Talk:Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Olympics Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Olympics To-do:
Greece Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Low This article has been rated as a Low priority article


  • At the opening ceremony, a runner symbolically sprinted through the years of the modern olympics, stumbling twice (symbolically) at the times when the Olympics were cancelled during the World Wars. No recognition was given to the killing of athletes during the 1972 Munich Olympics.

Is this a scandal? The runner ran, crossing a band for every Olympics arranged. The only things that have every cancelled Olympics are the two world wars. Thus, they mark the break in Olympic history by stumbling. This is not in recognition to killed, but to mark the points in history when Olympics were cancelled. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞]] 12:57, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • It's not a scandal to prize continuity of the Olympics over human life? Silly me, I thought it was... - Nunh-huh 20:41, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it's quite obvious that it's a huge scandal to consider 60 million dead people in World War 2 (including more than 6 million dead Jews) as more significant than 11 dead athletes. How dare they treat World Wars that killed millions as more significant than a single terrorist act. Aris Katsaris 00:53, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • Aris, first off, cool the sarcasm, please. Second, note that the killing of the Israeli athletes happened at the games. It doesn't compare to WW2, but it is more closely connected with the games themselves. You may disagree that Munich should have been acknowledged, but your belief has no bearing on whether failing to acknowledge it has caused a scandal. Klanda | Talk 06:09, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
        • Apologies for the sarcasm. Though it's not much excuse, I had been responding to similar sarcasm by User:Nunh-huh. Aris Katsaris 19:29, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This run was what it was, an enumeration of olympics in the past, and nothing more. They could have put all of modern history into it, but that had not been an enumeration of olympics. Why should we collect the POVs of different groups and call it scandal (however well-meant and humane it is, it is not to the point)? There are obviously a thousand things people could call scandal if it was not included. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞]] 23:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • It was a recap of olympic history, and as usual, the IOC leaves out the parts that reflect badly upon them. We should collect the parts of olympic history that the IOC seeks to expunge because we should oppose attempts by organizations to whitewash their own history, and because we should be dedicated to truth and not propaganda. = Nunh-huh 23:26, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, most importantly, we need an outside source to all facts on wikipedia. I have not read much about the scandals of the Olympic in the media.. How wide-spread is the view that this particular incident was a scandal? I mean, if it was wide-spread, we'll ofcourse include it even if I disagree. However, if it just is a general feeling, that noone bothered to mention in any paper, then we certainly have no grounds to include it. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞]] 14:33, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Taiwan or Chinese Taipei?

I believe there is an NPOV issue here of whether the IOC "imposed" the design on Taiwan or just following international protocol. Even the UN addresses Taiwan as "Taiwan Province of China" in its official documents. Should this be removed? See Chinese Taipei

Frankchn 13:00, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The issue of the ROC competing under the "Chinese Taipei" banner is at most an issue of concern, and by no means can be called a Scandal. I agree with Frank's idea of the IOC simply following International Protocol. I believe the POV here is largely fueled by recent Taiwan media viewpoints and ideas -- thus cannot be fully considered as the NPOV. Please remove. [[User:Colipon|Colipon -- (Talk)]] 17:29, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Moreover, I don't see how this is a 'scandal' of the 2004 games; under what name/banner has Taiwan competed in the past? Doops 22:40, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It will be temporarily deleted, if conflict does not arise, then permanently. [[User:Colipon|Colipon -- (Talk)]] 01:20, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] add doping list

what do you think about adding a daily updated list. example on this page: doping table

[edit] Free tickets

Is the issue of free tickets real? I thought it was only rumoured that they were *going* to do that, but has it actually happened? If nobody offers evidence about it in a while, I'm gonna remove that. Aris Katsaris 00:53, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You are right, there's no evidence to support this claim. Etz Haim 00:36, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
And finally, to solve this once and for all, Jacques Rogge of the IOC, announced in his press interview yesterday that there were 3,3 million tickets sold, more than those sold during the Barcelona and Seul games, despite Greece's significantly smaller population. Etz Haim 04:09, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Taekwondo

I have removed the following bullet point:

  • American Taekwondo head-coach Dae Sung Lee is deemed unqualified due to a possibly racial motivation by the largely white committee members of the Colorado based United States Tae Kwon Do Union and replaced by Jean Lopez brother of current athlete Steven Lopez.
  1. something which happened in Spring 2004 can hardly be a Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics
  2. due to a possibly racial motivation by the largely white committee members sounds rather POV to me

reinstate it if you will, but be careful out there... --Tagishsimon 01:00, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

For the Takwondo. This issue is more current as it affect the current olympics, and still is on going in mediation at this point. It is an issue of racism by a white committee about a korean head coach, and it is an issue about civil rights. I am returning the point back on the board. masssiveego

I have removed it for the second time. Happy it be re-instated again, but please consider the following concern.
Allegations of racism are actionable in law. If you are going to insist on them being stated as a fact on the wikipedia you really must cite a source, else you lay the Wikipedia open to potential liabilities. For this reason - and this reason alone - I'm once more going to RV the Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics. When you're add it, please ensure that it is phrased as an allegation and/or reports some linkable source for the recism allegation. Wikipedia can no more afford to make unsubstantiated attacks, even if they are based in fact, than any other website or publication ... it is the unsubstantiated nature of the allegation on the page that is the problem. Oh, and it needs to be taken out of italics! best wishes --Tagishsimon

It's pretty obvious to anyone who does a search on the web. Seeing the other points not having any "sources" to back up their allegations leaves room for questions. as per your request.

http://www.athens2004.com/en/LatestNews/newslist?item=fa8e5b625126ef00VgnVCM4000002b130c0a____

Examine this article to your hearts content as a good source about the situation.


The source says "The US district judge Susan Oki MOLLWAY, ruled that LEE failed to show the US Taekwondo Union and the US Olympic Committee discriminated against him.". The bullet point and your text above say such things as "It is an issue of racism by a white committee about a korean head coach". Legally, one would have to go with the judge. I'm glad to see you have rewritten the bullet point, though note that your commen "(racism by Olympics committee rewritten.)" suggests you still believe, despite the judge's ruling, that you side with Mr. Lee. That is your prerogative, but it is squarely a POint Of View, something we seek to avoid. --Tagishsimon


[edit] Tense

Some of the items are in the present tense and some are in the past. One is even in both. The page should pick a tense and stick with it. I suggest using the past tense, even if some of the events described are "happening now". This page will be here long after the Games and the past tense will be appropriate then. Molinari 17:24, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Arash Miresmaeili

I removed the weasel terms from Arash Miresmaeili paragraph. Please cite a source before reintroducing it. ato 00:11, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You mean like "Iran's president already has said the judoka would be compensated for his stance. " [1]? - Nunh-huh 00:56, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nunh-huh, are you going to rv? Or add additional (concrete) information from that link? (The latter, I hope). Klanda | Talk 01:13, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC) I updated, but of course feel free to monkey! Klanda | Talk 01:41, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

By the way, earlier link containing same report here. This was linked previously on the Miresmaeili page. Quoting: Iranian President Mohammad Khatami was quoted by the state news agency as saying that Miresmaeili's actions would be "recorded in the history of Iranian glories" and declared that the nation considered him to be "the champion of the 2004 Olympic Games." Iranian Olympic team chairman Nassrollah Sajadi told the Sharq newspaper that the government should give the athlete a $115,000 bonus.

This is not the same thing. Awarding after the action is very different from offering money to do a particular action. Both are critisable on their own, but they are not same. This should be reworded (already done by Klanda) to reflect the difference at least. IMHO, these comments belong to Miresmaeili's article anyway. ato 01:33, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ato, point well taken on the difference between an advance offer to pay vs a subsequent one. I'm glad I caught that, too. Klanda | Talk 01:42, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)
nicely done. -- ato 01:48, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] What's missing?

  • The equestrian judging controversy. As I understand it, the Americans are appealing again (with French and British support) after a first appeal board overturned the German's disqualification and awarded them the gold.
  • American athletes' drug-testing problems.

If I can get the time, I'll add these; but I hope somebody else will get to it before me! Doops 04:32, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • Greek Team Leader's offer to resign and searches of Greek sprinting coach's warehouse for banned substances at this SI link. Klanda | Talk 06:30, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know if this qualifies, but seemingly only Coke is allowed on Olympic grounds. There are other restrictions mentioned in a Slashdot article. Maybe these can be added to articles on IOC as well. ato 18:36, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Not only that, but we also have [2] (Olympians Banned From Blogging) [3]. Both should be added somewhere, either here or in the main 2004 Summer Olympics page. Probably here, since both are on the level of selling free tickets. Also add the absurd hyperlinking policy [4] [5]. cesarb 19:53, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I added the food/drink restrictions, now someone else should add the others (I will not do it unilaterally, since I'm not sure if they would qualify as a scandal or just something that should be noted in the main 2004 Summer Olympics page). cesarb 20:32, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed

Currently disputed:

[edit] women's 100m hurdles

I wonder how far this can be considered a scandal. Unless the Russian Federation protested in grounds of Perdita Felicien knocking Irina Shevchenko on purpose, I don't see where's the scandal. WolfenSilva 06:04, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think it's still notable, on the grounds that top athletes don't take other athletes next to them down on to the ground when they trip (also considering that very few athletes actually trip on the hurdles). True, it's not a scandal, but nonetheless notable, especially because officiating decisions had to be invoked. --Valentino 00:53, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)