Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1928 Summer Olympics medal count/archive1

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

The list was not promoted 04:02, 8 April 2008.

1928 Summer Olympics medal count

[edit]

Complete list of medals per country for the 1928 Summer Olympics, with a comprehensive lead section to introduce the data. – Ilse@ 18:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Previous comments
Wow, back then there were 1/3 of the events there are now and Canada won 15 medals, they'll be lucky if they hit that number this summer. Anyway, it's a very nice list, I'm going to make a few tweaks, but I get the sense that it missing something that would make it a truly excellent list, perhaps the table is a little narrow or maybe it needs more text. Not a lot of complaints, it would be nice if it was sortable, it would also be nice to have a couple more images. -- Scorpion0422 18:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment — There are 45 of these lists, and to my knowledge this is the first time we've tried to make any of them a featured list, so any improvements applied here ought to be done consistently to the rest. (I'm not sure why 1928, of all Games, is the "guinea pig" here...) — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments very nice. If this is to become a precedent, let's get it perfect.
    • Consider making the list sortable (it'll probably work out of the box)
    • Not convinced over the use of US English but won't oppose on it.
  • Otherwise, it's a nice piece of work. I guess I'll hold off support until other people have commented because I may have missed some obvious bits and pieces. And, as we've discussed, get this one right and another 44 FLs will follow! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think some of the medal count lists are too short (ie. Some of the early Summer ones and a large portion of the winter ones) to ever reach FL status, but it could happen. -- Scorpion0422 19:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments. I'm thinking that to make it a true FL, it really needs some meat.
    • It would probably make sense to have at least one section of text that puts into perspective the medals won at these games. In other words, explain the reaction to the US winning double the medals as anyone else, or perhaps find somewhere where medals were disputed. I just think in general the topic has to be looked into so that a good chunk of text can be written.
    • Also, maybe think about what to do with the whole "this table is ranked this way because..." section. It should probably be repeated somehow on all the pages eventually, so there must be an easier and more appealing way to show it than to repeat it on every page.
  • Overall, good. I'll also hold off on my support. Jared (t)  20:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments from Andrwsc on content:
    • I agree with Jared's comments about the need for more prose text in the introduction.
    • I don't think "lavender blue" and "boldface" need wikilinks here. They are not in the context of this topic. Also, the table legend ought to be put next to the table, not left in the page introduction section.
    • You'll see that I added the "Events contested" section. This is something I've had in mind for a long time, and now seems the perfect time to deal with it. I've always thought that these medal count lists require proper explanation of the gold/silver/bronze totals, especially since they almost never add up the same. Feel free to improve the section I added, but I think the principle is necessary.
      • I have added the information about not adding up to the lead section, and I removed the "Events contested" section because I think this should not be in the medal count list, but in the main article about the 1928 Summer Olympics, as it currently is. – Ilse@ 00:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I still maintain it's necessary to show something that better illustrates how to add up the medal totals. These Games are "easy" to explain because the only discrepancy is a single event, but other Games are far more complex, and I would like to see a standard way of showing how the totals add up. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I agree this is relevant when understanding the Games, but I am not sure this article is the right place for this info. If there is a way to make the connection to the medal count (i.e. the main list), I think it should be added. – Ilse@ 01:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • All-time Olympic Games medal count is linked from the navbox, so is it necessary to repeat it in the "See also" section? Similarly, I think Summer Olympic Games ought to be linked from the prose text in the introduction somehow, instead of being in the "See also".
    • I don't like the "General" and "Specific" sections for references, especially since one of them is listed in both places.
    • I am uncertain about the need of an external link to a Canadian broadcaster website for this list, especially since it does not support the entire list (e.g. medal count only lists 11 nations). Also, the IOC website is kept up to date, whereas many of these kinds of external links are not. I have run into discrepancies (for other years) between the IOC published totals and alternate websites (from Russia, Germany, etc.), as can happen when medal totals change. This actually happens more than you think, such as the retrospective upgrade of curling at the 1924 Winter Olympics to official status only a couple of years ago, and the changes due to drug violations etc. (e.g. Marion Jones for 2000). In any case, I just don't think the quality of that external link justifies its inclusion here.
    • The significant reference notably missing from this article is for the official report itself. I've just added it to the "general" section, but I'd like it to be moved to a proper inline reference when you update the introductory prose.
    • Since International Olympic Committee is linked from the article, we don't need to keep linking it as the publisher of some of the references.
  • Thanks for your work here! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have fixed most of your concerns. About the "general references" section, I added it, and I prefer to use one general ref for a table (because techinally each row should have its own cite) and also it makes it easier for users to find the ref we used for the table. -- Scorpion0422 22:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The following referenced phrase "The ranking in this table is based on information provided by the International Olympic Committee,[3]" already refers to the information on which the table is based, so I believe the "general references" can be removed. – Ilse@ 01:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe we can add a section which country/countries won their first medal at that Games? And which country/countries won their first gold medal at that Games? Doma-w (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I'm not sure I can help much with the Olympic-related stuff as while I enjoy the games it's not something I'm knowledgeable about. I'll try to help with the Wikipedia and language-related stuff instead.

  • Why "De Coubertin's Paris" and not just "Paris"?
  • Go for "Paris, France" and "Los Angeles, United States" rather than just the cities
  • Are "celebrated" and "celebration" correct terminology in "were celebrated in" and "the previous celebration's financial loss"? "Hosted" and "events" seems more natural.
  • The Highlights bulletpoint section seems to be verging on the side of WP:TRIVIA, especially with the inclusion of things like the Tarzan guy. I'd also prefer to see it as prose. They should all be referenced, too.
  • The "Medals awarded" could do with being elaborated, and personally, I don't like to see "See..." as in "See the medal winners, ordered by sport".
  • Is "debuted" a real word in British English? Firefox spell check doesn't recognise it in British or Aus English, but does in American and Candadian

That's it. Sorry I can't be of more help cause I like the idea of this -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 03:38, 25 March, 2008

Thank you for your help. I think you took 1928 Summer Olympics for your comments instead of 1928 Summer Olympics medal count. – Ilse@ 09:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, you're right. I clicked on the wrong link above. I've removed the linking so no-one else makes the same mistake and I'll get onto looking at the right page right now! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 20:33, 25 March, 2008
  • We can also add the medal count from the art competitions? Doma-w (talk) 09:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think this is a good idea when it is done in a separate table. – Ilse@ 11:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have added the table. – Ilse@ 12:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have restructured the article. – Ilse@ 13:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sorry, but I think this is a really bad idea. The art competitions have not been official Olympic "events" for 60 years, and they do not appear in the IOC medal database, anybody's medal tables, and so on. Therefore, I would say that it is "undue weight" to include them on these medal count pages. I certainly believe that they should be properly documented, so I created Art competitions at the 1928 Summer Olympics today (including the medal table) to accomplish that. I think these competitions should be similarly to the other non-medal events at each Games, such as demonstration events, for which we have pages such as Lacrosse at the 1928 Summer Olympics, linked from the main Games page and linked from the events navbox. But I strongly believe that these totals are out of place on this article. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think I agree with Andrwsc here, somewhat. I think it wouldn't be a problem to have some sort of prose describing why it is that there were art competitions and also why they aren't included, but no table should show it. The separate page works well at doing this, so a link to that would suffice. Jared (t)  21:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I don't see any problem in including them. Since the art competition have not been official Olympic event for 60 years, in the medal counts of the last 60 years no art medals will appear. In the earlier years there were an Olympic art competitions, so for this 1928 list the art medals should be included. And these medals are in a seperate table, so they are not confused or mixed with the sports medals. – Ilse@ 13:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This looks good, but I think Switzerland had to be ninth and Denmark tenth.
  • Don't we want to write the rank only once when countries tied, like it is written on all other medal tables e.g. Athletics at the 1928 Summer Olympics?

Comments Let's try again...

Oppose, regretfully. I have followed these 45 pages for a couple of years, so I was intrigued at the possibility of promoting them to feature lists. However, in good faith I cannot support the nomination of this list in its current form. I think it fails criteria 1d of WP:Featured list criteria, as the inclusion of the art competitions is controversial disputed. Art competitions are given undue weight in this article, as they comprised only one of fifteen competitions at the Games yet the sub-total for them is given the same weight as the combined total for the other fourteen. Equally important, there is no contemporary source that can be used as a secondary source that includes these totals. I strongly feel that nothing more than a "see also" reference is appropriate. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the personal opinion of Andrwsc is the same thing as a controversy. During the 1928 Summer Olympics the art competition was an official event, thus intended by the founding father of the modern Olympic Games, Pierre de Coubertin. Let me quote the article Art competitions at the Summer Olympics:
Art competitions formed part of the modern Olympic Games during its early years, from 1912 to 1948. The competitions were part of the original intention of the Olympic Movement's founder, Pierre de Frédy, Baron de Coubertin. Medals were awarded for works of art inspired by sport, divided into five categories: architecture, literature, music, painting, and sculpture.
The 1928 Summer Olympics medal count should include all medals awarded during the 1928 Summer Olympics. The quotation leaves beyond any doubt that this includes the medals for the events in the arts competition, because the art competitions were part of the Olympics from 1912 until 1948. Andrwsc would be right if the article was named 1928 Summer Olympics sports competition medal count instead. Thus, the argument that the nominated article fails criterion #1(d) does not hold. – Ilse@ 18:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, how about disputed instead of controversial. It's not just my own opinion; it's the opinion of other members of WP:WikiProject Olympics who have contributed to this discussion, and it's the consensus for these lists for the past few years. Never in the history of these lists have art competitions been added until now. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the art competitions were officially part of the Olympics, but not included in the article, it would then fail on criteria 1b and 1c. Wikipedia should present true facts, not people's idea of facts, especially when those facts can be verified. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not disputing the "officialness" (at the time) of the art competitions; in fact, I spent considerable time last week creating seven new articles in Category:Art competitions at the Olympic Games as I felt those events were under-documented on Wikipedia. What I'm objecting to is the "elevation" of those events so that the medal totals are presented in the same context as the totals officially endorsed by the IOC. Even putting a disclaimer on this page is insufficient, in my mind; if a screenful of table data exists in this article, it is undue weight. With respect to your request for secondary sources higher up in this discussion thread; none of those such sources (like the partial lists found here, here, and here) include the art competition events. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If these sources do not mention the art competition it does not mean that a featured list on Wikipedia should be incomplete. – Ilse@ 09:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still think we need a section which explains the specialities of this medal count. In my opinion stats are really more interesting when they are described. Maybe:
    • The host Nederlands finished "only" eighth - the weakest finish of a host at that time (Belgium finished fifth 1920)
    • India won their first ever gold medal
    • The Philippines won their first ever medal
    • Hans Bourquin was the youngest gold medalist (men) 14 years and 222 days
    • Virginie Hériot was the oldest gold medalist (women) 38 years 15 days
    • also the section "Events contested" (now deleted) was a good explanation of the count

Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 23:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me clarify the scope of the article 1928 Summer Olympics medal count. Information about the number of medals or the ranking of countries should be in this article. Nevertheless, there should be made a clear difference between 1928 Summer Olympics medal count and an atricle about Medals at the 1928 Summer Olympics. Details about individual medals and about the events contested should be in the article 1928 Summer Olympics or in ... at the 1928 Summer Olympics instead.
This being said, I think your first three bullets should be dealt with, the last three fall outside the scope of this article. Information about which countries are new on the list (medal count) is fairly easy to add. But it is not always possible to give reasons why a certain country is ranked on a certain position, other than: they won X medals. Do you know why "The host Nederlands finished "only" eighth"?
I will add information about 'new countries' soon, but feel free to be first. – Ilse@ 09:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I haven't read much of the above, but just looking at the list another time, I feel as though its quality has just gotten worse. There are hardly any citations, there is a separate medal table (which, as mentioned above, should not be there, in my opinion), and the information written out in prose is generic information not particularly about these games. Sometimes information in pages has to overlap, and I think that it is crucial for a medal count to explain the medals won at these games. I'm not seeing any explanations here. I am still not going to oppose this nomination, but as much as I would want WP:OLYMPICS to have another FL, I don't feel as though this is quality work, and accurately represents the depth that this page should theoretically have. I am certain there is information out there. Perhaps starting with a more recent medal page would make for an easier time getting the page to FL status. It would then serve as a good model. Jared (t)  20:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/1928_Summer_Olympics_medal_count/archive1&oldid=1138478511"