Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/BBC Overseas Sports Personality of the Year
- 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 promoted by Matthewedwards 05:54, 28 February 2009 [1].
- Nominator(s): Rambo's Revenge (talk)
Toolbox |
---|
I have worked on this for the last month, It is my 5th award in a SPOTY topic. WikiCup entry. I must also thank User:Chrishomingtang and User:Chamal N got worked on this page before me (from this to this), which greatly reduced the work I had to do. All comments welcome. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Chrishomingtang
|
---|
Comment I think you should add a note about joint winners.—Chris! ct 23:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support —Chris! ct 19:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)
Thanks for the comments, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support -- Problems resolved to meet WP:WIAFL.--TRUCO 14:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- this list would be a lot more interesting if it gave some idea of what they did that year
to earn the award. For example, the first guy won an Olympic Gold Medal, the second set 3 new world records etc. Rules99 (talk) 12:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Whilst I would like to, it could be construed as WP:OR. The BBC does not specifically mention why it gave all the awards, so whilst the winners achievements in that year maybe mentioned alongside the fact they won the award, it is not explicitly mentioned if any specific contribution(s) caused them to win. For example, an athlete may have a very successful season and break a national record say. Who is to say that whether the good season or the NR was the contributing factor to winning the award. If it is not explicitly mentioned then it is OR. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Then couldn't you just provide it as background information not necessarily implying a causal link? Rules99 (talk) 13:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've been advised against adding unnecessary background information (e.g. the age they received the award if not directly relevent [3]) All the winners have there own articles if people are really interested in their careers. After all isn't that what wikilinks are for...? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we should be assuming that readers want to know what they did that particular year. Rules99 (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The thing is listing this information IMO does imply a link. Take Roger Federer. If we list that he won his fifth consecutive Wimbledon title that implies a link, however he actually did a hell of a lot of impressive stuff in 2007 so how can you choose what to include whilst remaining neutral. It seems an unnecessary and contentious addition considering everything would be in their individual articles. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Having everything in separate articles means the list is just navigational and not informative (and also deadly boring). Incidentally we can cite someone linking success at Wimbledon with the award: "after equalling Bjorn Borg's record by securing a fifth successive Wimbledon singles title. Federer won three of this year's Grand Slams... " [4]. If these really are contentious you could demand citations although I don't regard them as necessary. Rules99 (talk) 17:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Bad choice due to it being recent. One wouldn't be able to this for the older winners (i.e. pre-1990). I notice that Rules99 has been blocked indefinitely so I can't continue this discussion in a constructive way. If anyone else wishes to discuss this please let me know. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 09:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Having everything in separate articles means the list is just navigational and not informative (and also deadly boring). Incidentally we can cite someone linking success at Wimbledon with the award: "after equalling Bjorn Borg's record by securing a fifth successive Wimbledon singles title. Federer won three of this year's Grand Slams... " [4]. If these really are contentious you could demand citations although I don't regard them as necessary. Rules99 (talk) 17:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The thing is listing this information IMO does imply a link. Take Roger Federer. If we list that he won his fifth consecutive Wimbledon title that implies a link, however he actually did a hell of a lot of impressive stuff in 2007 so how can you choose what to include whilst remaining neutral. It seems an unnecessary and contentious addition considering everything would be in their individual articles. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we should be assuming that readers want to know what they did that particular year. Rules99 (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've been advised against adding unnecessary background information (e.g. the age they received the award if not directly relevent [3]) All the winners have there own articles if people are really interested in their careers. After all isn't that what wikilinks are for...? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Then couldn't you just provide it as background information not necessarily implying a causal link? Rules99 (talk) 13:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Whilst I would like to, it could be construed as WP:OR. The BBC does not specifically mention why it gave all the awards, so whilst the winners achievements in that year maybe mentioned alongside the fact they won the award, it is not explicitly mentioned if any specific contribution(s) caused them to win. For example, an athlete may have a very successful season and break a national record say. Who is to say that whether the good season or the NR was the contributing factor to winning the award. If it is not explicitly mentioned then it is OR. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- I'd like to be able to sort by nationality. Rules99 (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This can be done, and I have done it in the past, but I would require that there is consensus for it. The first SPOTY list I submitted started it's FLC with the nationality sortability [5]. However during the FLC, Chris! combined them.[6] Can I ask you to work out a solution between you, so I can standardise it for all the lists. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps another column (giving the names) could be added to the "By nationality" table? Rules99 (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really see how that would be necessary. The flags are easy to spot in the above table and it seems like unnecessary repetition. I do not like this option (per Cr.6 Visual appeal) and would prefer putting the nationality sorting back over this, but that is something I guess Chris would need to comment on. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. The nationality column has gone back in per a MOS issue Struway2 pointed out below. That fix has also resolved this issue. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really see how that would be necessary. The flags are easy to spot in the above table and it seems like unnecessary repetition. I do not like this option (per Cr.6 Visual appeal) and would prefer putting the nationality sorting back over this, but that is something I guess Chris would need to comment on. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps another column (giving the names) could be added to the "By nationality" table? Rules99 (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This can be done, and I have done it in the past, but I would require that there is consensus for it. The first SPOTY list I submitted started it's FLC with the nationality sortability [5]. However during the FLC, Chris! combined them.[6] Can I ask you to work out a solution between you, so I can standardise it for all the lists. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Struway2 (talk) 18:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
---|
*Comments
cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- The lead image should not have a period in the caption.
- "Oleg Protopopov and Ludmila Belousova, joint recipients of the award in 1968, were also husband and wife." Are they not married anymore?
- There is an inconsistency in dashes; use either spaced en dashes or unspaced em dashes, not both.
- "The winning sportsperson is the one with the largest amount of points in total."-->The winning sportsperson has the most total points.
- "American boxer Muhammad Ali and Swiss tennis player Roger Federer have each won the award three times, [4] while Australian golfer Greg Norman has won the award twice. " "while"-->and.
- "The husband and wife skating duo"->The husband-and-wife skating duo
- "Belousova was the first woman to become Overseas Personality—she is also the oldest, aged 33." Tense inconsistencies ("was" "is")
- "who won in 1976 aged 16"-->who won in 1976 at age 16
- "Two cricketers that received the award" Use "who", not "that", when referring to people.
- "with fourteen recipients, tennis is the most represented sport.-->tennis has the highest representation, with with fourteen recipients. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All done, thanks for taking a look. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.