We should not go back and change names that were not used in history. It is the same as putting Caitlyn Jenner running in the 1976 Olympics, which some have done then claimed women's world records. All the contemporary references will use the names we have now. If you think there would be some confusion, you are welcome to build redirects, but wikipedia should always keep the proper name. Trackinfo (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Trackinfo:, Wikipedia's intent is to use common names, not official or "proper" names. "World Athletics Championships" is much more common than "World Championships in Athletics". Infinite mission (talk) 04:45, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have bought into the official name situation exactly. The IAAF is rebranding as World Athletics. They changed the name of their World Championships at the beginning of 2019 to conform with the re-branding. Prior to the name change, these titles ARE what the championships were formally called. Wikipedia does this all the time. There is only one official song title, book title or movie title. Wikipedia consistently uses that name. It then produces redirects to the potential common names these works could be known as (also allowing for disambiguation situations). Trackinfo (talk) 06:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was already aware of everything you've stated. Once again, Wikipedia prefers the most common title, not the official title used by an organization. I changed it much the same as anyone else may change an article to give it a more common name. Just because it had that title here before, doesn't mean that's how it should be. I can only imagine that if this was a more popular article or subject overall, it probably would've come up already, even before the organizational rebranding.Infinite mission (talk) 14:54, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It was asserted that the proposed titles are the WP:COMMONNAMEs, but no evidence that they are common names has been presented. Dekimasuよ! 12:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugnuts:,@Trackinfo:,@Dekimasu:, Google News search results yield the following: 13,900 results for "World Championships in Athletics" "world+championships+in+athletics"&sxsrf=ACYBGNTAUQ_H0tzWAWwRfidGdq-zJ9YToQ:1578411562918&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiKjpGk6fHmAhWRdd8KHft6AqEQ_AUoAnoECBAQBA&biw=1101&bih=1566, 88,800 results for "World Athletics Championships" [2], 796 for "2017 World Championships in Athletics" [3], 3,610 for "2017 World Athletics Championships" [4]

[1] Possibly - but would require some changes to Template:Country data Great Britain and N.I. and Template:flagATHCH to make it work properly, I think

[2] Possibly - but would require some changes to Template:Country data Great Britain and N.I. and Template:flagATHCHmedalist to make it work properly, I think

[a]

[b]

@@ Line 190: / Line 190: @@
 :::I was already aware of everything you've stated. Once again, Wikipedia prefers the most common title, not the official title used by an organization. I changed it much the same as anyone else may change an article to give it a more common name. Just because it had that title here before, doesn't mean that's how it should be. I can only imagine that if this was a more popular article or subject overall, it probably would've come up already, even before the organizational rebranding.[[User:Infinite mission|Infinite mission]] ([[User talk:Infinite mission|talk]]) 14:54, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 *'''Oppose'''. It was asserted that the proposed titles are the [[WP:COMMONNAME]]s, but no evidence that they are common names has been presented. [[User:Dekimasu|Dekimasu]]<small>[[User talk:Dekimasu|よ!]]</small> 12:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
+{{reply|Lugnuts}},{{reply|Trackinfo}},{{reply|Dekimasu}}, Google News search results yield the following: 13,900 results for "World Championships in Athletics" [https://www.google.com/search?q="world+championships+in+athletics"&sxsrf=ACYBGNTAUQ_H0tzWAWwRfidGdq-zJ9YToQ:1578411562918&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiKjpGk6fHmAhWRdd8KHft6AqEQ_AUoAnoECBAQBA&biw=1101&bih=1566], 88,800 results for "World Athletics Championships" [https://www.google.com/search?biw=1101&bih=1566&tbm=nws&sxsrf=ACYBGNQdvpJwRKIQUs8wMIsjz3WFRx9olA%3A1578411568713&ei=MKYUXoWZK-2xggf2j7z4Dw&q=%22world+Athletics+championships%22&oq=%22world+Athletics+championships%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l2.79286.85490.0.85757.10.8.0.0.0.0.194.918.0j5.5.0....0...1c.1j4.64.psy-ab..5.5.901...33i299k1j0i13k1.0.AxP0yXE0RVQ], 796 for "2017 World Championships in Athletics" [https://www.google.com/search?biw=1101&bih=1566&tbm=nws&sxsrf=ACYBGNQdvpJwRKIQUs8wMIsjz3WFRx9olA%3A1578411568713&ei=MKYUXoWZK-2xggf2j7z4Dw&q=%222017+world+championships+in+athletics%22&oq=%222017+world+championships+in+athletics%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3...2149.4918.0.5636.9.7.1.0.0.0.186.933.0j6.6.0....0...1c.1j4.64.psy-ab..2.0.0....0.quf7IS1xIaE], 3,610 for "2017 World Athletics Championships" [https://www.google.com/search?biw=1101&bih=1566&tbm=nws&sxsrf=ACYBGNSLiyK_h1zaxBYno3kbIDxrI_1lCQ%3A1578411728826&ei=0KYUXoqGMqSt_QbRsYfQDg&q=%222017+world+Athletics+championships%22&oq=%222017+world+Athletics+championships%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3...82607.86669.0.87082.7.7.0.0.0.0.244.974.0j3j2.5.0....0...1c.1j4.64.psy-ab..2.4.722...33i299k1.0.gWU9mkZK50c]