Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Single skating/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 9 September 2020 [1].

Single skating

Nominator(s): Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:16, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the figure skating disciple. If passed to FA, this will be the third figure skating FA. It has been thoroughly researched; I believe that it is ready for FA. I look forward to any and all feedback. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:16, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass

All images appear to be freely licensed.
Image placement could be improved. In the Compulsory figures section, there is narrow sandwiching of text between two images, which looks bad and should be avoided if possible (see the collapsed screenshot); you could fix it by moving the Morgenstern image to the right.
Most of the upright images would look better if rescaled with the |upright parameter as recommended in MOS:IMAGELOC. See the uncollapsed image for an example.
MOS:IMAGELOC states, "Most images should be on the right side of the page, which is the default placement." The article has several left aligned images which break up section headings, which is undesirable. The Nobunari Oda and Artur Gachinski pics should definitely be moved to the right because they are breaking into the next section without actually facing into the text to a significant degree. (t · c) buidhe 00:44, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believed that I solved the above issues by: removing the Morgenstern image, since the Compulsory figures section is so short, removing the Gachinski image because it really didn't really illustrate the section's content anyway, and changing the image size of the Oda image to fit within the section. MOS:IMAGELOC also states, "It is often preferable to place images of people so that they "look" toward the text." Everyone on the left is looking at the text to the right; that's why they're there. Hopefully, my changes have helped with image placement. Thanks, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. (t · c) buidhe 04:52, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Spicy

Interesting read. Just a few comments on prose... I know nothing about figure skating so do correct me if anything is off base.

"Single skating has required elements that skaters must perform during a competition - is "required elements" a technical term in figure skating, or is "required" redundant since we are told that they must perform them?

Yes, it is; there are elements that skaters can perform that aren't required

Compulsory figures, from which the sport of figure skating gets its name, was a crucial part of the sport for most of its history until the ISU voted to remove them in 1990.- is "compulsory figures" singular or plural? It is first referred to with "was", but later with "them".

No, it's plural. Thanks for catching the typo.

Free skating, also called the free skate or long program, is the second segment in single skating, pair skating, and synchronized skating in international competitions... - is it necessary to repeat the list of international competitions in this section when it is already in the "Short program" section?

I noticed that the last copyedit go-over I made. I think it's necessary if someone were to read the sections separately, but I can see it as being repetitive, too. What do you think? I'll go with your opinion, since I'm probably too close. Should we say in the "Free skating" section: "Free skating, also called the free skate or long program, is the second segment in single skating, pair skating, and synchronized skating, in the same international competitions as the short program"?

I think that would be a good idea - it communicates the same information without being repetitive. Spicy (talk) 14:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Championships and festivals focusing on compulsory figures has occurred since 2015 - have occurred

Got it.

Also according to the ISU, jumps must have the following characteristics to earn the most points: - is "also" necessary here? To vary the sentence structure you could change this to something like "Jumps must have the following characteristics to earn the most points, according to the ISU:"

Got it also, har-har.

"International Skating Magazine called this regulation the "Zagitova Rule", named for Russian skater Alina Zagitova, who won the gold medal at the 2018 Winter Olympics by "backloading" her free skating program, or placing all her jumps in the second half of the program in order to take advantage of the rule in place at the time that awarded a 10% bonus to jumps performed during the second half of the program" - very long sentence, suggest splitting

Done, broken up after the first "program".

"Single skaters must include the following in order to earn the highest points possible during choreographic sequences:" - "choreographic sequences" is plural here but the rest of the sentence refers to the sequence in singular - change to "during a choreographic sequence"?

Good catch.

"The first time a senior singles skater used music with vocals and lyrics during a major international competition was Artur Gachinski from Russia" - Gachinski is a person, not an event; could this be changed to something like "The first senior singles skater to use (etc)..." or "The first time... was Arthur Gachinski's performance at Skate America in 2014."?

Wow, that was a dumb mistake; good job being the first person to notice! Fixed.

Since 2003, women single skaters have been able to wear skirts, trousers, tights, and unitards, which was a change since the ISU requirement in 1988 that women skaters wear skirts during competition, a rule dubbed "the Katarina Rule", after East German skater Katarina Witt, who "skated her tapdance-based short program in a showgirl-style light blue sequined leotard with high-cut legs, low-cut chest, and similarly colored feathers on her headdress and sleeves and around the hips as the only perfunctionary gesture in the way of a skirt". - suggest splitting this sentence as well

Done, separated after first use of "unitard".

That's all - thanks for putting this up for FAC. Spicy (talk) 01:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, Spicy. Thanks so much for the review; it was very helpful. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and happy editing :) Spicy (talk) 14:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks again and same to you. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia

S&P/ID 2018, p. 9 ... no idea what S&P/ID is, guessing it is "Special Regulations & Technical Rules Single & Pair Skating and Ice Dance 2018" based on the date but a) I can't figure out how we get from there to S&P/ID, and b) we shouldn't make our readers guess.

Yes, you're correct. It's what the ISU calls the document, but you're right that we shouldn't expect readers to know that. Changed to "Special Regs"; I didn't bother changing the ref names, though.

Similarly, Tech Panel, the source is Technical Panel Handbook ... spell it out?

Done.

The lead is underdeveloped, and it is jumping around, from one topic to another, then back to an earlier topic. The prose is not clear in the lead ... for example ... Deductions in singles skating include violations in time, music, and clothing, as well as regulations regarding falls and interruptions. Deducations are regulations? I think the lead needs a rewrite.

I moved some things around and expanded the lead.

History does not seem to mention single skating at all.

I bumped into this in the GAN. The GA reviewer insisted that this article needed a history section, which I disagreed with initially, but they insisted so in it went. I still don't think it needs it, for as I said then, the history of single skating, including those who have dominated the sport in different eras, is really the history of figure skating. Other skating discipline articles (pair skating, ice dance) have these sections because they were added to figure skating later. Plus, there is information about the histories of the other disciplines, for that reason, and not as much about the history of single skating alone, separated from general discussions about the sport's history. I'd be fine with removing the section for these reasons.

"The short program lasts, for both senior and junior singles and pairs, two minutes and 40 seconds." Is there any group for whom it does not last 2:40? ... If not, why the qualifier?

Yes, figure skating has other divisions, for younger skaters: novice, intermediate, juvenile. I didn't think that the time requirements for them was notable enough to include here.

The first paragraph of short program is unclear in scope ... it starts talking about what it is, but then moves to who holds records-- why are the record holders not in a separate para? At the end of the section ...

I went ahead and separated the paragraphs in the Short program section, but didn't in the Free skating section because the paragraphs would be too short. Personally, I think the records better belong before the discussions about requirements.

Short program talks about point scores without having first explained how those point scores are arrived at.

I'm not sure this is the place to talk about about how skaters earn points. I think it better belongs in the article about the ISU Judging System (IJS), which I intend to tackle in the coming months. I mean, when the infobox in Michael Jordan's article talks about his Career NBA statistics, as a non-basketball fan, I don't understand what the numbers mean, and the article doesn't explain the scoring system in basketball. I just looked at a few basketball articles, and they don't explain scoring, either.

Some reorganization and beefing up would help ... for example, short programs could have four paragraphs: 1) The short program is ... 2) both male and female single skater must ... 3) an explanation of scoring ... 4) record holders.

The Short program now has three paragraphs. In the Competition segments sections, it's in summary style. I could add more from the parent articles, which are linked in the Main article templates, if you like.

Free skating, I don't know what is meant by "in the same ... "

Are you talking about the phrase "...in the same international competitions as the short program"? That was a change requested by Spicy above. Can you tell me how it's unclear?

SO, as I read on down, I see the things I am asking for are given later ... reinforcing my idea that the organization is backwards. A more logical flow might be 1) Competition requirements, 2) Rules and regulations, 3) Competition segments, 4) Records holders. It feels like I am supposed to understand Competition segments and points and records before I know how those things are built.

Sandy, I understand your points, really I do, but the current structure of this article follows the traditional structure of articles about the other disciplines (pair skating, free dance). It could be true that for this article, your structure makes more sense, but I'm not convinced. Personally, I think a reader, even the uninitiated skating fan who only watches skating every four years, needs to begin at the segments. A viewer unfamiliar with the sport is gonna tune into the Olympics and the commentators are going to announce, "Welcome to the Short program" and they need an understanding of what that is in relation to the Free skate. And then they need to know what skaters have to do within the time frame of the short program and free skate. All the elements are linked and discussed later in the article. That being said, if you insist upon it, I'm happy to comply with your suggestions.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:40, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing this version. It's still not working for me at all. The lead still bounces around from one topic to another, now includes excess detail, and the idea that we have to include history (even though history contains zero mention of single skating) is odd. Why is there no mention of single skating in history? Did the original Olympics not include single skating? It seems they would have. If not, why would History be the first section, where we expect to find content relevant to the topic (single skating). Why did this happen? "As of the 2018–2019 season, however, only the last jump element performed during the short program ..."

The lead starts with two definitional sentences, than has a sentence that has no mention of singles, then in para 2 goes back to definitions (where the reader has to guess that "There are two segments in all international competitions" refers to single skating), then oddly has record holders in the same para, while going BACK again to history in the same paragraph, but again, without even mentioning singles. Then the third and fourth paragraphs go in to excess detail about definitions and rules. The lead isn't working at all for me, nor is the article organization, and the lead looks like the article is trying to develop content where there is little to cover. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I state above, the problem with developing content about the history of single skating is that the sources (even Hines) don't separate single skating from the history of figure skating in general. That's why I asked if we should just remove the History section, thus removing it in the lead. No, the original Olympics (1896) didn't include figure skating, and along with it, the discipline of single skating; as the article states, the first time the Olympics included the sport, again along with single skating, was in 1906 in London. The 2018 rule change, which is explained in the final paragraph of the Jumps section, explains the reason (the "Zagatova rule") for it in the very next sentence.

There are two sentences in the first paragraph of the lead, and both mention single skating, so I'm confused about what you mean about "a sentence that has no mention of singles". I changed the first sentence in the second paragraph, which hopefully clarifies it, to: "Single skaters are required to perform two segments in all international competitions..." The records are in the short program and free skating program, so I thought that it belongs there. Along with removing history, I could also remove records. The definitions explain the elements single skaters have to perform. Perhaps what's confusing you is that skaters in other disciplines have to execute some of the same elements. I'm not sure how we can clarify that, so I'm open to suggestions. I'm willing to take your directions about changing how the article is organized. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7

Nothing really jumps out at me (so to speak) but there was a couple of confusing bits. I read it a couple of times, and there are some bits that are unclear to me (possibly because I've never performed an ice skating jump, and my knowledge of the sport comes solely from reading your Wikipedia articles):

Hah, for some reason, that made me laugh. ;)

"The use of vocals was expanded to singles skating, as well as to pair skating, starting in 2014" You mean music with lyrics?

Huh, that's exactly how the ISU describes it. Changed to "music with lyrics" in all instances.

"All jumps are considered in the order that they are completed. If an extra jump or jumps are completed, only the first jump will be counted; jumps done later in the program will have no value." Er, how many jumps are you limited to?

That's told in the separate sections about the competition segments above. Actually, the point is that you can do as many jumps as you wish; you just won't get points for all of them. I could put the number of jumps required in the short program and free skate here in this section, but wouldn't that be repetitive?

"Since 2003, women single skaters have been able to wear skirts, trousers, tights, and unitards. Since 1988, the ISU required that women skaters wear skirts during competition, a rule dubbed "the Katarina Rule"" Do women have to wear skirts or not? The text seems to be out of chronological order.

Switched sentences; the one starting with 1998 is now before the sentence about 2003.

Quibbles:

Link Pyeongchang.

All done.

Reference required in the first paragraph of "Rules and regulations"

Do we need one there? It's a summary of what's to come. I could remove it, if you like.

I love the line about "excessive nudity". Aside: while competing in a 24-hour mountain bike race well past midnight, I was overtaken by a rider wearing nothing but the regulation cycling helmet. Apparently, nudity makes you ride really fast.

I know, that's always cracked me up, too. That reminds me of when I was in the arena for the 2010 Nationals in Spokane, Washington, watching an ice dance competition. The scores came up and the audience was confused about a one-point deduction. The commentators speculated it was because the team's costume was a bit revealing; I said, "But that's what my husband likes about this sport," and a woman pointed to her husband and said, "Him too" as he nodded enthusiastically. I'm sure the rest of the crowd wondered why there was laughter in our section. Figure skating can be so staid and conservative, but I guess mountain biking is not. ;)

Take care on the ice. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! No worries there; I tried skating as a child and discovered I did not like falling, especially on cold, hard, icy surfaces. I love watching it, though. You too. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

"If there is a costume or prop violation, the judges can deduct one point per program." - source?
Fixed, thanks for the catch.
What makes Cosmo a high-quality reliable source in this context?
I understand the objection. I think what makes it a good source is the content; it's pretty much spot-on accurate and illustrated nicely with images and videos. See, one of the goals as editors who write figure skating articles on WP is that we make the sport accessible for what I call "the uninitiated figure skating fan", or the fan that only watches every four years during the Olympics. This particular Cosmo article also does that, so I thought it was appropriate to use. That being said, there's nothing the Cosmo article supports that can't be supported by another source, so if you want me to remove it, I will do so, but it will personally disappoint me, boo hoo. ;)
FN19 should omit work title and just use |publisher=NBC Washington
Ok, done.
FN23 title is incomplete
Fixed.
Be consistent in when/whether you include locations for newspapers
It's my practice to include locations when it's unclear. For example, I wouldn't include the location of The New York Times or the Boston Globe. Are there any newspapers with unclear locations that I missed?
By that logic I wouldn't expect to see it with Lake Placid News. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But the LP source (FN31) has its location. I just did a spot check, and I didn't see any other less obvious locations. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's my point - since the location is in the title I'm not sure why it's included. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, duh, I get you now. Yah, I'm assuming that not everyone knows that LP is in N.Y., so that's why I included it. But I can remove it if you wanna be really picky. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
FN31 returns 404 error
Fixed.
Should use "Technical Panel" rather than "Technical panel" in short cites
Got it.
FN56 is missing "p."
Ack, another good catch
Fn63 doesn't match up with other cites to that source
Ack again!
FN64 is missing caps on work title
I think I got that one.
This is now Boston Globe while FN 57 is The Boston Globe - should be consistent. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Got it now. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fns65 and 32 should have the same work title. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:26, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Um, actually no. Same author and magazine (Atlantic Monthly), but different articles.

Thanks for catching all those silly errors, that's why we copyedit. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment - This has been open for a long time and despite being on the Urgents list, it does not have the necessary support for promotion. Therefore, I will be archiving it shortly and it may be re-nominated after the customary two-week waiting period. --Laser brain (talk) 11:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. --Laser brain (talk) 11:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.