Talk:Shooting at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Qualification

According to the ISSF website the women's 25 m air pistol is not one of the shooting disciplines in which Brazil has been allocated a host nation quota. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.128.5 (talk) 12:34, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting at the 2016 Summer Olympics- Qualification - Women's 25 m air pistol

Lynda Kiejko earn a quota for Canada by winning the gold medal at the 2015 Pan American Games the 25m pistol event: "The winners of all fifteen events, along with the runner up in the men's air rifle, skeet, trap and both women's rifle events will qualify for the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (granted the athlete has not yet earned a quota for their country).[3]" Can you explain why do you reverted this edit? I'm tired of backing you up all the time, you don't own Wikipedia or its olympic pages. Please stop reverting without explaining why or I will have to report you. I'm sick of all this little cat and mouse game. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 23:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First and foremost, Lynda Kiejko won a gold medal and a quota in the 10 m air pistol, and added her second gold in the 25 m pistol. Because she already earned a quota in the air pistol, the Olympic slot has been distributed to the runner-up Sandra Uptagrafft of the United States in the 25 m pistol. Granted the athlete has not yet earned a quota for their country means that a quota must be distributed to a different athlete from any country, as long as the NOC has been entitled to a maximum of two shooters per event. In Kiejko's case, she is eligible to compete in the 25 m pistol, but her place must be confirmed by the NOC and ISSF, along with the quota she won in the 10 m pistol.

Second, I notice that you added Michel Dion of Canada. Cassio Rippel already won a quota in the 50 m rifle prone. Because Brazil has reserved a place in each of the nine events, and he competes for the host nation, this does not imply that the quota has been distributed to Dion. As per rules on the host country places, these will only be granted in any of the nine places entrusted to the host nation, if it did not obtain any place in that event during the qualification period. With Rippel's victory at the Pan American Games, the host country still keeps a quota in the 50 m rifle prone. If he is confirmed by NOC to compete for the Olympics as long as he obtains the MQS (minimum qualifying score), then the unused host country place will be reallocated to the NOC with the highest MQS that has not yet obtained a quota place or been granted a Tripartite Invitation for the Games.

I hope that you fully grasped the rules and regulations on the distribution of Olympic quota. In case you may have not clarified about this case, I share you the link. [1]. Thank you!

Raymarcbadz (talk) 03:42, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

“Because she already earned a quota in the air pistol, the Olympic slot has been distributed to the runner-up Sandra Uptagrafft “

Nothing has been confirmed yet. As a read the rules, “The winners of all fifteen events (of the 2015 Pan American Games), along with the runner up in the men's air rifle, skeet, trap and both women's rifle events will qualify for the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (granted the athlete has not yet earned a quota for their country). 2015 Pan American Games are the continental championships for the Americas.

Regardless of the type of firearm, EVERY winner and 80% or runner-up of event earn a quota place. Only one shooter per NOC is allowed. If the NOC is already qualified, the next eligible NOC in line is the continental champion and have the spot. So I’m 100% sure that when the next official list of ISSF will be published, she will be listed as the winner and qualifier in both events.

“(granted the athlete has not yet earned a quota for their country).” : Its your interpretation of the rule, and not the ISSF rule itself. My interpretation is far more simple and logic: 2 quotas maximum, 1 quota for the host and 1 quota max per event (ex: World cup and P.A.G.). TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://corporate.olympics.com.au/files/dmfile/Rio2016QualificationSystem-Shooting.pdf : "Designated Continental Championships or Games 2014 & 2015 & 2016". TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 04:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The Host Country Places will only be granted quota places in the above-mentioned events if the Host Country did not obtain any quota place in that event during the qualification period." : Which is not the case here. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 04:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the latest update from the ISSF. It should be the final say in this matter. JoshMartini007 (talk) 04:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion

A third opinion has been requested. What is the question? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:57, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:TheGreenGiant23, User:JoshMartini007 - What is the question? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue was with the interpretation of the qualification system. Honestly now that the ISSF has updated the quota by nation page (see above comment) the debate is over. We should also remove the dispute tag on the page as well. JoshMartini007 (talk) 03:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quota exchanges

Should we have a section on quota exchanges? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For which event? I don't think it is necessary to have a new section if there's no purpose on how to do it about the quota exchanges. Raymarcbadz (talk) 07:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

India and now Sweden have exchanged quotas, and there is no where in the article indicating which event they swapped from (and the athlete who originally earned the quota). Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:36, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sportsfan 1234, I just only placed updates in the edit summary about the changes. Haven't you checked the history of this article? India swapped places with the men's 50 m rifle 3 positions spot that had been occupied by a double starter (Gagan Narang, instead of Sanjeev Rajput) and the men's trap. Sweden did the same feat with the women's 10 m air rifle spot with the men's double trap instead. Slovakia with the women's trap with an additional counterpart (men's trap adds one more place). So what is indeed your problem and is there something wrong with all the tables displayed in each shooting event? With all honesty, you're expecting too much. Raymarcbadz (talk) 15:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but there should be some sort of indication somewhere stating which quotas were swapped. For me I only know which quotas were swapped, but do not know which the event these quotas were swapped from. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For China and South Korea, there are about two or more double starters occupying the qualifying places, so we do not know which event has been swapped with another. As per ISSF rules, an NOC/ISSF Member Federation may request to change a maximum of one (1) quota place in one (1) event for one (1) quota place in any other event if available. Clearly, NOCs must exchange a spot in one event for one in any other event, and this must be done once. Then the rest will be returned to ISSF for reallocation, and we do not even know which of these unused spots must be distributed to unqualified NOCs in any of these events. Adding another section to determine the exchange of quota places is unnecessary. Raymarcbadz (talk) 15:41, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re-allocation of unused quota places and athletes qualifying for other events

Hi everyone,

As you already noticed, ISSF has already distributed the wildcard and Tripartite Commission invitations to several nations, who have not qualified in any other tournament from September 2014 to February 2016. As of May 28, 2016, 374 athletes have already been qualified for the Games, but some of them might be reduced at a later date before the deadline closes on July 18, due to the number of shooters competing in two or more events that their NOC has provisionally qualified.

For the selected shooters qualifying in other events, apart from their selected event, they will only be named once the 390-athlete quota has been reached, and the deadline for Rio 2016 entries has already ended (which will happen on July 18, 2016).

You may keep the shooters' other events in their NOCs at the very moment.

Thank you!

Raymarcbadz (talk) 04:00, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You do not own this page, nor dictate what goes in it or not. A valid source has been produced for Canada (and I am sure they exist for the other countries, like India for ex.) and therefore should be included in the article. If there is no source then inclusion can wait till there is one. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you please stop being too demanding and aggressive in a "I am always right" way. It's like you're such a perfectionist in both styling and grammar (are you strict in grammar?). I'm not owning this page, okay? I'm also contributing to this article, as well. India also exists, as they have already selected their shooters before, and they do have a valid source. Raymarcbadz (talk) 04:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not demanding anything first of all. There is absolutely no reason why a sourced piece of information should be excluded from this article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:26, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the selected shooters qualifying in other events, apart from their selected event, they will only be named once the 390-athlete quota has been reached, and the deadline for Rio 2016 entries has already ended Is there a source for this? If not your point is not valid at all. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No source, but there's a point for it and ISSF has not updated the list of quota places until now. Can't we just add them up once the Rio 2016 entries have already released on their website and reached their deadline (July 18, 2016)? For now, entries on athletes qualifying in other events remain hidden until the deadline has been set. It takes time, okay. Be patient. Remember that the NOCs have the right to select their shooters, but the ISSF has an irrevocable answer and is mainly responsible for monitoring and updating the list. Raymarcbadz (talk) 01:47, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You lost me at no source. Sorry your point is not valid at all. If there is a source it should be included. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:01, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So if you say that I'm wrong. Then definitely, the rules of ISSF are indeed wrong and I believe ISSF has a mistake. Why are you getting so impatient about the process? Here's the link of the qualification system. Read them again and again. [2]. If you have complaints, contact the sports federation through their website or Facebook page (if you have), and they'll answer. To be honest, you treat these articles as NOC pages. Raymarcbadz (talk) 03:20, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop behaving like a child. I have pointed out to you a source (a valid one) that shows these athletes will compete in multiple events. There is absolutely nothing you have shown that contradicts this. So please stop. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You too as well. And you called me an "idiot"? Please stop it. I've worked really hard to contribute to the project. And I'm just correcting and updating. If you want to open up discussion, do that on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics. Raymarcbadz (talk) 03:57, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No one is questioning your work ethic. I am questioning your instance of removing sourced information. You do not own Wikipedia, get that through your head. Sourced information will remain in an article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:52, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All of the NOCs have sourced information for the shooters. Why do you have to keep on rushing them? Do you know when is the deadline of Rio 2016 entries? Raymarcbadz (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this link? Shooting at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Qualification. They don't have {{n/a}} tag, and so as the host nation. Is there something wrong? Raymarcbadz (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The {{n/a}} is there to show the read it does not apply. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:37, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How about the link that I share with you? Raymarcbadz (talk) 14:38, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What about it? The past does not take precedence. The {{n/a}} is a great addition to the article to remind them that there was no qualified athlete as part of the qualification system for double starters. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sportsfan 1234, if you're going to add a shooter qualifying in other event, don't forget to update the total number of shooters per event to track the quota counting. Thank you! Raymarcbadz (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of quota places and shooters

Sportsfan 1234, you should know that the list of shooters is not final. ISSF has just updated the quota places as of today, and it didn't mention that the list is final. Quota places are different than shooters. Don't be confused. Other NOCs have not selected their shooters yet. United States has not named the shooters competing in the 10 m air rifle and 10 m air pistol. Some are expected to select double starters who will occupy other events because of their MQS scores. Next time, when I made an edit summary about these updates, read them properly before you revert. Take your time and be patient. Thanks! Raymarcbadz (talk) 14:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are different, but the list provided by the ISSF is final. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:51, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. It's not yet final. There will be updates in the coming weeks. Believe me or not. ISSF never stops updating the list, so just wait patiently and calm down. Raymarcbadz (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To close the debate once for all: let just say wait and see. If you compare with the precedent 2012 Olympics, you'll see that the vast majority of shooters qualified in others event rather than ISSF qualifying events. I dont see why it will be different this time. The rules of ISSF specified that athletes can qualify in others events, if quota places are available for sure. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC) \[reply]

PS: Sportsfan 1234, slowdown on reverting, you pissed a lot of people here with your attitude and im seriously close to report you to administrators for war edits and rude behavior. So calm down, exchange with others with respect and take a break of Wikipedia for a while, it will be good for you and all the other users. Cheers. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, TheGreenGiant23. All we can do is just wait and see, because you'll never know who will be selected, and what will happen to the rest of quota places. Anyway, all shooters can qualify in other events, not only if quota places are available for sure. They must also attain the MQS standard for their respective shooting events, as per ISSF rules stated in the system. Thanks! Raymarcbadz (talk) 08:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]