Powered by
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia

"WikiProject Sports (Rated Project-class)
""WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of "WikiProject Sports, a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of "sport-related topics on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the "project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 "Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's "quality scale.


Templates Help[edit]

Can someone please help me with the coding for "Template:ParalympicNationRow I am no programmer and I can't work out what I have done wrong. There is an example on the template page. User:Yachty40000 ("talk) 01:07, 16 Sept 2016 (UTC)

"Jock (stereotype) listed at Requested moves[edit]


A "requested move discussion has been initiated for "Jock (stereotype) to be moved to "Jock. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion "here. —"RMCD bot 01:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{"bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up "Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Man of the match[edit]

Hi. There is a move request at "Talk:Man of the match#Requested move 5 March 2018 that might be of interest to this project. "AIRcorn "(talk) 01:57, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

"Man of the match listed at Requested moves[edit]


A "requested move discussion has been initiated for "Man of the match to be moved to "Player of the match. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion "here. —"RMCD bot 02:00, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{"bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up "Article alerts for this WikiProject.

UMass rivalries[edit]

I was thinking about adding additional rivalries to the UMass sports pages. I realize its a big school, but the sports programs are not nationally very well known. Specifically, I'd like to change the BC-UMass football rivalry to a general rivalry page (UMass plays them annually in Olympic sports, baseball, softball, and hockey as well), and leave the basketball rivalry page as is since it has a name. I was thinking of changing the UConn-UMass football rivalry page also to a general rivalry page for the same reasons as BC. After that, I was thinking of adding a Temple-UMass general rivalry page, a UMass-URI general rivalry page, and a UMass-Maine football rivalry page.....any thoughts?...."Pvmoutside ("talk) 17:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Rod Laver RfC[edit]

For those who edit tennis articles, there is an ongoing Rod Laver RfC that affects article ledes at "Talk:Rod Laver. "Fyunck(click) ("talk) 21:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Re: "Draft:Spyros Rigos[edit]

This may qualify for inclusion into main namespace. Could you please check and share your thoughts or expand? Thank you. --"Gryllida ("talk) 02:05, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

RM notification[edit]

Greetings! I have recently relisted a "requested move discussion at "Talk:Man of the match#Requested move 5 March 2018, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, "QEDK (" 🌸 ") 09:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Baseball Featured Article Review[edit]

FAR coordinator "User:Casliber has nominated "Baseball for a "featured article review here. This is a procedural review of its FA status due to the discovery of socking at its original FAC. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets "featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. The "instructions for the review process are here.

If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. "SandyGeorgia ("Talk) 14:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Is there an English umbrella term for sports like "indoor golf?[edit]

My (Korean) students want to write article about something they call in "Konglish "screen sports". After a while I figured they mean stuff like indoor golf, but apparently there are other sports version of it. If you Google Image for 스크린 축구 'screen soccer' you can see that there is something like that. Then try '스크린 야구', screen baseball. And looking at '스크린 스포츠', screen sport, shows a few more - I think I see a tennis and archery, for example, not too mention those horse-riding pics :D They are a bit like arcade games, but it seems separate, at least for Golf I've seen (through never been in one) quite a few dedicated business places here in Korea, something along the line 'come play screen golf', those places are small, restaurant-sized, but numerous. And looking at the pics, the trend in Korea at least is to expand this to other sports. But what are English names for that phenonamon? I tried researching this, but I guess I am not using the right keywords. Screen sport? Indoor sport? Indoor screen sport? Errr. Help me out, I'd rather not invent new terms if I can help it... and the "indoor golf article is not helpful, either, no relevant terms of categories. Nor does "Category:Indoor sports helps much. --"Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| "reply here 11:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

I think you'd be looking for something along the lines of "Indoor golf#Golf simulator, i.e. "simulator sports" but I don't think it's necessarily a "genre". "Primefac ("talk) 12:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

"Physical exercise listed at Requested moves[edit]


A "requested move discussion has been initiated for "Physical exercise to be moved to "Exercise. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion "here. —"RMCD bot 14:00, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{"bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up "Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Sports Reference template[edit]

There is a proposal to amend the "Sports Reference template and your thoughts are invited. "Schwede"66 18:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Seeking 2nd opinion on Notability[edit]

"Zeke Upshaw has been nominated at "WP:ITNC to be posted on the main page under Recent Deaths. However a question has been raised concerning his notability. I would like to get a 2nd opinion befoer we get too far along on this. The article was only created after he died. -"Ad Orientem ("talk) 18:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

"List of common misconceptions listed at Requested moves[edit]


A "requested move discussion has been initiated for "List of common misconceptions to be moved to List of common errors. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion "here. —"RMCD bot 02:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{"bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up "Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Single Purpose IP Address Edits Changing NCAA Tournament Infobox[edit]

It seems that someone at IP Address " has unilaterally decided to change infoboxes for NCAA tournament pages (basically anything that uses "Template:Infobox NCAA Tournament yearly) so that the teams full names are written out instead of just the school title (i.e. Vanderbilt Comodores instead of Vanderbilt) are listed in the infobox. I do not know if this was previously discussed as what should be adopted as the new format, but I am guessing that since these edits are coming from an IP address this is probably not the case. I am writing here to, firstly, confirm that I am correct, and, if I am, how I can get the edits rolled back. As you can see, the IP address changed a lot of pages over the past few days and I have no desire to undo all his edits manually. Could someone please advise me? Thanks in advance. "Hydra88 ("talk) 16:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


I have requested that the above article be renamed. Thanks. "SFB 21:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion about article ""Cristiano Ronaldo"[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at "Talk:Cristiano Ronaldo#RfC about statement in the lead section, which is about an article that is within the scope of this WikiProject. "Ahecht ("TALK
) 15:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Official stadium names[edit]

How do we deal with stadium names which are officially "[Sponsor] Field at [Normal Name] Stadium" or some variation thereof but are more commonly known by their normal name? I was looking into this after the home of the "Potomac Nationals was renamed Northwest Federal Field at Pfitzner Stadium earlier today. I looked at other stadiums I'm familiar with, and "Harry Grove Stadium redirects to "Nymeo Field at Harry Grove Stadium while the home of UConn football is "Pratt & Whitney Stadium at Rentschler Field with "Rentschler Field being an article about the former airfield at that site. However, "Scott Stadium's full title is Carl Smith Center, Home of David A. Harrison III Field at Scott Stadium, which isn't even a redirect to that article. Also, "Husky Stadium is listed at that title despite its official name being "Alaska Airlines Field at Husky Stadium, which is a redirect. What is the policy in situations like this? Perhaps significantly, the Potomac stadium was previously known as "G. Richard Pfitzner Stadium and the "G. Richard" appears to have been dropped from the name entirely. However, Frederic Scott's first name was never on that stadium, Harry Grove's still is, and the other two aren't named after people so they kept their full name, it was just added to. "Smartyllama ("talk) 16:21, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@"Smartyllama: I normally go with the long-term common name of the stadium. Sometimes that will involve a sponsor ("Emirates Stadium) and sometimes it won't ("City of Manchester Stadium). I've seen lots of wasted time on the subject of stadium names, principally by people who place a lot of importance on "official stadium names, which is why you get things like "Arsenal Stadium instead of Highbury (stadium). We already have sufficient guidelines for this at "WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. I don't know why, but some people interested in stadiums frequently deviate from what is one of Wikipedia's most followed standards. "SFB 18:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Help with Kevin Plank edit request[edit]

Hi there! I recently posted an "edit request for the article on Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank that might interest members of WikiProject Sports. I'm seeking to update the article's section on his early life. While there are no major issues with the existing section, there is room for improvement, including clarifying the details about his youth and college football career. I'm hoping to add citations where none exist, clarify some details that aren't accurate, and a few other clean-up items. This is laid out fully on "the article's Talk page.

As I do have a financial conflict of interest here, since I'm making this suggestion on behalf of Mr. Plank via agency SKDKnickerbocker as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I won't make any edits to the article myself. Instead, I welcome input from uninvolved editors and assistance taking live changes as appropriate. Thanks in advance, "16912 Rhiannon ("Talk · "COI) 17:18, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

"Jweiss11 and "ZappaOMati: Since you are both members of this project and interested in football articles, would either of you be willing to look at "this request? I'm hoping to help create a more developed article of Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank, and that includes information regarding Plank's early life and developing the details about his football career. Thanks in advance! "16912 Rhiannon ("Talk · "COI) 16:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

RSN discussion notice[edit]

A "discussion related to this project, regarding "AR-15 style rifle, has been opened at Reliable sources noticeboard. –"dlthewave " 15:00, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Is there a specific "word/term/expression" for a ranking system like this in a tournament?[edit]

I'm looking for a word/term/expression (if it exists) for a system like this:

It's something like a knock-out system, however with a major difference. Losing doesn't mean you eliminated but you continue for the lower ranks where winning means you continue for the upper ranks.

Suppose I have 8 teams, playing in a 3-round system. The table below shows the consequence of winning (W) or losing (L) in each round:

1st round 2nd round 3rd round Final rank
W W W 1
W W L 2
W L W 3
W L L 4
L W W 5
L W L 6
L L W 7
L L L 8

So winning in the first round means continue for rank 1 to 4, where losing means continue for rank 5 to 8. (Winners of the first round continue playing each other and losers of the first round continue playing each other, so in the second round, a team which won in the first round will never play a team which lost in the first round.) Winning first and second means continue for rank 1 to 2, winning first and losing second means continue for rank 3 to 4 etc.

So not knock-out, but maybe something like knock-down (knocking your competitors to a lower (down) ranking).

Anyway, I'm looking for a word/term/expression for a system like this.--"Sb008 ("talk) 12:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I know this sounds like a bit of a cop-out, but I'd read through "tournament and see what sticks. What you're describing sounds like a combination of "round-robin and "ladder, with a bit of "promotion and relegation mixed in. "Primefac ("talk) 13:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't know a name for the whole tournament structure but handball calls it placement rounds and placement matches when knocked out teams play further matches for a final position. See e.g. http://www.ihf.info/MediaCenter/News/NewsDetails/tabid/130/Default.aspx?ID=1160 and "2015 World Men's Handball Championship#Knockout stage. "PrimeHunter ("talk) 13:32, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
(I already started typing what's below before PrimeHunter responded. It's actually meant fir handball. But if I use "placement tournament, probably no one knows what it implies. So I'm hoping there's a more general word/term/expression).
Thanks for the reply, but none of the formats on the "tournament page apply. Actually it's part of a more complex system. Let me try to describe it with an analogy.
Suppose Spain and England would decide to introduce a new league for next season, the SP(ain)EN(gland)-League.
Next season the Premier League would be split in 2 phases and in the Primera División would be done the exact same. In the first phase the 6 best teams of both the English Premier League and the Spanish Primera División (of this season) would be separated from the other teams and play each other in this new SPEN-League. Not in a tournament format but as a full competition. Meanwhile the remaining 14 teams (in each country) would play a full competition as well.
So in the first phase there would be 3 leagues, the SPEN-League (with the 6 best teams from both Spain and England, total 12 teams), the Premier League (with the remaining 14 English teams) and the Primera División (with the remaining 14 Spanish teams). In the SPEN-League there would be 22 rounds, and in the first phase of the English Premier League and the Spanish Primera División 26 rounds each.
Pretty clear the season would be very short compared to the 38 rounds right now.
So in the second phase both the 6 English and Spanish teams would "return" to their own country.
I'll only continue for England, similar would be done in Spain.
* The 5 best English teams in the SPEN-League continue for the English Championship (and who qualifies for which European tournament). Those 5 teams play a double full competition (16 rounds). These 5 teams are also qualified for the next edition of the SPEN-League.
* The lowest ranking English team in the SPEN-League together with the 4 best ranked teams in the Premier League (first phase) would play a double full competition for 1 spot in the next edition of the SPEN-League (as well as remaining spots for European tournaments).
* The 2 teams at the bottom (13 and 14) of the Premier League (first phase) would play some kind of play-off system with teams of the Football League for relegation and promotion (instead of 3 teams directly relegated right now).
That way these teams would play something like 38 matches a season as well, except for those teams ranked 5 to 12 in the Premier League (first phase).
To let them play more matches we let these 8 teams play in a system as described above. They don't play for promotion, relegation, qualification or whatever any more. Just for their final ranking (rank 11 to 18, after the 5 teams who played for the Championship and the 5 teams who played for the spot in the next edition of the SPEN-League). Also the teams are not coupled like that. In the first round, 5 will play 12, 6 - 11, 7 - 10 and 8 will play 9 (based on the ranking of the first phase of Premier League).
Now for these 8 teams the total number of matches in a season will still not reach something like 38, but that's kind of irrelevant for the scenerio.
A total setup like this exists for the Belgian and Dutch (team) handball leagues (BENE-League). The number of teams in the leagues is different and all teams end up playing a similar amount of total games.
So it's not round-robin, nor ladder. It's not related to promotion or relegation, nor is it actually for rank 1 to 8 (but in reality for rank 9 to 16).
Compare it to the World Championship. Forget all before the quarter final. Normally teams who lose in the quarter final are out. Those we lose in the semi final play for 3rd/4th, and those who win play the final for 1st and 2nd. But now assume we let those who lose in the quarter final continue for 5 to 8. We would have 2 kinda semifinals again. Those who lose continue for 7th/8th and those who win for 5th/6th.
It may sound like a crazy system, but top teams in England and Spain and most football fans would probably welcome it. In the 1st phase each round 5 top matches with a lot of extra revenues for those teams. Other teams than the top teams probably will be less enthusiastic cause they get less chance to play top teams.
The objective in Belgian and Dutch handball however was not to create more revenues for top teams, but to push the handball to a higher level by letting the top players play more top matches.
Since I want to create the pages for the BENE-League I want to know if there's a specific name for a system as described.--"Sb008 ("talk) 15:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@"Sb008: I would call this a "multi-bracket tournament. If you're looking for a pre-existing well-known term for something you've just invented then I'm afraid you may be disappointed! "SFB 21:11, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
I didn't invent it, it's used in handball. But apparently there is no word for it, so it seems my only option is to describe it.

Request additional input at "AR-15 style rifle[edit]

There is a debate about several sections on this article that could use some outside eyes. One is the appropriate mention of mass shootings in the article lead. Another is how the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban should be covered in the article. Thanks! "Springee ("talk) 18:32, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

FIS Freestyle/Snowboard World Championships[edit]

The above two events were held separately until recently. They have since been merged as one event, however both Wikipedia articles continue to indicate this, I believe there should be a separate article for the merged championships. What is everyone's thoughts on this? "Sportsfan 1234 ("talk) 17:39, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Are they merged or are they just held at the same time/place (pardon my ignorance). I would say if they are considered separate championships I would continue on with two pages. If they have come together under a new single name then I would create a new page with that name from the time the merged forward. But if they still use both names it somewhat would indicate they are still separate but being held at the same location/time. -"DJSasso ("talk) 18:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
They are considered separate in terms of the results page of the FIS, but the name is merged. "Sportsfan 1234 ("talk) 19:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I would consider them separate as they are considered separate disciplines within the FIS. We have the discipline-based results separated for the Olympics already, this isn't much different. From the FIS point-of-view, it probably just started making more financial sense to hold them at the same place/time. So similar to the Olympics, one page for the main event, keep the disciplines separate. A bit "WP:CRYSTAL, but perhaps one day they separate them again, especially if they had chosen to only award the Freestyle to Deer Valley (where snowboarding is not allowed) in 2019, we would have to re-split again. "Yosemiter ("talk) 21:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
That is basically what I was thinking spelled out much better. -"DJSasso ("talk) 23:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

"Sportswear (activewear) listed at Requested moves[edit]


A "requested move discussion has been initiated for "Sportswear (activewear) to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion "here. —"RMCD bot 19:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{"bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up "Article alerts for this WikiProject.

RFC on the use of notable games sections[edit]

In many sports articles there are sections dedicated to listing or detailing notable games. I am looking to gather some opinions on how these sections should be handled, particularly in biographies. Should they be included at all? If so what should be the criteria for a game to be designated notable? "AIRcorn "(talk) 07:32, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Additional notes: The majority of these I have come across relate to Chess Players and Baseball Umpires. I will leave messages at their wikiprojects, but if there are any others editors think should be contacted feel free to do so. Also while notable games are used for lots of different sporting articles, I am most interested in there use on biographies, where our sourcing requirements are stronger. However I welcome opinions on the other articles. "AIRcorn "(talk) 07:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

You will find a lot more such events if you search for "matches", as well as "games". In the game of cricket, it's quite normal, and actually expected, for particular highly successful "innings or "bowling performances (all within single games) to be mentioned in a BLP. "HiLo48 ("talk) 07:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
I am not worried about mentioning them in their career, it is more having a dedicated section where we are deciding what constitutes a notable game or match. I searched "notable matches" and could not find a cricket one. Do you have an example. It seems to be common for football referees though so I will leave a message at their wikiproject too. "AIRcorn "(talk) 08:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Might be good to take into account already-existing lengthy thread "WT:CHESS#'Notable games' inclusion criteria. --"IHTS ("talk) 08:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I think there is a difference to be made between some of these 'notable games' listed in some of the examples (which appear to just be exciting matches at most) versus things like "Bobby Moore winning the World Cup having its own subsection to his career (not that I think his article is in a good shape currently). To carve out a section entirely for notable games for a club, or player, you would think that (within the context of the clubs career in particular) this would be likely to justify its own standlone article if it is in fact so notable (and be referenced via a "See main", or "See also"). If it isn't notable enough for its own article, then it should instead be summarised within the annual section of each team, and then treated in context for the club history. "Koncorde ("talk) 13:17, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
They should just be mentioned within the prose. However, I wouldn't be against them being in a section in a stub or something since its just an "unfinished" article at that point. -"DJSasso ("talk) 13:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
I doubt that is the case. The sample cases are often more like "playing style", or specific points of interest. Aircon is clearly not referring to chess, and inferring that 'notable games' (which are often unsourced, or weakly referenced not notable games) would somehow sweep away chess is a stretch of the meaning of 'logical conclusion'. Chess, and many other sports and games have very distinct inclusion criteria for what is notable or significant enough to warrant splitting matches away from the core narrative. "Koncorde ("talk) 17:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
I have no idea what you mean. This whole issue started w/ chess, user Aircorn states that above. Aircorn *is* speaking about "Notable games" secs in WP:CHESS articles. (Why do you say he isn't?) What means "sweep away chess"? I was clear in the example I gave about secs equivalent to secheads "Notable games". I'm not familiar nor do I have to be in this discussion re sports matches & splitting them, this thread is 1/2 about WP:CHESS bios. I think you don't comprehend this thread or what I wrote above.
For WP:CHESS bios, are you suggesting "Notable games" secs list "playing style or specific points [games] of interest"? I suppose many times that is true. And on that basis I w/ have little problem w/ "Notable games" secs in WP:CHESS bios renamed to "Playing style" or "Games of interest". But that's unfortunately not what those secs are most often named. If I understand you correctly, you are claiming a substantive difference based on word choice ("notable" versus "style" or "point of interest"). The same arguments c/ be made against those secheads. ("What makes the games included more representative of playing style [or more interesting than] the subject's other games?" This topic has built-in confusions that haven't been dealt with, and plowing forward to a "solution" when the problem isn't well defined or understood can never be a good idea. --"IHTS ("talk) 18:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
) ) WikipediaAudio is not affiliated with Wikipedia or the WikiMedia Foundation.