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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Running, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of running 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.RunningWikipedia:WikiProject RunningTemplate:WikiProject RunningRunning
There's rather a lot of overlap between this article and the "athletics" one; while it is certainly possible to draw a distinction between the broader term and the narrower one, it does not follow that they are best handled in separate articles. It's misleading to state that "It is under the banner of athletics that the two most prestigious international track field competitions are held"; the Olympics and Worlds also include the marathon and race walking. Perhaps it would be better to have separate "track" and "field" articles, and let "track and field" redirect to "athletics". Track running events have more in common with road racing than field events, apart from the minor detail of taking place in a stadium. While a minority of sprinters also long jump, it's less common than distance runners doubling up track and cross-country or marathon. And of course doping concerns are not specific to "track and field" either. jnestorius(talk)22:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are rather similar because the athletics article remains in a pretty bad state – halfway pulled by US editors towards track and field article and halfway pulled by non-US editors towards a holistic view of the sport of athletics. That is why it remains so dissatisfying for all readers. My original plan was to completely write the two separate articles in userspace and then move them to mainspace, but other editors started to build the "track and field athletics" article in the meantime.
While there is much athlete crossover in long distance, the sports of road running, track and field, and cross country are very much independent. We should discuss them as sports as a whole and not just from an athlete perspective. Outside of the World Championships in Athletics and at the various multi-sport events, the three sports almost never coincide. The IAAF Diamond League is distinctly a track and field meeting series.
While I understand the concerns of overlapping, there are essentially two principal ways in which these two topics can be dealt with in a encyclopaedic manner:
Option 1: Have an in-depth article titled "athletics" which incorporates an extensive overview of track and field. No independent track and field article. (The "Britannica" or "French" solution).
Option 2: Have an athletics article which relies on sub-articles for more extensive information; giving overviews of the sports of track and field, cross country and road running, among others.
Having given this some six months worth of though and work, it becomes clear that the first option is somewhat impossible here due to the fact that we must cater for a nationally-plural audience. The move of the main topic to "track and field athletics" some two years ago strongly underlines the fact that American readers not only expect there to be a specific "track and field" article, but that they do not understand when it comes under the title "athletics". On top of that, it is illogical to have an athletics article using "track and field" as a disambiguator or qualifier as athletics is more than just track and field. A similar term would be "United Kingdom (England)"; the latter forms a significant aspect of the former but they are two distinct ideas. With so much widespread usage of "Athletics (track and field)", it is no surprise that many US editors and readers confused the terms, and often thought it meant the kind of "athletics" that is covered in college athletics.
Further to this, as the sport of athletics is not just track and field, how do you start an athletics article when many people expect it to cover track and field? The definitions are different. The former title of Track and field athletics was doubly incorrect in that the term is actually synonym of "track and field sports" and "track and field", but its content covered the sport of athletics. In the real world, track and field athletics is never an exact synonym of athletics – neither cross country or a 5K street race could be described as forms of track and field athletics.
While from a British, Australian, or European perspective it would make most sense to pursue to topics by the "Britannica solution", the combination of the fact that track and field is a very common term in the US and Americans are typically unfamiliar with what Athletics (sport) covers, makes this solution unworkable. Hence, my decision to build two separate articles in the manner of athletics (sport) and track and field.
I don't think its misleading to state that the foremost track and field competitions come under the athletics banner, the Olympics site itself shows both track and field under the title of Athletics, just as swimming and diving come under the title of Aquatics. The idea of splitting the "track and field" article into "track events" and "field events" would not only ignore the fact that the two almost always come together as the same competition when held at professional level, but also leaves us again with the problem of redirecting American users to an "athletics" article where they expect "track and field" (and we all go back to square one). On the basis of these issues and perspectives, I think it's best that we develop athletics (sport) as a hub for the various sports it contains, rather than as a holistic article. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)Join WikiProject Athletics!14:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand some of your points. It seems as though you expect Americans to ignore a broader "athletics" article and just read a narrower "track and field" article; is this what you want to happen, or what you want to prevent happening? You ask "how do you start an athletics article when many people expect it to cover track and field?"; what is your own answer to this question? I'm also unclear what the difference is between a "hub" and a "holistic article". Maybe I should just wait till you've reworked athletics (sport)jnestorius(talk)17:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that I want or expect American readers to ignore an athletics article to focus on a track and field one instead, but rather that it is a confusing affair for people to read about track and field through the athletics article (as has been attempted until I separated the two), especially when so many American readers are entirely unfamiliar with the term in that sense. My own answer to that question is that it is logistically impossible in Wikipedia - we must define the titled topic in the first sentence – athletics and track and field are not synonymous, thus they can't coexist in the same way that, say, Sidewalk and pavement do.
My primary intentions are (a) to provide a solution which is clear to all parties, and (b) one which clearly demonstrates that athletics and track and field aren't exactly the same thing. I know Wikipedia isn't the place to right great wrongs. Still, treating the two topics separately not only allows for clarity and a minimum of confusion for all English speakers and editors on Wikipedia, but it is also an excellent way of clearing up that the two terms are not interchangeable. Oddly, there aren't many clear online definitions of athletics that point out that it is in fact the parent sport of track and field, not a sister sport of synonym. Many people frequently call the IAAF World Championships in Athletics the "IAAF World Track and Field Championship"[1], and (while there is some clear overlap) this is not entirely correct – the same happens with the Athletics at the Olympics.
Hopefully, covering the two topics will help American readers understand what athletics actually is, rather than seeing it through the narrowed view of track and field. I'll put some work into the athletics article soon to demonstrate what I mean by a hub article. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)Join WikiProject Athletics!19:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It would appear there is no all-encompassing word for "athletics" in American English. The governing body for "athletiss" in the US is called "USA Track & Field", after a few years as "The Athletics Congress". It says of itself "USA Track & Field (USATF) is the National Governing Body for track and field, long-distance running and race walking in the United States". So, Americans are always going to have a bit of a problem; the standard usage there is to use "track and field" in a broader sense than is strictly accurate. The Wikipedia article on USATF currently states "USA Track & Field (USATF) is the national governing body for the sport of track and field (or athletics) in the United States." The Wikilink is to track and field when it should be to athletics (sport). If you have two closely related articles, there is a strong danger that editors will Wikilink to the wrong one. Special:WhatLinksHere/Track and field tells me that several thousand pages link to "Track and Field". How many of those ought really to be linking to "athletics", and how will they be fixed? By having a single article, that problem goes away. I don't think two articles makes for clarity; I think it increases confusion. It would be clearer to have something like:
Merged introduction
Athletics is a collection of competitive sports events that involve running and walking races, jumping, and throwing. Types of athletics competitions include track and field, road running, cross country running, mountain running and race walking. The name "track and field" derives from the venue for the competitions: a stadium which features an oval running track surrounding a grassy area. The throwing and jumping events generally take place within the central enclosed area. In American English, "track and field" is often used loosely to include non-track races, while "athletics" denotes sports in general.
Athletics events are generally individual sports with athletes challenging each other to decide a single victor. The racing events are won by the athlete with the fastest time, while the jumping and throwing events are won by the athlete who has achieved the greatest distance or height in the contest. The simplicity of the competitions, and the lack of a need for expensive equipment, makes athletics one of the most commonly competed sports in the world.
The USATF article is wrong because of the confusion between the two terms (as you say, Americans have no true exact word for athletics in this sense). Dealing with the two different topics within one article actually makes links more problematic in that when someone wants to link to track and field, it links to an article that does not deal with that topic alone, hence we continue to have the problem where people think track and field is athletics and vice versa.
If we were to link that track and field in the USATF article, which then redirected to athletics, then we would only compound that confusion. I've corrected the USATF article to better reflect the reality – we can see that a number of different sporting concepts feature and we should have the links leading to those articles. We have separate articles for cross country, racewalking and road running – just because there is an American linguistic gap for "athletics" doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a separate articles for athletics and track and field too. Track and field is not just an American term either – it is also used in British English and corresponds to the same meaning.
If there are problems with the links within other articles then that is a problem to fix. Not a reason to sit back and think a division is hopeless. A vast number of those links to track and field were recently created by R'n'B and I. If you're familiar with sport at US educational institutions and track and field in the US at the professional level then you will know that a link to track and field is much more accurate and precise than a general athletics one. These are the direct links which have recently been added.
.jpg){kind=small}
