Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2010 Summer Youth Olympics medal table/archive1

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 by The Rambling Man 14:24, 15 December 2010 [1].

2010 Summer Youth Olympics medal table

Featured list candidates/2010 Summer Youth Olympics medal table/archive1

Nominator(s): ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 08:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nominator: Strange Passerby (talk · contribs)

The article satisfies the FL criteria. You may refer to other Olympic medal table FLs. Just a question, will credits be given to significant contributors to the article? Thanks in advance for reviewing, ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 08:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 19:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

You should invite significant contributors to be part of the process, or add them in their absence as "nominators" (but it's best to check first).
Not sure we need a link to "medal" to be honest. At least, not a generic one.
- Removed. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Would prefer a more imaginative intro so you don't just repeat the title of the list so you can get some bold in the opening sentence!
- Lede should be captivating enough now :) ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid "see footnote", just use normal notes/references where appropriate.
- Removed. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Context - what edition of the 2010 SYO is this?
- Edited article. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mixed-NOC needs explanation as this is, perhaps, unique?
- Explained. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The term is overlinked as well.
- Resolved. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reference for the date of "dissolution" of Netherlands Antilles?
- Yes. I'm not sure if its absolutely necessary, but its there anyway. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mildly unstable based on the 15 October 2010 announcement...
- Haha its stable as the table I feel. Only one actual "disruption" so far. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"for a gold medal[4] and a bronze medal,[5]" prefer "for a gold and a bronze medal,[4][5]"
- See Strange Passerby's comments below. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"in these events are bound to be swept by " sorry but I don't know what this means.
- See Strange Passerby's comments below. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid "Refer to the main article for further information." as well. You've already linked this...
- Removed. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just for some more context, how old are the competitors in this?
- Clarified. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Changes... section uses expanded version of IOC, just use abbreviation once you've abbreviated it.
- Corrected. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the overcapitalised title in refs 4 and 5.
- Removed. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mix date formats in the references.
- Resolved. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Refs 7 and 9, are they WP:RS and why is one a work and the other a publisher?
- Both are credible websites covering the Olympics. Used often by WP:OLYMPICS too :)
In Safari, I got an error when looking at ref 6...
- Is is still there now? ANGCHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re. RS: [2][3] Seems to meet criteria for RS. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 04:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Re. (old ref 6) ref 7 error: it's because there was a Google Maps app in the original link which webcite couldn't handle. The ref is from the text though. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 04:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation added for dissolution of Dutch Antilles.
Overcapitalisation in refs fixed.
Refs moved to end of sentence.
Reworded mixed-NOCs events "swept by" mixed teams
Refs have a single date format now.

Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 05:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there is no real need for the second table. Just update the entry in the main table and add a note to explain the situation. Nergaal (talk) 23:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The second table was added based on precedent at 2008 Summer Olympics medal table#Changes in medal standings. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 04:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I personally think it clarifies the change clearly. Whether the table should be removed because only one medal change was made is something I've no comments on. Fine either way. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for my clumsiness. I should have done a more thorough check! I have one issue that warrants its discussion here. Is or are the Olympics singular or plural? The recently promoted Venues of the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics (see FLC) had me convincing reviewers it was singular, and so it stuck. However Strange Passerby believes the Olympics are in plural form and not singular. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 05:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]
- ~~WP:ENGVAR. All our articles on Games in British English-usage countries use the plural. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 05:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)~~ [reply]
  - ~~Okay then. Which means I would have to make the according changes to Venues of the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics as well. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 06:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]
    - Done. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 10:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~ Support –

~~Don't think the bolding in the lead is necessary. Once you seperate the bolded items for the purpose of creating a better intro, it doesn't look that attractive to leave the bolding in.~~
~~Medal table: the dashes in the third paragraph should either be made unspaced or turned into smaller en dashes; I recommend the latter for consistency throughout the article.~~ Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:19, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Both done. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 00:41, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

"A total of nine nations – Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Guatemala, Jordan, Nauru and Turkmenistan – won their first ever medals at an Olympic event. Puerto Rico, Vietnam and the U.S. Virgin Islands won their first gold medals." Besides pouring over ~50 medal tables, what is sourcing this information?

Would provide indendent sources for each, give me a day or two. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 11:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've managed to find sources – and add them – for Bolivia, Eq. Guinea, Jordan, Nauru and Puerto Rico. You'll have to forgive me but I'm unable to find sources for the others. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 14:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I have to oppose over unsourced statements, then. Courcelles 00:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would a link to a search for all medallists from an NOC at www.olympic.org showing no medals be considered a source? E.g. http://www.olympic.org/en/content/All-Olympic-results-since-1896/?AthleteName=Enter%20a%20name&Category=&Games=&Sport=&Event=&MenGender=false&WomenGender=false&MixedGender=false&TeamClassification=false&IndividualClassification=false&Continent=1310290&Country=346682&GoldMedal=false&SilverMedal=false&BronzeMedal=false&WorldRecord=false&OlympicRecord=false&TargetResults=true 85.164.140.22 (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has Courcelles been asked to revisit? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No way to evaluate this idea until it is executed really. This could work or it could not, try it and let's see. Courcelles 02:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you review it now and see if that satisfies your concerns? Thanks. Str Pby (talk) 04:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get some other opinions here? I'm just not sure about showing a blank search result as proof of something. Courcelles 18:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well from my perspective, I'm not keen on "sources by deduction" i.e. working out that something hadn't happened yet because a source provides no results. I suspect you may need to rely on non-English sources (which is okay, if used reliably, sparingly and with appropriate translation) to fix this problem. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Courcelles 00:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:"The concept of mixed-NOCs was newly introduced in the games" Not quite- see Mixed team at the 1896 Summer Olympics. The first three Olympiads (and perhaps 1924 Chamonix) had mixed teams.

Actually, both are different, which explains their different names. This has been roughed out thoroughly in Archive 1 of the article's talk page; and in fact, Archive 2 and the current talk page. A number of sources also introduce mixed-NOCs as a new concept in the Olympics. From the official Singapore 2010 website: " It is the first time in Olympic history that there will be mixed-NOC events." From the official Olympic website: "introduction of innovative events, such as the mixed NOC team fencing competition", "created especially for the YOG" ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 11:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read that a little more critically. Events specifically for mixed teams? New concept. The idea of folks from different nations making up a team? Not new at all. They're different, though somewhat related, concepts. Courcelles 15:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was unsure of it myself at first, though the talk page debate with other editors eventually led me to believe mixed-NOCs is a new concept. I will find time tomorrow to comb through the talk page archives to review what happened then; don't think I got it wrong, but we'll see. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 14:23, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now reworded the offending sentence. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 14:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prose, "(202 gold, 200 silver and 221 bronze)" Table, "199 silver". Also compare 623 versus 622.

Sorry about the mistake. I've corrected it. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 11:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not a mistake. 1 silver medal stripped. --Mohsen1248 (talk) 15:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Now I know why I thought I had made a mistake when I hadn't. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 14:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have included a short mention of the stripped medal in that paragraph now, although the main information is still in the "changes in medals" section. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 14:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 8, why is this a reliable source?

Ditto ref 11.

Courcelles 04:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AroundTheRings (ref 8) has its own article on WP, and is well-cited by other news sources. And if you read up on Morethanthegames (ref 11), there is absolutely nothing to suggest its unreliability. If I'm not wrong, it is one of the top sports news providers in the UK. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 07:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any response to the rest of my comments, then? Courcelles 08:29, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Afro (Talk) 07:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments - per WP:COLORS, colored cells should have accompanying symbols (e.g. * ^ †) for accessibility reasons. Afro (Talk) 08:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- The only colored cells are the 'Gold', 'Silver' and 'Bronze' cells at the top of the table, if I not wrong? If that is so... they don't need explanation since it involves basic understanding of sports. ANGCHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 11:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Umm, see the Singapore row. Courcelles 11:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct Courcelles. Afro (Talk) 14:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is explained at the top of the table. This practice of highlighting the host nation in blue already applies to the ten or so Olympic medal table FLs. ANG CHENRUI _WP:MSE♨ 14:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Its the only way you are conveying the information in the table, its why you need a symbol. Afro (Talk) 18:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, technically the symbol here would be "Singapore", so I'm not sure it's a problem, as the key says, so it's not really a problem (in my opinion). The Rambling Man (talk) 15:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that makes sense. Afro (Talk) 13:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I have no issues with the list. Afro (Talk) 23:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – this FLC is stagnating and I believe that as a co-nominator I've done what I can to try to solve the concern raised in the single oppose. However, as this seems to have been unsatisfactory, and as my co-nominator has only made one edit in the past month and has been unable to help on this issue upon which I've reached a dead end, I'm formally requesting the article be withdrawn from consideration from WP:FLC. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 14:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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