Talk:Science Olympiad

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science 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.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

Thoughts on what to do with these? Eventually they're going to take up a lot of space. 71.204.62.62 (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me if I'm wrong but I thought that Wikipedia articles had unlimited space. If you don't like how people will have to scroll past all of it, you can change the format in a number of ways. I'd do it it it was an actual problem and I had the time. :) FluxLightSpectrum (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we should remove past years' events or note the events that changed between years. I'll get around to that at some point.Rey grschel (talk) 05:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Is that vandalism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.53.218.27 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yep, got it. You can always be bold and take care of it yourself! (ESkog)^(Talk) 05:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scoring

Are you sure the method given for scoring is correct? I know at state and regional copetitions 1st is given 11 points (it's higher at state), 2nd gets 10 points, etc. highest score wins.

The article is correct for New York regional and state, at least. --AySz88 ^-^ 01:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wandered over to the SO forums after posting my question, and the way stated there is the SO recomended way of doing it.

not to be rude,but what do you think about plattsburg MO"s team? i mean they always smoke regionals and they do really well. i think they might go all the wya this year

__
Scoring wise, I think the article is correct- there are many different ways to do it. At nationals, and the way it is done in NJ, they give 1 point for first place, 2 for second, 3 for third and so on. At the same time, I believe some states do it differently.
Ursypretty 22:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the scoring method where lower scores are better, isn't there a maximum value, significantly lower than the number of competing teams, that a team can get for an event, for instance 11th, 12th, and 13th place and so forth get 11 points for the event? If two teams competed in three events each at Nationals, one getting 1st, 1st, and 50th in the three events and the other getting 8th in all three, wouldn't the team with two firsts and a 50th have the better overall score? The article suggests, by induction, that a placing of 50th in an event would stick a team with 50 points, which sounds strange, but possible, to me. --Allen 08 August 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.242.36.165 (talk) 11:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Event and event description formatting

There's been some inconsistency for a while about the event list and their respective descriptions, so I'd like to check: should we create descriptions for all the events, or put the event list without any description? Just wondering... --Havocrazy 03:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see the events and their descriptions. Perhaps have them in a nice little table/box. Willhockey16 04:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with events and their descriptions. I like the way they are now as apposed to before with no descriptions.Smartkid2 14:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'll see how to create a wikitable or something sometime when I figure out what is the proper style/formatting for it... if anyone knows how to do it already, uh, would you be interested in helping to create it? --Havocrazy 07:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have any more comments on this? I think I'm just going to set it up the way that the competition results are formatted, like the following example:

Event	Description
Anatomy (Digestive and Nervous)
Awesome Aquifers	Construct an aquifer and answer questions about groundwater concepts

And so on and so forth. Any comments? --Havocrazy 22:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me, go for it. Willhockey16 02:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me too.-- 24.184.12.248 00:16, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the insanely extended time period that's elapsed since I posted that formatting, but I got sidetracked by a combo of school and procrastination. Having returned, I'll try to implement the table and update what I can perhaps this weekend :). My sincere apologies! Havocrazy (talk) 06:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category?

Should Science olympiad aritcles be a subcategory of Olympiad? I just thought of that. Munkee madness 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A number of people have tried to do that in the past, but their articles have been typically merged back with this main article. I think I'll set up a table for events and descriptions soon, if I can get some more feedback on it in the above entry. --Havocrazy 22:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updating

I'm not sure in other places, but in Ohio, Awesome Aquifer was removed, as was heredity. I don't want to make changes because I'm not sure of the other locations. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 01:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

its not in new york —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darth Anzeruthi (talk • contribs) 04:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Past national champions

I fixed the winner for the 2006 B-divison competition. Booth was the winner. http://www.indiana.edu/~nso/tournament/news.shtml for official results if you want to verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.209.157 (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

I haven't ever heard of Canada competing. They are not on the results sheets from the national competition. They aren't on the membership map either. http://www.soinc.org/aboutso/membership.htm Smartkid2 (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canada sometimes sends one or two teams to compete in the National competition. GotMoney999 (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Storm the Castle

The Storm the Castle article seems too short to stand on its own; its content would be better merged into the main article. If the events content gets large, then a Science Olympiad Events article may be justified, but probably no specific event would be sufficiently substantial enough for its own article. Dl2000 (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly agree. The content should just be moved and shortened. Spencer^T♦^C 01:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After numerous days, Storm the Castle is now a redirect. The only reference link for that game actually went dead, so it doesn't seem warranted or notable to include any additional detail for this game, at least compared to the other games mentioned. Dl2000 (talk) 04:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Random Comment

BTW gj with updating the 2009 national winner so fast. I didn't think it would be done so quickly. Anyway thanks for doing the work for me I guess. 209.6.208.21 (talk) 00:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

State Winners?

Should we put state winners on the page? I think it is a good idea but it would take up to much space. How do all of you think of it? GotMoney999 (talk) 21:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a good idea. :) After all, I hope to be one myself! Just one tip: Ecology and Dynamic Planet: Ugh. I didn't do so well...I mean, I guess it was okay, but...the test was really hard, asking stuff like about the pollution lvl of nyc rivers, and sources, and exact percentages of river pollution in US. like, it was nothing on the study sheets, kind of unfair. Mutomana (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I think this article should show images of the competitions. Sfoske70 (talk) 02:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nationals would be a good place to start on that. But then again, you'd have teams constantly trying to put their picture on this page then. Ifly6 (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources

What is considered a secondary source? A significant amount of interpretation is posted to online discussion forums (e.g. the Science Olympiad Student Center) with little that I can find in the way of accurate secondary sources - news articles written about Science Olympiad are frequently rife with blatant inaccuracies. What parts of the page specifically could benefit from more secondary source references? --71.59.14.12 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or remove

For subjects not currently in this years contest, do we remove them or something else or just plain out keep them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshmallo3535 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Events

Should I migrate the "Events and event history" section to a list article?

Also, if I were to migrate, should I get rid of past years' events and only list the current year's? Should I also get rid of past years' events in the main article as well?

Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]