Jump to content

Talk:2006 Winter Olympics medal table

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Saopaulo1 (talk | contribs) at 19:29, 17 February 2006 (→‎Sorted by Language). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Show only countries that have won any medals

While it currently looks good to have all the countries at the games listed on this page, I think it will make it awkward to update the page - especially since there will be frequent daily updates, I expect. For example, all of the countries who haven't won a medal yet will need to have their rankings updated almost every time a country wins its first medal. I suggest that as of the first day of competition we trim this back to the countries that have won any medals at all. The home page for the 2006 games has the list of NOCs with flags, and that one page ought to be sufficient for the "big list of countries". Andrwsc 06:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was the plan when I created the page. I just put on random coutries as placeholders, and people seem to have added to it--Funkmaster 801 06:33, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I added a few more obvious placeholders (GER, AUT, SUI, FIN, etc.) for the same reason, but that seemed to have escalated into a "how could you forget my country" contest.... Andrwsc 18:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misreported medals

I suspect that earlier today, a misguided person took Russia's loss, and Canada's victory in the Women's ice hockey group A games as medal victories. Thanks to the person who fixed it up. Berzerker 01:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medal order

I know it's the IOC standard to list countries by gold medals, but isn't that a bit silly? It doesn't mean WP has to do it. It's especially odd to see on the front page that the US leads in the medal standings when Norway has 7 medals and the US only has three. Could we perhaps revise this chart to put total medals first, with ties broken by numbers of gold, silver and bronze? 70.49.124.76 06:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Oslo! Whilst the Scandinavian bit of me has great sympathy for your proposal, the common-sense bit of me says keep it as it is. It is the standard way of presenting such info, and a non-standard Wikipedia approach could be confusing. All the required info is there if readers want to compile their own charts.--Mais oui! 06:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it is of any sympathy, American newspapers and media generally use the total metal count method you suggest. I personally prefer it as well. However, since the olympics are governed by the IOC, and they use the gold-rank method, that's the way it's going to be. I came to this page tonight half-expecting both methods used. When the olympics are over, I suggest we post two tables (using both methods), with the gold-order method first, as, once again, that's how the IOC does it. -newkai | talk | contribs 07:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know the US did it that way! Well, considering this intelligence, I've changed my mind: let's do it both ways, now.--Mais oui! 07:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See Yahoo!'s medal count. 68.73.56.16 21:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced that's the way American newspapers and media generally do it at all. In fact, Yahoo!'s Medal count and MNS both order them in the same way that Mais Oui proposed, with the medal count taking precedence over the metal color: it is called a metal COUNT, after all.--Firsfron of Ronchester 07:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd propose to weigh the medals given. I find it silly that "1 Gold/0 Silver/0 Bronze" beats "0/3/5". But I also dislike "0/0/9" being higher rated than "5/3/0", for example. Personally, I'd suggest calculating a "score" as something along the lines of "5*Gold + 3*Silver + 2*Bronze" (primes). This would make "0/1/1" higher than "0/0/2" and "1/0/2" the same as "0/3/0". Well, you get the idea. Yoghurt 00:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One advantage of the IOC method is that it requires no addition or multiplication. The IOC is not immune to arithmetic errors, as Anders Haugen can testify. The IOC method is popular in Australia, as it put Australia ahead of its homophonic rival for part of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Andjam 01:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer showing the country who won the most gold metals first. It highlights quickly the number of the best athletes in the world. The country that wins the most gold medals is generally regarded as the winner of the Olympics. In the old days, you would check to see whether the USA or the USSR was winning the most medals.

So, a country whose sportlers won just one (gold) medal has better sportlers than a country that had 6 silver and 3 bronze medals? -- Yoghurt 01:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The country with 6 silver and 3 bronze are probably a bunch of chokers. Andjam 03:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list also sorts itself out if two countries have the same medal count. For example, if countries have 3 gold medals, than the list is then sorted in terms of silver etc.

Finally, note that in each event there are twice as many medals which are either silver or bronze medals as gold.

Accountable Government 23:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we compromise by doing what the official site does, which is also listing a ranking by total medals afterwards. I would do it but don't have the coding ability. 67.68.249.224 18:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a reason to do it any other way than how it is. Now, it's listing by order of countries with the most “best athletes”. I think that counting the total number of top three spots is arbitrary. Counting total metals makes just as much sense as counting total top two finishes, or top four finishes, or top five. Sure we’d be harming countries with a lot of silver and bronze, but doing it by total medal count hurts countries with a lot of fourth place finishes. Doing it by gold is the only fair system. -Arctic.gnome 03:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update rates

Are updates done after each event, or after the end of each day? Andjam 01:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not one who updates this page, but I view it often and I believe that it is updated very close to actual time. So any information here is probably no more than an hour or two old, depending on what events are being played currently. --Jared 20:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listing what events

Could we maybe list which events each country has won medals in (and, if possible, who won them)? It would be nice to know, and would be very possible for anyone who has a source which lists them. Hell, I'll do it if someone can get me a source. I do, though, suggest we do it quickly if at all, to keep the work minimal--jfg284 you were saying? 13:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is all found on the individual country page. -- Elisson Talk 18:21, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in that case, it's not worth it. It's also not in keeping with the format of previous olympics. I probably should have looked at those pages, first.--jfg284 you were saying? 22:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medal images

If we're going to have images of medals rather than "gold", "silver" and "bronze", should they have a hole in them to reflect the medals being used at these games? Andjam 09:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice thought, but they're already pretty small and putting holes in the middle of them could make them pretty cluttered looking. Also, in 1994 IIRC they used crystal medals with metal inlay and I don't think 1994 Winter Olympics has little crystal icons for the medals. -Drdisque 23:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor mistake on my behalf

I think ive messed the coding up Sorry!82.24.72.42 18:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DSQ of Olga Pyleva

Due to the positive anti-doping test, Olga Pyleva (RUS) has been disqualified and losed his silver medal. I think that Martina Glagow (3rd, GER) is promoted to the 2nd rank, like Albina Akhatova (RUS), from 4th to 3rd rank.

Already been accounted for. [1]. Sam Vimes 20:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norway Silver and Bronze

Why are Norway's silver and bronze medals (six each) bolded? So are the six gold medals for the United States. Is this some kind of Satanic code or a gripe about the United States winning a disproportionate amount of gold while Norway only seems to win silver and bronze this time? :) Norway has won the most medals (13) so far, but only one gold. The United States has struck more gold than any other type of medal.--Sir Edgar 08:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. They show who has won the most of each type of medal - as it says above the table: "the greatest number of medals in each category is in bold". I think it's good for showing who got the most in each category, but then again, I'm Norwegian... Sam Vimes 08:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying updates

It is extremely annoying that some editors do not update all three medals of a competition, but just a single medal. This leads to much more work to correct all the missing medals. Therefore I have added a temporary “Update Rules” line on the main page. noclador

Sorted by Language

Why? Why oh why?

What does this section even mean? What significance does it have? Why does anybody care? 69.199.249.113 19:16, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I agree. Also to say Switzerland is a German speaking country is like adding Canada to the English speaking countries. Saopaulo1 19:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]