Jump to content

Talk:2012 Summer Olympics/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Does every country have female athletes?

From the article: "...meaning the Games became the first at which every country and sport included female competitors.". This was passed around some in the press at the start of the games, but I don't believe it's actually correct. Barbados (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbados_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics ) has 6 male athletes and no female, and both of Nauru's athletes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics ) are male. Kevinatilusa (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

These games had the last previously all-male countries to send female competitor(s). The ones which don't have females in these games, have had females in the past. Now every NOC has had a female athlete at least once. That is what it is supposed to mean. 85.217.15.248 (talk) 21:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
That is true, and it is something that should probably be more clear, because right now it seems to be claiming that all delegation included women. Tad Lincoln (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I tried to edit and clarify the meaning Kevinatilusa (talk) 02:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunatly there is a small snag to this reasoning. The sources I've seen all say that this is the first games where each country fielded a women's team. And per WP:V, the basis for inclusion is verifiability not truth, and everything must be attributable to a reliable source, otherwise it's technically WP:OR. Is there a source for this I'm not seeing?JOJ Hutton 04:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Kevinatilusa already cited two countries, or NOCs, whatever, that included no female athlete at 2012 games. Barbados and Nauru. Even though he used the wikipedia articles on those coutries, not the original source, it's quite easy visiting the London 2012 official website and verifying it. For the lazy ones: Barbados Nauru No female. Maybe other NOCs than those two dint' sent female athletes to the games, but my lazyness do not allow me to verify it NOC per NOC. =P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.161.156.120 (talk) 06:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
WP:OR states that you shouldn't take information from two or more sources to come to a conclusion not directly stated in those sources. That would be original research, and if we look the other way on this particular topic, it would be hypocritical and inconsistent. And of course we can not, under any circumstances use another Wikipedia article as verification for facts. Considering that a lot of sources are actually saying that this is the first Olympics that every single country fielded a women's team, we better come up with a verifiably reliable source. JOJ Hutton 15:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
The official Olympic site's list of Nauru athletes is not verifiably reliable enough? If you don't allow that, then there's a problem in that you're essentially asking to verify a negative -- if one source believes all countries sent female athletes, and ten others believe some countries sent women and others didn't, the former will report on it as news, the latter will say nothing because it's not as interesting. Kevinatilusa (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
My curiosity took over my laziness and I went for it. Besides Barbados and Nauru, Saint Kitts and Nevis also sent only their men sprint team. Tameka Williams, a female sprinter from Saint Kitts and Nevis, was expected to participate in the games but SKNOC alleged she assumed the use of drugs prior to the games and sent her back home. About the sources, the London 2012 website is not one source. It is THE source from where other sources as newspapers and magazines take most of the information about the games they publish. And there is listed ALL atheletes, as is stated there, that participated in the games from any coutry. And from those three countries/NOCs only men participated. I mean, come on... It realy amazes me how people cling to wathever half-arsed argument to keep some piece of information that is not true just because that piece of information pleses then somehow. If some news says that all 204 NOCs sent women to these especifc games thats is just wrong information. Maybe due to an overexcited reporter as three autocratic coutries that never allowed their women to take part of the games finally abided by the world pressure. The truth is that, with those three countries sending women for the first time, all the 204 NOCs have now sent women to the games at least one time. Nauru, for example, sent a woman to the 2000 and 2004 games, but sent no woman to the 2008 and 2012 games. I'll just create a new section asking that part to be edited back to the Kevinatilusa version since the user R013 reverted the changes Kevinatilusa did before. I'll add BBC list of athletes as well (witch they probably took from the London 2012 website...) as reference:
Barbados: London 2012 BBC
Nauru: London 2012 BBC
Saint Kitts and Nevis: London 2012 BBC The BBC list still includes Tameka Williams. They did't update the list after she was sent back home. I could only find a tweet from BBC here and news from Times of india here
Something interesting and unexpected. I found as well two countries that sent only women. Bhutan and Chad. One male sprinter from Chad was expected to compete in the games, but he was cut before it. I don't know the reason for the cut indeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.56.51.68 (talk) 00:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I found a reliable source in a few seconds with a Google search and have changed the article [1] to say: "Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Brunei entered female athletes for the first time, meaning every country has sent a female competitor to at least one Olympic Games. Barbados, Nauru and St Kitts and Nevis only had men in their teams but had entered women in previous Games.[1] With women's boxing included, the Games became the first at which every sport had female competitors.[2]"
  1. ^ Magnay, Jacquelin (11 August 2012). "London 2012 Olympics diary: three countries have failed to send any female athletes". The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group. Retrieved 14 August 2012.
  2. ^ "London 2012 international digest - Day Six". BBC Sport. 2 August 2012. Retrieved 11 August 2012.

Reviews from around the world

​

Reviews from around the world are really good,hailing it as the best Olympics ever,a spectacle,praising London for a job well done. Also a poll was taken asking people "Was London 2012 the greatest Olympics ever staged?" with 92.07% of almost 10,000 people voting "Yes it was the best ever"

The Australian, Peter Wilson: British take gold as best Olympics Games hosts

The Age, Australia, Greg Baum: It's been a right bang-up job

Washington Post, USA, Mike Wise: London 2012 taught us about legacy, humor and courage

New York Times, USA, David Segal: Britain Takes a Final Bow

The Globe and Mail, Canada, Doug Saunders: Olympic elation envelops host nation

National Post, Canada, Bruce Arthur: Britain pulls off an Olympics to remember

New Zealand Herald, David Leggat: Three cheers for a job well done

China Daily: Grand finale brings Games to an end

Link to reviews: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9471860/London-2012-wins-gold-medal-for-best-Olympics-ever.html

Also The Mayor of Rio de Janeiro has congratulated Boris Johnson and London for putting on "the greatest Games ever".

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5h67nRP7owpLVKzzGNcdYxgB30M3Q?docId=N0388481344608695581A

I think a 'Review' section should be added with all this in it.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.29.179.174 (talk) 14:29, 13 August 2012‎ (UTC)

Edit request: female athletes

Someone edit the part of the article about female athletes participation to match official source as discussed above in this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.56.51.68 (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Participant map

Why is there such precise distinction among tiny Olympic delegations (one color for countries with 1-3 participants, another for 4-9, and another for 10-29), but then very little among larger ones (one color for every country having between 100 and 299 participants)? It seems odd. Funnyhat (talk) 06:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The number of countries with 1-3 or 4-9 athletes is similar to the number of countries with 100-299. JoshMartini007 (talk) 14:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Controversies

Why hasn't be removed Paraskevis Papachristou minor and irrelevant with the Olympics games controversie from the mane page? is it fair for the athlete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.69.86.166 (talk) 08:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

You're right that doesn't belong in such a short summary of all the controversies, I've removed it - Basement12 (T.C) 09:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Artists

"London 2012 finale used video montage of Bowie classics, and prerecorded slots for other absentees Kate Bush and the Sex Pistols"

Article imbalance

The article currently seems quite lopsided, giving lots of attention to the bid and preparation for the games and not so much to the event itself. So, for example, Ken Livingstone is mentioned twice in the article but Usain Bolt is not mentioned at all. I suppose this to be a consequence of the way that the article was developed - being started many years ago, filling up with details of the preparations and so leaving no space for the actual event itself. The article therefore needs rebalancing and I shall place an undue tag to encourage this. Warden (talk) 08:21, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's too lopsided at all. I'll assume you were just using Bolt as an example (there's no particular reason he should be mentioned in this article) but there seems to be a good balance between the preperations for the Game which lasted over a decade and the Games themselves which lasted two weeks. Alongside this article we have hundreds of by sport, by event and by nation articles as well as the Chronological summary of the 2012 Summer Olympics and List of 2012 Summer Olympics medal winners that go into far more detail on the sports. Mentioning specific athletes in this main article, other than those who set world records who are already included, would introduce an element of subjectiveness that we should try to avoid - Basement12 (T.C) 11:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree with Basement. I too don't think it is undue at all. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 11:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
This article is just an overview and summary of the totality of this Olympiad, the Games are not over yet so there is still mateial coming in to be added to this article. There are other articles that cover in great detail everything from venues, sports, teams, events, individual participants, etc. Take a look at all the articles in Category:2012 Summer Olympics and its subcategories. BTW is there an easy way to find out the total number of articles in the whole category? Roger (talk) 11:32, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
57 pages according to WP:AWB if not recursive. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 11:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Wrong. That is just the 47 articles in the "root" category itself plus 10 subcategories. AWB does not count the entire category "tree". I'll consult the guru's at WP:VPT. Roger (talk) 11:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Good to know =). Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 11:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Applied recursively, AWB finds 9,276 articles in the sub-directories. The vast majority of them appear to be biographies, presumably of the competitors.  An optimist on the run! 20:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Although I am a Londoner and proud of the Games, I am concerned at some Pro-UK bias here. The opening few paragraphs should sum up a worldview of the Games suitable for an international encyclopedia. Therefore I think it is not appropriate to have the statement:

"Great Britain achieved its highest tally of gold medals since 1908, finishing third in the medal table."

I feel that even though UK is the Host, this should not be part of the short list of features of this Olympics that is key and relevent to Wikipedia's world of readers. This statement belongs only in articles or sections about the UK (so-called "GB") Team etc. Indeed, if anything should be said about the gold medals list at all in this section- and in my view it shouldn't- it would simply be who won it. I propose to remove this unless someone can explain why this fact belongs here.

IceDragon64 (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Rebecca Soni's world record

Rebecca Soni set a new world record for the same event twice during these Olympics. Since the final was the day after the semi-final, the records are listed separately. I think it might make more sense to consolidate them into one item, so it's clear that they are for the same event. What do other people think? Tad Lincoln (talk) 21:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

No, the record she set in the semi-final was the offial record until she broke it the next day. Roger (talk) 09:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

most successful athetes

Is there a list/a table of most successful athletes in these games? I could not find it, if there is. There is 2012 Summer Olympics medal table, which has countries/NOCs in it. The only part I could find about athletes was in "The Games" section: list of World records. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.217.15.248 (talk) 21:28, 12 August 2012‎ (UTC)

There can be many views on "most successful". Athletes with at least four medals can be seen by clicking the "Year" column in the first table at List of multiple Olympic medalists at a single Games. There are six listed in 2012 and all are swimmers – a sport where you can compete in a lot of events. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I mean same kind than the 2012 Olympics medal table. So, there is not an article for every games, only compilation of all games. I see. 85.217.15.248 (talk) 20:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request: London, England

Could someone please change the error in the opening paragraph? The games took place in London, United Kingdom - not London, England.

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thatrainbowconnection (talk • contribs) 00:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see that as an error. As far as I'm aware we don't have a policy as whether to refer to the country of the UK. In mot cases though the indivdual country is referred to rather than the UK. For instance, 'London, England', 'Aberdeen, Scotland', 'Newport, Wales' rather than using the UK. For what reason, I'm not sure but that seems to be the way. Often counties are used rather than countries as well, for instance the page Halifax, England simply redirects to Halifax, West Yorkshire. It is more specific I suppose. Mtaylor848 (talk) 15:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

London is in England and indeed it has always been common to refer to "London, England" to distinguish that London from other Londons in the world. However, I understand that since the Games are held in the UK, not just England, there may be a case for saying London, UK.

IceDragon64 (talk) 21:55, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

'Many commentators considered these to be the greatest games ever'

It says this in the opening statement. It gives no indication who these commentators are. This could probably be said for all games. If an unusually high number of notable commentators have expressed this then it should be worked in the article. However there is no mention of how many have said this and who they are. A small number of un-notable commentators may have said this but the same could be said for any games. On what basis did they say thi? There are two sources provided, one being the Telegraph, which is a little dubious and a very 'pro-British' paper.

If nobody objects or can improve this claim I shall remove it. Mtaylor848 (talk) 15:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Read just above you, Reviews from all over the world have hailed London 2012 as the best games ever. Worldwide polls were done asking if London 2012 were the best games ever and over 92% from around the world voted "yes". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.182.6 (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

 Not done Biased and false claim. I agree with User:Mtaylor848. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 16:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

How is it a biased and flase claim when 10,000 from around the world vote it as the best games ever and all the reviews in the links were from different countries across the world? And im Italian! lol You need to learn the meaning of the word 'biased'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.192.114 (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Have you heard of the recency effect? People have a tendency to think the latest of everything is the best. Funnyhat (talk) 06:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
You yourself need to learn the meaning of the word "biased". 10,000 from more than 7 billion people is rather low, and most of them have a bias and a regency effect, as Funnyhat explained. Furthermore, the "reviewers" were not more than 100 years, as the first Olympic Games was in the last 19th century. They simply can not remember all the Olympics and then suddenly state that this was the best Olympics. Please use your logic and stop making such ridiculous statements. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 10:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Will all commentators on this debatable subject please ensure they use non-confrontational language. I see no reason why a statement need be referred to as "ridiculous", for example.

IceDragon64 (talk) 22:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request: Sports Section (the new table)

Personally I dislike as it looks ugly and takes away information as no diciplines are shown, but if we're going to keep it like that Aquatics (diving, swimming, synchronized swimming and water polo) needs to be merged or else it will look like the Olympics has 29 sports instead of the 26. Wondering how we'll go about it. JoshMartini007 (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It should be reverted to avoid incosistency and confusions. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 17:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Sports Undertaken

And I quote, "26 sports and 39 disciplines" and then go on to list 29.... Did I miss something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRadclyffe (talk • contribs) 14:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

The list shows 25 sports and the 4 diciplines of aquatics (diving, swimming, synchronized swimming and water polo). I've reverted to what it was before until a better solution is found (or we keep it the way it is). JoshMartini007 (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

About male discrimination

There were a country and the area where a man did not participate in.[1]。As for the rhythmic gymnastics and the synchronized swimming, only a woman item is adopted, and the participation of the man is not achieved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teel-m (talk • contribs)

As for the rhythmic gymnastics and the synchronized swimming, only a woman item is adopted, and the participation of the man is not achieved. Uhmmm... these are women's sports, and male discrimination is exactly what? Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 07:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, men's rhythmic gymnastics is a sport originated in Japan. World Congress was held in 2003. You tube of men's Rhythmic Gymnastics.[2]--Teel-m (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

So what do you want to insert? Your own POV? Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 07:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Medal Values

All monetary values should be in £GB, why are the medal values singled out in $US — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlin-UK (talk • contribs) 18:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Because the U.S. dollar is currency used in the cited article. The article doesn't give the value in any other currency. --JamesAM (talk) 02:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Men and women

All the Wikipedia articles on previous Summer Olympic games include the total number of athletes and also the number of men and the number of women. This page is missing this information.

According The Guardian's datablog (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/datablog/2012/aug/07/olympics-2012-athletes-age-weight-height#data) the numbers at London 2012 were Men: 5756 Women: 4628 However this adds up to 10,384 which doesn't quite match the total figure quoted in the infobox.

Suggested change to infobox:

Athletes participating 10,384 (4,628 women, 5,756 men)"The Guardian". Retrieved 24 August 2012.


Can someone update this please? Payo (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

​

Why Guardian? User the official site of the Olympics. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 07:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I have closed the semi-protection request because the requesting user should not be blocked from editing this article; however, the discussion on the merits of this change can and should continue on this talk page. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Unlock

Don't we need to unlock this page? --InformationContributor11 (talk) 00:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

You can file a request for un-protection at WP:RFPP. -- Dianna (talk) 02:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Volunteers -- small edits requested

I realise that my points are certainly not earth-shaking, but the section on volunteers (2.4) has a couple of minor errors. The volunteers' shoes (trainers) at the Olympics were not beige/brown, they were grey with red laces, and the volunteer uniforms did not include fleeces, only jackets. I was in volunteer workforce operations and saw hundreds if not thousands of volunteers, and this was true of all of them (there were contractors and other workers at the Olympics who had different uniforms). Also, this section uses both present and past tense -- probably all should now be in the past tense. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.164.112 (talk) 06:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2012 Summer Olympics/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jamesyboy2468 (talk · contribs) 16:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Let's do this. Corrections welcome... jamesy boy (2468) 17:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Quite a few spelling/grammar issues in the article, Too long, spin off longer sections, world records.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research. Needs references on the: #financing section #Security section (Should be able to be copied from Security for the 2012 Summer Olympics#World Record section (should be preety easy to find)
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Needs more information on sports,
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Biased towards UK
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment. Re-Write and resubmit.

A brief overview of the article finds some striking shortcomings. An Olympics is a huge undertaking which gathers the world's focus for two weeks. There are so many things which can be said about it that entire books could be written. The challenge of the main encyclopedic article is to summarize the event into a comprehensive work: being able to cover all important issues while keeping the overall size in balance. Details can always be moved to subarticles in line with WP:Summary style. I have a number of concerns:

  • Much can be said about the ideal length of a Wikipedia article, but this article is too long by any reckoning; I would expect it to be about half the size, at the most.
  • The entire article is over-focused on the organization of the games and has little content on the actual events and sports.
  • There is no balance between the various section's length (controversies is very short, public transport is very long etc)
  • "Broadcasting" goes into excessive detail about UK viewing, which is highly biased.
  • There is very little coverage of the sports themselves. There should be a prose summary of each sport, which include highlights. This does not necessarily mean a section for each sport, though.
  • The world records should be spun off into their own article
  • Overall, the prose quality is periodically low and the article appears cluttered. The worst example is a single-sentence top-level section ("Victory Parade").
  • The first sentence is a run-on. The lead needs to be more focused on what is important and what is unique to that particular edition of the Olympics, rather than listing more trivial information. It also needs to focus more on the sports. For instance, it is not interesting in the lead who fronted the bit or which IOC session approved it, but mentioning the other candidate cities is, as is London being the first to host the Olympics three times.
  • To take an example for one paragraph in the lead: It starts with "Construction in preparation for the Games involved considerable redevelopment, particularly themed towards sustainability.": the first part could be said about nearly any Olympics, except for a few of the earliest and those immediately after WWII, while sustainability has been a topic for most Olympics since the 1990s. This sentence adds no value to the reader. Despite the amount of information presented about venues, very little specific is said. Use hard facts instead of vague comments, and always ask yourself: could this be said about most Olympics?
  • "The Games received widespread acclaim for their organisation, with the volunteers, the British military, and public enthusiasm praised particularly highly." is at best misleading; I sure remember a lot of criticism of the Olympics. Overall, the article completely undermines the a large amount of valid criticism of the event.

As the article is now, it fails 1a, 2b, 4 with smaller margins, but is nowhere near 3a and 3b. I would recommend failing the article, as it needs to be re-composed before being able to meet criteria 3. Arsenikk (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Development and preparation section overweight

The Development and preparation section, at 2981 words, is more than half the article (5743 words) and is longer than the main article, 2012 Summer Olympic development (2751 words). The opening and closing ceremonies should be kept as is (at least), but most of the rest needs heavy pruning. I'll offer to do this provided nobody is going to be upset with a reduction from the current nearly 3000 words to maybe a few hundred, with loss of lots of detail. I'll copy edit the other sections first, to give time for discussion. Comments, please? --Stfg (talk) 11:26, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

As long as the information is in the sub-articles then cannot see a problem. if not then transfer before pruning here. Keith D (talk) 16:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
I won't be able to undertake to check that. By the way, many of the sub-articles are quite out of date, sometimes talking about what is planned to happen during the Games and citing sources from 2011, so they need substantial work anyway. Some of them contain large tracts that are identical with what's in here. But checking it point by point is a big job.
Anything that gets pruned will be in the history, not lost. My offers are either to create the precis and let the sub-articles take their own course, or to do nothing. It's up to you. But this problem is one of those that caused the GAN to fail, and perhaps this article is not the place to be developing detailed content to then transfer to the sub-articles. Rather, the sub-articles should be developed from sources, and this one needs to be in summary style. --Stfg (talk) 17:40, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Having slept on this, what I'm inclined to do is not to summarise that section, but instead to tag it as {{Overly detailed}} and leave it at that. The work needs doing, as the GAN makes clear, but 5 sub-articles have to be considered even if the ceremonies subsections are left unreduced (as I intended). I'll wait another 24 hours for any further comments, but I'm not going to risk making trouble by removing content that other editors have worked long and hard to create. --Stfg (talk) 10:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
I've now tagged like that, so as not to compromise other editors' work. --Stfg (talk) 09:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Doing so was problematic, as the Wikimedia software repeatedly reported server errors. I trust the article is in correct shape now (?) --Stfg (talk) 09:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Merged comment

I am new to wikipedia - how do I go about suggesting a link to a 2012 forum site, I don't just want to edit it and then be shot down in flames. Can I propose a site? If so how? Thanks Dickie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldenmedal (talk • contribs) 11:44, 4 February 2009

Baseball and softball

The Sports section says that the IOC vote confirming its decision to drop baseball and softball took place at the 2006 Winter Olympics, but the citation is to a report dated 2005 and posted from Singapore. Hence the failed-verification tag. --Stfg (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Important addition to Tickets section

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Summer_Olympics#Ticketing
Please add following or similar:
Despite the huge request for usual tickets most tickets with the highest prices(for e.g. opening ceremony category AA, which cost £2,012 each, and category A which cost £1,600,) remained unsold, even for e.g. one day before opening ceremony for this ceremony. [2]. Also empty seats made a huge public opinion and mass media discussion, not only because the VIP "for sale" seats was empty, but also because many of awarded with the free VIP tickets(like sponsors, family, politics) didn't arrived and not returned ticket.[3]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. The protection expired before this request was answered. Subject to consensus and the core content policies, you should be able to edit this page yourself. —KuyaBriBriTalk 18:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ london 2012.com. "Chad - Athletes". Retrieved 2012-08-15.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/26/london-2012-tickets-available-opening-ceremony
  3. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/london-2012-olympics-blog/2012/jul/31/london-2012-empty-vip-seats

Article is NOT too long!

In my opinion, this article is fine as regards length and I think it would be a pity to split it up. This sort of dumbing down we don't need on Wikipedia. I've just used it for a Christmas quiz for grandchildren, by the way. Dendrotek 15:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dendrotek (talk • contribs)

I agree, other than maybe the public transport section I don't see more than a few lines in other places being removed besides removing entire sections, while technically still too long for Wikipedia standards I guess you have to concede that some articles are going to be long. I thought this problem was dealt with back in October. JoshMartini007 (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I agree too. As we seem to have consensus, I'll remove the tag. Stronach (talk) 09:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Things you might want to fix before next GA nom

The sections for the Cultural Olympiad, Opening Ceremony, and Closing Cermony are very short and do not have much information. They all just have a sentence or two then another paragraph, it should have more prose. I'm not saying describe everything about each topic, but get atleast a solid paragraph or two for each one otherwise I would not pass it for GA. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 23:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Olympic records

There is a list of World records, but I'm missing a section about Olympic records. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I guess that there would be too many to list them all; 20 in swimming alone. It might be possible to summarise the numbers across the various sports (& link to other pages where relevant). - David Biddulph (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I agree. The same as done at 2008 Summer Olympics#Olympic and World records. Besides of that the world records list could eventually also be moved to its own page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sander.v.Ginkel (talk • contribs) 14:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Moving proposal: List of World records

The article is quite long (I don’t say too long), but I think the list of all the world records don’t has to be on this page. I think it could be summarized and the list could be moved to its own page. There are also pages about Olympic world records (2004, 2008) and Olympic records (2004, 2008). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:53, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Nations references

All the nations has in the "Participating National Olympic Committees" table have a reference that is nowadays redirected to the same page (olympic.org/olympic-results). Isn't it better to remove these references and replace them for one reference. It looks better and makes the article shorter (so it loads faster). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be better to replace for one--Nitobus (talk) 16:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Olympic Park Map for London?

Could a map like the one created for the Olympic Park in Sochi be created to show what the Olympic Park in London showing all of the venues used in the games as it was set up for the games themselves with the possibility of a second map to show the Olympic Park in his legacy mode? (94.3.222.1 (talk) 21:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC))

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/london-olympics/
    Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment

There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited! Becky Sayles (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2012 Summer Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 13 external links on 2012 Summer Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2012 Summer Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:45, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2012 Summer Olympics. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 00:24, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2012 Summer Olympics. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 01:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2012 Summer Olympics. 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) 00:42, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on 2012 Summer Olympics. 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) 08:26, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

2012 Sports Calendar

Yesterday I modified the Sports Calendar template for the 2012 Games however I have accidently done something in my modification which means everything below the template is now centralised I have tried everything to correct this but I cannot find what I have accidentally done please can someone have a lock and correct this tiny mistake that I have made. (2A02:C7F:5621:2A00:4CFA:D3BC:2930:D0CA (talk) 12:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC))

I have fixed the problem, I think. It was not your edit that caused the problem but an edit made just before your edit by another user. Keith D (talk) 14:51, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2012_Summer_Olympics/Archive_3&oldid=1170462462"