Misplaced Pages

Talk:Olympic Games

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SSSheridan (talk | contribs) at 15:55, 11 May 2021 (→This article (a Featured Article) needs significant work: fixed list formatting). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:55, 11 May 2021 by SSSheridan (talk | contribs) (→This article (a Featured Article) needs significant work: fixed list formatting)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Olympic Games article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Featured articleOlympic Games is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
[REDACTED] This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 12, 2012.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 11, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
March 13, 2005Featured article reviewKept
January 20, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
May 1, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
October 9, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
February 21, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 12, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
[REDACTED] Olympics Top‑importance
[REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSports
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconMulti-sport events Top‑importance
WikiProject iconOlympic Games is within the scope of WikiProject Multi-sport events. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Multi-sport eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Multi-sport eventsTemplate:WikiProject Multi-sport eventsMulti-sport events
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Template:WP1.0

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Olympic Games article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages

There is a request, submitted by (unknown) , for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages.

The rationale behind the request is: "Previously requested ".

"The greek olympics" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The greek olympics. The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#The greek olympics until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 20:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
49.145.105.55 (talk) 05:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 07:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Oxford spelling edit notice

This article has the {{Use British English}} template up top, and its Talk page has the {{British English}} template up top. So why are we using this editnotice which displays a banner saying "This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling" when I open the edit window? Looking through the article, I can see that it certainly does NOT use Oxford spelling (which mostly changes 's' to 'z' in words like "organization" but abandons all other Americanisations), so either we need to ditch the Oxford notice or incorporate it properly with appropriate templates and spellings throughout. I personally don't see why we would need to use Oxford spelling, as the other Olympics articles are either written entirely in British English or American English. Rodney Baggins (talk) 10:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I've found that the {{British English}} template was added to the Talk page by an unregistered IP on 31 July 2016, then this diff added the {{Use British English}} template to the article page on 26 August 2016. It would seem that User:Acopyeditor saw the template on the Talk page and accordingly introduced the spelling format to the main article. Then on 26 August 2017 (one year later) User:Koavf created the British English Oxford Spelling edit notice for some unknown reason. I'll leave this alone for a few days, but I suggest the edit notice needs to be speedily deleted as there was never any consensus reached on any spelling format, let alone the Oxford one. If there are no objections here, I would personally prefer British English, per existing templates. I've pinged the users concerned in case you have any preferences or suggestions? Rodney Baggins (talk) 10:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

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. 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." 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 Misplaced Pages 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)

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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Olympic Games#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)

Categories:
Talk:Olympic Games Add topic