Talk:World records in athletics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Needs

What does this article need to reach (perhaps) featured standard?

  • We need a section about the movement to strike all world records before year 2000.
  • Pictures?

Punkmorten 20:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

A few off the top of my head.

  • Need a section on how a record is ratified. What makes or breaks a record?
  • An explanation of how records are timed to the thousandths but rounded up to the nearest hundredth. Case study Gatlin WR where they accidently rounded down.
  • When an athlete is busted for PED's which records get removed? How far back and why?

I'm not sure about pictures, what did you have in mind? David D. (Talk) 06:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] World record progression articles

The current world record progression articles are listed on Category:Athletics records. These should be re-named consistently, as there are currently different schemas used. Some possibilities:

  • World record progression for the G/gender's event
  • World record progression in the G/gender's event
  • World record progression for G/gender's event
  • World record progression in G/gender's event
  • World record progression event gender
  • Event world record progression

I'm not sure which would be the most suitable, so ideas are welcome. Prolog 17:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

My preference would be either:
  • World record progression event gender

or

  • Event world record progression gender
I don't have a very strong opinion in this issue though. David D. (Talk) 18:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I believe that the article titles should be as usable (for other editors) and readable (for users) as possible. The best arrangement for that purpose is a full phrase and not a series of concepts tied together by space. My suggestion would be "World record progression for the Gender's event". This also keeps in line with what I found by google searches for "men's 10,000m" (thousands) vs. "10,000m men" (few hundred) and the order of concept used by the IOC. In staying with order of specificity for adjectives, this also makes sense as it is more specific for 10,000m to be modified by Men's than vice versa. Whether it is the Men's 10,000m or men's 10,000m is a different question though, and I'm not sure I have any feelings one way or the other on it. ju66l3r 21:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
2006 IAAF World Athletics Final used the likes of "3000 metres steeplechase women", so I'm still a bit undecided. "World record progression for the Gender's event" might be the best alternative, but I prefer lowercase (gender) as it seems much more common on Google and looks better. Prolog 18:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not certain whether you're refering to the wiki article for the IAAF World Athletics Final or the IAAF page itself for that Final. I noticed that the link provided in the wiki article goes to a .de (German) website. I haven't boned up on my word order in German, so I don't know if it's just a translational issue for putting the gender after the event. But I do know that this page at the main IAAF website for listing the current rankings seperates by gender first, then by event and the individual gender-event pages list it as "Men's 1500m". I agree that as an article title in Wikipedia, "men's" may be more appropriate and better looking. ju66l3r 05:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I was a bit unclear there. I meant the television broadcasts of the final, which was competed during last weekend (Sept. 9-10). I'm for "for the gender's event". Prolog 08:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] animal records

it would be interesting to include a list along the lines of one here, where the winners are listed by species. The "World records in athletics" title doesn't specify humans, after all! 131.111.220.6 14:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, "athletics" does imply humans. The term "athletics" implies running or fielding events, either road or track, by humans. Regardless, athletics is a human sport, even if animals can theoretically participate. Mipchunk 19:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not ratified records

People have been changing some of the records to reflect unofficial world records. This is unacceptable. Remember that a world record, by definition, must be accepted by the IAAF. Mipchunk (talk) 17:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)