Talk:2020 Thomas & Uber Cup

Thailand and Indonesia flag

I see that User:Hariboneagle927 remove Thailand and Indonesia flag, as he stated that " Indonesia and Thailand are not allowed to use their flag as per WADA including but not limited to the victory ceremony". But, per insidethegames.biz article, the sanctions is just can't flown their flag. The sanction here different with Russia which they don't allowed to compete under their own flag (see: Reuters). in Badminton World Federation Thomas Cup final video also showing Indonesia flag while the match is in progress, but only in the victory ceremony Indonesia can't flown their flag. let me know if i wrong User:Griff88 Stvbastian (talk) 01:36, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The sanction against Thailand and Indonesia is that they cannot "officially" use their flag, except the Olympics. Its different from Russia because they can still compete under their country name (and not under the name of their federation). For Indonesia the flag used in the victory ceremony was their federation flag (as per Indonesia's Tempo). It is not limited to the victory ceremony and is not limited to a certain sport. But the guidelines are still being drafted, so understandably actual implementation of the flag ban would differ.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I reverted my edits so far, save for the flag in the "champions" portion for now. I can't see the video, but if the flag were indeed used despite the WADA ban, I think it would be fine to retain the flags here as well.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Stvbastian & Hariboneagle927, I believe we should wait for further tournaments, maybe in 2021 BWF World Championships it will be clear. As for now, let's keep the national flags intact. Based on what we've seen, Russia in 2021 Sudirman Cup is referred as NBFR in BWF publications and their federation flag is used for TV broadcast too. Whereas Indonesia and Thailand are still using their usual flag on TV broadcast and announced with their respective names, i.e. the ban is only during flag hoisting. So I don't see why we have to remove Indonesian/Thai flag unless there are further updates. Griff88 (talk) 11:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

@Stvbastian:, @Griff88:, @Griff88: - Now an IP user insists on keeping the Indonesia flag on the "champions portion" when WP:RS states that the flag was not flown in the awarding ceremony. They insist that WADA and Wikipedia are too different entities. Afaik Wikipedia just follows what reliable sources. Any advise on how to proceed with this.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 14:26, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Badminton Association of Indonesia flag being removed by bot

The bot keeps removing the "Badminton Association of Indonesia" flag, File:Persatuan Bulutangkis Seluruh Indonesia Logo.jpg, because this logo is a fair use image, which can only be used on the Badminton Association of Indonesia. It is not a valid fair use of this logo to have it on this tournament page- please can people stop re-adding it, as the bot will just keep (correctly) removing it again? Joseph2302 (talk) 21:36, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Wanzac as they were last person to add this logo. The logo is copyrighted, and so cannot be used on this page. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:37, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of 2020 Thomas Cup group stage into 2020 Thomas & Uber Cup

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a Merge Proposal and / or Redirect. Please do not modify it.
The result of the request for the Proposed Merger of {requested article} into this talk page's article was:

Not Done—No Consensus to Merge.
— — — — —

Duplicated except for the information that is hidden by default in this article. Add the info to the main article instead of creating the same things twice noq (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose. The stages articles are meant for details (score per matches instead of ties only). BnTAA (talk) 08:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Why can't the details be in this article? Why is a separate article and double editing needed? noq (talk) 15:18, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

For. Why it is not possible to have all the information in one article ? It would be easier and the size of the article is not an excuse because it deals with two competitions wich are independant of each other. They should each have an article. This would solve the problem of size ... Flammekueche (talk) 07:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose merging. The stages articles are meant for details. The articles are not short like critized before. This way here is much more useful, for instance for transclusions or for the Wikipedia book function. Florentyna (talk) 01:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment We can follow 2014 Thomas & Uber Cup article in which only Group stage for respective "Cups" is separated. zoglophie 06:14, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

What does having the group stages in a separate article add? The detail could be merged into this one and remove the need to click around multiple articles. noq (talk) 13:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

— — — — —
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a WP:PM.

Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. zoglophie 19:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of 2020 Uber Cup group stage into 2020 Thomas & Uber Cup

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a Merge Proposal and / or Redirect. Please do not modify it.
The result of the request for the Proposed Merger of {requested article} into this talk page's article was:

Not Done—No Consensus to Merge.
— — — — —

Duplicated except for the information that is hidden by default in this article. Add the info to the main article instead of creating the same things twice noq (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

The knockout stages should also be merged here if not deleted as placeholders. IF the article starts to get too big, a more rational split would be to have separate articles for each of the two cups currently in the article. noq (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Should be merged onto this page. No need a separate article, Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose. The stages articles are meant for details (score per matches instead of ties only). BnTAA (talk) 08:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Why are they needed? The details are hidden by default so all you see is the same info you get here. And both articles need updating rather than one! What advantage is there in splitting detail across different articles? noq (talk) 09:14, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Then the details should be in the main page, which is combusting. After all, it has been like this for years and all survived merge. BnTAA (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

That is what the merge would do. What do you mean by combusting? Why create lots of small articles with double editing to keep things in line when putting them all on one page, or a page per cup if it gets too big is a more logical structure. Can you provide links to any previous merge debates that are relevant that survived? noq (talk) 17:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

@BnTAA: Can you respond to this point please. noq (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I just think the main page will be really full if merged. Better to separate the articles to TC and UC. BnTAA (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

It would be easy to merge and if the page is too full, split by cup rather than having 4 sub articles is what I am suggesting. noq (talk) 16:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose merging. The stages articles are meant for details. The articles are not short like critized before. This way here is much more useful, for instance for transclusions or for the Wikipedia book function. Florentyna (talk) 01:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Why is repeating information on multiple pages and splitting details across articles more useful than getting all the detail on one page? noq (talk) 09:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

@Florentyna: Can you respond to this point please. noq (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose. I don't think those pages should really be merged, those group stage pages are just meant for details of each match. It is better they remain the same either way there have been pages that still continue to do this or in the past. Jr2006Venz (talk) 12:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

What is the advantage of having multiple articles? The extra detail in the sub articles could easily be included here - s what is added by duplicating most things? The oppose views here are ignoring that question. I understand there is more detail in them currently - I don't understand why they need to be separate articles for this? IF this article gets too big, it can be split by cup rather than having 4 sub articles (2 for each cup) and then duplicating the most relevant info here. Putting it all here or in one article per cup removes the duplication and the need to edit multiple articles to keep things up to date. Just repeating that there is more detail in the sub articles is ignoring the fact, that the detail can be placed here. That is why this is a merge debate rather than a deletion debate. Also read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There is no need to continue using an odd layout just because someone did that in the past noq (talk) 09:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jr2006Venz, Florentyna, and BnTAA: Can you respond to the points raised above please. noq (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I can see what you are saying and do understand your statement. I think it would be better to do that for the next and future editions since this year's edition is almost completed. Jr2006Venz (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Why not this one? noq (talk) 16:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jr2006Venz: Can you respond to this point please. noq (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't mind doing it now or not since the competition is already over but to me, I think it would be better to just start things off new, starting with next year's edition. It may create some misunderstanding to some users in the beginning if they came back to view the page or view the page itself. I would think it may be better to begin the upcoming edition instead of a past one. Eitherway, I don't mind whatever the situation becomes. Jr2006Venz (talk) 20:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

So its been delayed long enough for this competition to finish so lets forget about it and kick it down the road and repeat the discussion next time? Why not do it here, sort it out once and for all and next year will follow the merged format rather than people arguing we did it this way last year. noq (talk) 13:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

On the English WP, it's usual to have several sub-articles, while in other languages, there's only one global article. Currently, the problem is that two separate competitions (Thomas Cup AND Uber Cup) are in the same article. Yes, they take place at the same time and in the same place but they are independent of each other. Logically, two articles are needed: "2020 Thomas Cup" and "2020 Uber Cup". And that would settle the debate on the sub-articles ... Flammekueche (talk) 22:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Sub articles are normally used when their is a substantial amount of extra detail to add. In this case, there is not. But the structure used here is just bizarre and needs to change. Either an article for each cup (which would appear to me to be the most sensible) or a single article with all the detail from the sub articles. noq (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose noq While there is scope for merging the sub articles, I prefer the current version more. This is because if you do merge knockout and group stages all in one article, it's readability will be affected and article could become hotchpotch. See amount of draw and matches I do not think it is good mixing the things. Also, we should not separate Thomas and Uber cup because the event itself has its official naming as "Thomas and Uber Cup" and these competitions are conducted together by the authority BWF. Moreover, sub articles are not doing any harm to Wikipedia, for the reader's ease, links are provided to reach those sub articles. zoglophie 18:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose See directly above from Zoglophie. --Florentyna (talk) 16:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

— — — — —
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a WP:PM.

Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. zoglophie 19:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)