Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Triathlon at the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics – Girls'/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 Dabomb87 21:57, 7 September 2010 [1].

Triathlon at the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics – Girls'[edit]

Featured list candidates/Triathlon at the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics – Girls'/archive1

Nominator(s): —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 02:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first medal event of the first Youth Olympic Games, so it has some historical merit. It will probably the first of many 2010 YOG articles that will soon appear in FLC for consideration. If successful, it can be used as a template for future candidates. I believe it meets all the criteria for inclusion as a featured list. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 02:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, interesting. This nomination could allow a lot of FL's, as I what believe are the only two featured-class works on individual events; Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Women's road race and Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's road race are featured articles. I don't have a problem with it, though- I always thought these events worked better as lists than being forced into articles anyway. What I do have a concern about is the FL requirement that a minimum proportion of the items be redlinked, when here they're all redlinks. I'm going to have to think about this one. (For an actual comment... sort-ability for the various times would be nice to have) Courcelles 02:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think this should be a developed article like the road races. It is not a 'List of' anything. Reywas92^Talk 02:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear I don't think lists need to start with "List of". But otherwise I agree with the Reywas92, this should be developed into an article. As for the redlinks, if the girls don't meet the WP:GNG, they don't need to be linked at all. Regards, --W F C-- 21:33, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course it must not have that in the title, but it does need to be a list of something. Reywas92^Talk 22:12, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Clarification on the redlinks; I believe they have merit. It's true that most do not meet notability requirements at this moment, but I have no doubt we will see some familiar names at the 2016 Summer Olympics (as many have already indicated that they will attempt to qualify for these games). I'm less inclined on using general notability guidelines because, for example in Indonesia at the 2010 Summer Youth Olympics, there are sources interested covering the YOG and their athletes. Instead, their notability should be assessed under WP:ATHLETE. (2) In my defense, I was not aware that those two road race articles were at FA status. I presented this article/list for consideration in FLC because most of the information is in tabular/list format. It might also be fair to say that the YOG will never receive the same amount of detailed coverage as the existing Olympics. The prose that has been written has already exhausted all possible sources on the topic. Of course, consensus for action is up to the community, but I thought I needed to make some clarifications. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 22:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 06:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Having read your explanation, I agree with you on redlinks. I'm inclined to point out to the directors that this proves how stupid our current "minimal proportion of redlinks" criterion is, but I don't know if I have the energy to start that debate again. I sypathise with you on the potential difficulty in deciding whether this should be a list or an article (I've had similar problems in the past), and will wait for further clarification on that matter. Given that articles and lists develop in different directions, it's quite hard to review something until there is consensus on which way it should go. Once consensus has been reached on this matter, drop me a line and I'll be happy to give the list/article a review, whether that's here or as part of a peer review or informal review on the list/article's talk page. Regards, --W F C-- 00:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question - do any of these athletes meet our notability guidelines? Please specify which ones do. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question - is this simply a list of the result of one competition in one minor tournament? We have lists of senior Olympic medal winners for a year, or lists of senior Olympic medal winners in a sport, but this is neither. Is this list in any way notable? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've been asking myself the same thing, TRM. A similar article was sent to AFD, where a no consensus close appears likely, but I can't convince myself these are notable. I could go with three potential FL's for each Youth Olympics, Venues, Medal Table, and Medalists, and I'd be least sold on the last one. I truly think in the fervor of the Games ongoing we went a little crazy with article creation for the YOG. I'm going to have to land with an Oppose for this list; questionable notability, pretty much a sea of redlinks, and I think event articles- for the real Olympics or the YOG if we keep them around- are just that; articles. Courcelles 17:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Knowing that it is possible to write a featured article on an individual event at an Olympics-type event, I don't believe that something like this should be purely in list format. If this became an FL, how many old Olympics events would we be willing to consider here? There are articles and lists, and this (assuming it's notable) should be the former. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 12:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say that there ought to be some introduction-cum-description of the event in the article. We need to know the finer details of the event. Right now, it's just pure lists save for the lead-in. Oh, and it's not the first 2010 YOG article nominated for featured status btw - I've got one right now. Haha, but I would love to see more of such nominations - keep 'em coming :) ANGCHENRUI ^Talk ♨ 04:36, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A structure similar to the that of the two FAs stated earlier (Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Women's road race and Cycling at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's road race) would do well for the article. ANGCHENRUI ^Talk ♨ 04:40, 6 September 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.