Talk:Venezuela at the 1956 Summer Olympics

Venezuela at the 1956 Summer Olympics has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 2, 2021	Good article nominee	Not listed
July 15, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Venezuela Mid‑importance

	Venezuela portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela 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.VenezuelaWikipedia:WikiProject VenezuelaTemplate:WikiProject VenezuelaVenezuela articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Olympics Mid‑importance

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics 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.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Venezuela at the 1956 Summer Olympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Willbb234 (talk · contribs) 17:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this article. Quite an obscure subject so it'll be interesting. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 17:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is an "event handbook"? May need clarification.

What needs clarifying? It's a handbook for an event, and presumably the context clues help if somehow you don't get that. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I know what an 'event' and 'handbook' are, but taken at face value, the phrase The Venezuelan Olympic Committee (VOC) received a total of 130 event handbooks, including 15 each for fencing and shooting seems so trivial that I didn't know if there was some hidden or different meaning. The sentence is also written as if the reader knows that the Olympics gives out event handbooks and the reader knows why and who they give them out to. Overall, the sentence needs removing or the phrasing needs clarification. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'Fencing' and 'Shooting' shouldn't be capitalised and should have wikilinks.

Done Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Melbourne, Venezuela's Olympic attaché was a Miss. W. Bond I don't think this is important enough to merit inclusion. It also isn't specific given we don't know their first name.

Generally the attachés are mentioned in these articles. Usually they are significant people in Olympic committees, though Bond here doesn't appear to be, and is only named in official documents in the (fairly sexist) manner here. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The delegation, of 28 men, arrived on 15 November no need for these commas.

There is; it's a condensed way of saying "The delegation consisted of 28 men and arrived on 15 November", and if the text was kept without commas it would introduce a lack of clarity as it suggests that a "delegation of 28 men" arrived on that date but doesn't confirm if that is the whole delegation and on what days other people may have arrived. Grammar is important. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The details on dining halls and eating arrangements are trivial and shouldn't be included.

Is there no argument that the fact the organizing committee grouped "similar eating habits", and which nations Venezuela was therefore grouped with, is interesting? The article's scope is the national presence at the Games, not just results tables. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is in the slightest "interesting". Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

while Solórzano, running in heat 4, was disqualified any details on why he was disqualified?

No. The sources are limited because being an early Olympics for Venezuela, and not winning anything, the media didn't care. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the results box in the track section, it should be 42.0 not 42.

Done 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

How did the individual and team races differ? Were they competed in the same race, or were there two sperate races both held on the same day? Also, you should include a date. The articles (Cycling at the 1956 Summer Olympics – Men's team road race and Cycling at the 1956 Summer Olympics – Men's individual road race) give the date as 7 December.

Done Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

would have had strict regulations why not just "had"?

Because no equestrian events happened in Australia, thus preventing strict regulations being put in place for the Olympic horses. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

they could take practice shots before and between sets, up to 18 practice shots to they could take up to 18 practice shots before each set

No, since it means something very different! Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"572/60" "555/60" shouldn't these be out of 600?

No? They scored X with 60 shots, as outlined in the paragraph.

Oh, I can see the confusion. I don't know how to resolve your misunderstanding; that's the jargon of how these scores are recorded: 60 means they got every shot on target. So if it said 500/50, someone would have missed 10 shots completely, but the rest were perfect. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little confusing, but I think I understand now. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

who placed ninth of eleven should be "out of eleven"

No, it's correct. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just suggested different wording as I believe it makes more sense to say 'out of' than just 'of'. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the running deer event, you don't mention what the score is out of. Presumably 600?

It's actually unknown. No official record mentions it, and since 1956 is the only time the event was run in this format, it can't be compared. See how Shooting at the 1956 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 meter running deer, single and double shot and 100 meter running deer don't (can't) mention it, either. Can't include what we don't know. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You capitalise 'Running Deer' and 'Running Target' in the section, but in the section title, it is uncapitalised. This should be fixed for consistency.
For the small bore rifle, it is presumably out of 1200?

Well, the article says for a possible 600 already, so no. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am referring to the previous sub section; the total possible score isn't mentioned in the previous sub-section and I am assuming it is out of 1200. This needs clarification

Any more images that can be used would help the article greatly.

Not many exist, and Australia has tight laws. A blurry opening ceremony image wouldn't be sufficiently fair use. Sweden are a bit more lax but I could only confirm two photos. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks of references complete and the sources are consistent with the content.
In general, I'm concerned with the over-reliance on one source. Also, the excessive use of sports-reference isn't ideal as it really only lists results.

The official report is pretty comprehensive, though sports-reference has great score breakdowns that aren't expanded on in it. Kingsif (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll place this article on hold to give me time to think about whether this should be promoted and to let you address the issues. Kidn regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsif: I have replied to your comments. Please let me know when you have replied or edited the article accordingly. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 22:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Willbb234: Thanks! I'm back and will look at responses today Kingsif (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has been about a month since the GAR was opened and I don't believe the issues have been sufficiently addressed. I am particularly concerned about the over-reliance on a single, dated source which makes the verifiability of the article questionable, thus failing WP:GACR point 2. No work on the article was completed after 20 March when the nom replied to the discussion stating they would. Therefore, I will fail this article. Please get in contact with me if you have any questions. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Venezuela at the 1956 Summer Olympics/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 12:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Links

Some of your refs need to be rewritten so they aren't in all caps. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Lede

MOS:OL states we don't need to link to major landmasses, such as Australia. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:33, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Twenty-two competitors, all men, were selected by the Venezuelan Olympic Committee to take part in 16 events across 5 sports - MOS:NUM numbers need to be consistent. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:33, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The delegation featured no female competitors - you have already said this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:33, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lede seems a bit short - no info on any of the people, or even which sports? No best placed finishers etc? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:33, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General

Even if you link in lede, you need to also do first time in the body. So, Olympic Games, equestrian, 1956, etc. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
previous incidence of the Games - just say 1952 and link. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need to have a column for women in the participation table? Do we even need a table - we could say this in prose.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Link light welterweight Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like the "main article" template could easily be linked naturally inline. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you need a "men" subcategory? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
. The fifth gate was particularly difficult.[19][20 ^{[according to whom?]} Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are all of those shooting events notable for WP:REDLINK? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review meta comments

I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Had a look through the original GA review, and not convinced there are any issues with the referencing that would cause major issues at GA level. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:24, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No rush Kingsif, just a ping to confirm you've seen the review. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: Have now, been stuck with terrible connection recently and I’m on mobile now. Will try to get to this soon Kingsif (talk) 08:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No issues. Happy to leave open for an additional seven days. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:19, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: I have addressed most points; regarding some of the notes about tables/layout, it is my understanding that all the Olympics articles follow such a format. This would also be the case of the redlink events. Kingsif (talk) 22:13, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]