Talk:2018 Winter Olympics

If Russia excluded Pyeongchang, how to deal with this entry?

Russia possibly banned because of state-sponsored doping program. If Russia excluded Pyeongchang, how to deal with this entry?

Well, if there are sanctions, we document and source the sanctions. Currently the different sporting bodies indicate Russia as qualified in the indicated events, so we change it when they do.18abruce (talk) 18:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

This is just a guess on my part, but it looks like Russia is going to get away with this whole thing and probably won't face a major punishment. This move will certainly be controversial IF that decision or another is made. Either way, its going to be controversial. But I can't say I have high hopes that russia will be banned for the doping scandal. If they are not banned, there will certainly be outrage to talk about. --WRCosA (talk) 20:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The British Broadcasting Corporation just published that Russia has been banned from the games and only athletes who prove that they are clean may take part. However, they must do so as independents under a neutral flag.173.162.58.21 (talk) 18:43, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Countdown Clock

As the olympics are about half a year from now, is it possible to add some sort of countdown clock or a "number many days until opening" or something similar? boldblazer (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

 Done – The infobox displays months from now, and will switch to "days from now" 60 days before the event (template {{Days from now}}). — JFG ^talk 20:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Sponsors

I think the section on sponsors should not be in its current form (a list of all sponsors). This is an encyclopedia, not a list. I think there should be a paragraph summarizing key sponsorship appointments. What are everyone else's thoughts? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't understand what is notable about a list of sponsors, a list of nations yes. If there was some context to explain what is notable about a sponsors inclusion (or exclusion) then it would make some sense. Or even some insight into what the difference is between "olympic partner", "OFFICIAL PARTNERS OF PYEONGCHANG 2018", "OFFICIAL SPONSORS OF PYEONGCHANG 2018", etc.18abruce (talk) 14:52, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I understand why you are removing sponsor tables. Is it because the games have not been yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh0108 (talk • contribs) 08:19, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

@Josh0108: The games not beginning yet have nothing to do with it, please read what has been discussed and contribute to the discussion. Multiple users have removed the sponsors from this page, if you want them included find something notable about their inclusion.18abruce (talk) 12:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Afghanistan

since two different users have attempted to add their inclusion I felt that a note was appropriate. A rather unreliable source has indicated that they have qualified two skiiers. Both skiiers competed in the World Championships last February, and have not entered a race since, and according to the FIS neither are close to qualifying for the olympics (they need a FIS point total of 140 or less). If anyone is interested a reliable source has posted a story about the Afghani skiers that is quite interesting, and does not make the ridiculous claim that they have qualified for the olympics.18abruce (talk) 19:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Nigerian bobsled

Wow, the CBC, NYpost and many others are reporting that Nigeria has qualified for the olympics in women's bobsled. See here for the rules of qualification (specifically the time frame and point 'C' about minimum requirements) and then see here for the official rankings. Hopefully logic and a little common sense should indicate that there is a problem with the reporting, however if there is a specific statement from their NOC or from the IBSF then that would be valuable to the discussion. At this point it appears (to me) that when they achieved one of the minimum requirements there was some kind of a celebration that got badly misinterpreted.18abruce (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

And the Guardian got it right, there is hope for the world.18abruce (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

It would appear that they are "as good as qualified" according to recent reports, along with Ghana in skeleton. I do believe it is better to leave it until qualifying is done though, and it is then certain.18abruce (talk) 19:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

AZE and CAY

Both countries have qualified athletes in alpine skiing. In both cases there are indications that the only athletes eligible from those countries have retired. That being said, athletes don't qualify themselves, they create a quota for their country. I don't actually have a preference, just think it should be discussed with some sort of consensus.18abruce (talk) 20:37, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Both countries do not have other eligible athletes atp, so imo they have not qualified. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 21:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

But the skiers don’t qualify themselves - they qualify a quota for their nation. So any Azerbaijani or Cayman skier can take that quota. Smartyllama (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

That is not true. Any skier competing must meet the qualification standard. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:59, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Since neither nation is entering another athlete in any competitions it seems unlikely that the countries in question could replace them. Looking at the FIS country profiles it is not a question of whether others are good enough, there just isn't others at all.18abruce (talk) 21:28, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Looks like Patrick Brachner has come out of retirement [1]. Even if the article is false (about his retirement) it looks like another skier will compete for Azerbaijan. I have re-added Azerbaijan back to the list of participating nations. Any objections? @18abruce @Smartyllama Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Add number of athlete

Please add number of athletes by country — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.182.188.121 (talk) 05:20, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

There is no point, it will constantly be changing until mid-January. Or it will constantly be disagreed on until then.18abruce (talk) 16:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

qualified number of athletes

this was previously discussed and consensus was to not list them until numbers are more definite (see the archive on this page). I understand that some countries we can be pretty sure, but why do we want to be constantly arguing over this. Hockey, Curling, Short track speed skating, and figure skating have confirmed totals, nothing else belongs here yet. And since it is unlikely (possible i guess) that no country only has qualifiers in those sports, it just serves no purpose to list totals.18abruce (talk) 16:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Add facts about Oylmpic boycotts due to eating dogs and costs of games and low ticket sales (RfC)

S korea is hiding cafes where dogs and cats are served.Juror1 (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

provide a source that explains the issue, and present it rationally, so we can discuss the issue then.18abruce (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Koreans-and-Chinese-eat-dog-meat

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/south-korea-closes-biggest-dog-meat-market-in-run-up-to-olympics Juror1 (talk) 19:33, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Although only a small proportion of South Koreans regularly eat dog meat, thousands of restaurants and health food stores continue to sell it, mainly in soups and stews, or as a herb-infused tonic, according to International Aid for Korean Animals. International criticism of dog meat consumption intensified during the 2002 football World Cup, which South Korea jointly hosted with Japan. Some campaigners have launched online petitions calling for a boycott of next year’s Pyeongchang Olympics unless the country bans the eating of dog mea 453,000 HAVE SIGNED THE PROTEST PETITION at CHANGE.ORG Juror1 (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

no Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

The sources presented do not confirm your assertion (even after modifying it). There certainly is some controversy, but I am not convinced it belongs on this page.18abruce (talk) 14:39, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

it is a world wide issue (450,000 signers ) about 2018 winter olympics , only place it belongs is on this page!

WHAT ASSERTION? THERE IS A WORLDWIDE BOYCOTT OF THE OLYMPICS AND YOU HIDE IT YOU great deleting monitor factor (GDMF) AFTER I PROVIDED proof Juror1 (talk) 01:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

This is the first I am hearing about it, some "worldwide" boycott. Please stop adding this to Wikipedia. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

first time? you dont read the news?

There are wikipedia pages that discuss this issue (like this one), it is up to you to present a rational argument why it belongs on this particular page. Your assertion that people are eating pets in obviously incorrect and completely unrelated to the sources you presented. Your modified assertion that South Korea is hiding cafes where dogs and cats are served does not seem validated by the sources either. A nation that is providing press releases on the issue is not doing a good job of hiding it. Finally I am having a hard time understanding how calling names and making up things (in caps no less) is meant to convince anyone.18abruce (talk) 02:13, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

the item is not about eating dogs ( or cattle or tofu) , it is about a BOYCOTT! is it a boycott that will exist after 2018? NO is it a boycott about their cards? no google (you know what that is? ) words olympics and boycott - facebook comes up (you know what facebook is , how many users they have, how many more users than wikipedia) and change.org comes up . first tier

@Juror1: If delegations were boycotting then it would be notable. But these are individual viewers, not Olympians. Don't get us wrong, we aren't supporting the whole dog/cat meat fiasco, but it is not related to the Games themselves. The Games are the perfect time for activists to protest practices in the host country, that does not have anything to do with the actual Olympics. Jith12 (talk) 16:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

not talking about athletes boycotting, its about 450,000 not buying tickets and TICKET SALES are down. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/09/olympic-ticket-sales-fall-short-for-pyeongchang-games.html

The issue of countries going into debt has been 40 years an issue with Olympics BEFORE wiki ever existed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juror1 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

http://fortune.com/2016/08/10/olympics-financial-disasters @Juror1: The article that you linked to makes no mention of the dog meat situation. As it is the dog meat situation is not specifically related to the Games. If the Games are specifically impacted from an athletics standpoint then we can re-activate this topic. Right now there is no educational value in including information about an unofficial movement. Jith12 (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

450,00 IS NOT unoffical IT IS MORE THAN ALL THE TICKET SALES Juror1 (talk) 20:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

So people didn't buy tickets who probably weren't going to anyway? I didn't buy tickets to the Olympics, and I also oppose eating dog meat. Does that mean I'm "boycotting" anything? No, since I wasn't about to buy tickets to an Olympic Games halfway around the world anyway. How many of those 450,000 people actually would buy tickets were it not for the dog meat? Any of them? More than a very small number? Probably not. Smartyllama (talk) 20:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Juror1: I understand that you are frustrated. I too am disappointed by the fact that people are still eating dog meat. Despite this, multiple editors have established consensus that it is not appropriate to include mention of this movement in the article. However, since you are adamant about including text about the movement I will take this topic to RfC. This way we can have more opinions and reach an official conclusion. This will be the most effective and uncontroversial method to end this debate. Please include any further discussion in the "Threaded discussion" section.

Should the "Concerns and controversies" section of this article mention protests against the dog and cat meat market in South Korea in the lead up to the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang? Jith12 (talk) 22:15, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Survey

• Oppose, the dog and cat meat market in South Korea is not directly related to the 2018 Winter Olympics and therefore mentioning protests against the market in the lead up to the Olympics is unwarranted in an article about the Games themselves. Jith12 (talk) 22:15, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose; I am intrigued by the CBS article, and the Guardian article, but am unconvinced that this is the page to explore and explain the issue. This page could be expanded to discuss recent developments, perhaps by comparing effects of the 1988 olympics and 2002 world cup, where similar issues arose.18abruce (talk) 23:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose Completely irrelevant. It belongs on the appropriate page, and this isn't it. There's no boycott, people who probably wouldn't buy tickets anyway say they're not, and sales happen to be down anyway. Totally irrelevant. Smartyllama (talk) 23:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Doesnt matter if not on this 2018 page, data about 2018 Winter Olympic Boycott was put on pages other than 2018 Winter Oylmpics (Irony). Juror1 (talk) 00:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)