Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:39, 10 June 2009

So what needs to be improved

Possible amendment to half marathon world record progression

Although the half marathon isn't an official track record...

Here were the existing records before and after the time when Arturo Barrios hit the La Fleche track in 1991:

60:46 Dionicio Cerón 1965 Mexico 16.09.1990 Philadelphia, USA

59:47 Moses Tanui 1965 Kenya 03.04.1993 Milan, ITA

Then since the half marathon is 13 miles 192.5 yards, it would appear Barrios broke Ceron's record in 1991 because for 1 hour he ran 13M 196 yards, which seemingly wasn't broken until Tanui's 59:47 in 1993.

P.J. Christman, former editor of Running Stats ----

Hi, I am gabi71, I made a mistake and somebody made me see it. I was trying to add a translation of the page into Spanish because I couldn't find one...and instead, I edited almost everything... I'M SO SORRY. If somebody can save my translation and make a link to Spanish, it would be great. I am a certified translator and a former athlete...Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabi71 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please change the "1896 olympic marathon" picture on the marathon page to either a picture that is either a true picture from the event, or to at least something less offensive that Vietnamese children running down the street following a napalm attack by US soldiers? (Sorry, i'm not signed in now: rtdonnes) 75.80.217.51 19:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This WikiProject is great and all but it has no info. What needs to be improved? It's pretty broad by simply stating running since there is so much more to running. Sharpdust 01:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, that would seem to be one of the first priorities, figuring out what to do on the open trails ahead. Building articles for the several red links in the new Pre's Trail article would make a relatively easy loop for the short run. Or perhaps it would be better to simply start drawing up a list of missing running articles, as a point to point route that might really get somewhere. Ombudsman 21:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Some suggestions I've thought of and also based on Ombudsman ideas.

• Running in different parts of the world, i.e. Running in Kenya is significantly different than Running in the United States.
• List of running clubs
• Improve jogging article
• Expand Bill Bowerman article, a major player in the technological advances of the running shoe and Arthur Lydiard, man who popularized jogging and the running boom.

Sharpdust 04:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

speed of running?

What is the usual speed of running? dash, short-distance, and long-distance, for average persons and for athletes? I am trying to come up with a list of speed in the page for speed so this information will be useful. --Leo 15:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, varying speed is a consequence of "running", but speed does not define "running". Non-aerobic jogging is what I call "running". To consider one's self as "running" is to surpass 80% of one's maximum heart rate (MHR). In other words, a gait which creates between 40% and 80% of MHR is, in my opinion, called aerobic jogging because both the heart and lungs best process oxygen (necessary for burning corporal energy) at these percentages. To calculate MHR, substract your age from the number 220. For example, if a person is 30 years old, then that person's MHR is 190. Thus, this 30 year-old is considered to jog when the gait forces the heart to beat at a rate of anything between 76 and 152 beats per minute, but if that person's heart attains more than 152 and under 191 bpms, then the heart and lungs can barely process the oxygen. The result is that muscles produce lactic acid. You would then witness a lot of violent exterior corporal movement, but, inside, no energy is being burnt. So, to answer your question, varying speeds would depend on muscle fitness. That is to say, speed depends on those muscles' ability to function, inspite of the presence of lactic acid. I guess bigger muscles can function with X amount of lactic acid present, than smaller muscles with the same amount. When the owners of those two muscles compete against each other, and they have both entered their respective non-aerobic zones, then it is obvious that the person with the bigger muscles is capable of attaing a higher speed. Please note that some sources consider aerobic jogging not to surpass 70% of MHR.

Categorization

Several of the categories under Category:Running were changed around without edit summaries and/or discussion. Because no reason was provided for the change, I've reverted everything back as it was. However, I'm open discussing the matter so we can decide how to best categorize the articles here, and then rearrange appropriately based on consensus. -- MisterHand 04:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

At first I was confused, but after looking it over I see what is going on. SilkTork replaced the Category:Foot races category with several sub-categories, all under Category:Running. Makes sense to me now! So, do we want all foot races categorized together like it is now, or simply put their categories under Running as SilkTork had it? I'm torn about it myself...I think I'd like to keep the "Foot races" category around for races that may not fall under any of the sub-categories. -- MisterHand 05:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. The foot-race category seems inappropriate. Many entrants are in wheelchairs. Unless the intention was to seperate wheelchair entrants from those running on foot and have two categories for each distance: "Wheelchair middle distance races" and "Foot middle distance races", etc. Such a categorisation is possible, but as such cats would be tagged onto the same articles, then it starts to look unnecessary. Also, it seems awkward to have a category Running, and also have a category Foot races, which seems to cover the same thing. It looked to me that it was more helpful to have the category Running broken down into distance: Middle distance, Long distance, Marathon, etc. SilkTork 07:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for putting it that way. I hadn't thought about the wheelchair aspect of things...most of these races aren't 100% "foot" races. I'm going to revert myself on this one. -- MisterHand 10:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Stub tags

{{runningbio-stub}} and {{runningbio-stub}} are on WP:SFD again, reflecting perhaps a lack of clarity from previous occasions on what exactly to do with these, particular as regards their relationship to {{athletics-stub}}. It's probably not strictly a sub-type, but are there many stubs that relate to "running", but not to "athletics"? Alai 18:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Categories

I was about to start writing some marathon and half-marathon articles, when I realised that it would be appropriate to group them by country and/or region (Europe/Australia/North America, etc). But then I noticed that we have the cat Category:Sports by country. And there is a cat Category:Athletics by country. So there seemed some duplication. And I wondered where to place the articles. Sports by country leads to the cat Category:Sport in the United Kingdom which is broken down into various sporting activities, like Swimming in the UK and Athletics in the UK. We also have the cats Marathons and Half marathons, which are subs of Running. So there are a series of interwoven cats. Research on marathons in a particular region would be helped by appropriate categorisation, but how best to proceed? SilkTork 15:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC) There's also the cat Category:Sport by city. SilkTork 16:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC) And Category:Sport in the United Kingdom by locality. SilkTork 16:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Two new categories

Two new categories Category:Running by distance and Category:Types of running. See what people think. SilkTork 17:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

suggestion

Hi all...I can't find an article for Browning Ross or the Road Runners Club of America. This would be a significant contribution. KarateLadyKarateLady 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

RRCA article done Racepacket 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Misplaced Pages Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Road race infobox

I wanted to make an infobox for road races, so I made up a draft at User:Leebo/Infobox roadrace. Suggestions, critiques, opinions, and help are all welcome. Most importantly, I want some input on all of the parameters that should be included, right now I only have a few. Leebo /C 13:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

List of winners of the Boston Marathon

I've nominated this article for featured list status. Feel free to drop by with suggestions and/or comments. Geraldk 00:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Rock n Roll Marathon coming to San Antonio TX

News for San Antonio TX runners - a Rock N Roll marathon is coming to San Antonio in Nov 2008! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogirlrun (talk • contribs) 20:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Athletes

The running project seems to be one of the few sports that does not generally get tagged to athetes of its sport. I have created the Adriana Pirtea article this weekend and was involved in the creation of the Patrick Ivuti article. I wanted to add this project's tag to their talk pages, but it does not seem that that is the common practice for this sport based on looking at article talk pages for Frank Shorter, Michael Johnson (athlete), and Berhane Adere. Do you know of a WikiProject that focuses on track athletes?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 05:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Dane Rauschenberg

I have nominated the Dane Rauschenberg article for deletion. In general, we should develop criteria for what is a noteworthy runner. Self-promotional articles on 3 hr+ marathoners will detract from the credibility of this project and from Misplaced Pages in the eyes of runners. Also, we might want to develope criteria for what are suitable sources for establishing the noteworthiness of a runner.Racepacket 17:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• It is unfortunate that the AfD failed. However, project members should remain vigilent for WP:COI violations where runners attempt to post their (non-noteworthy) running achievements in a self-written biographical article.Xcstar 22:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
• I have nominated the fiddy2 article for deletion. This article is about Dane Rauschenberg's fundraising web site, and his running 52 marathons in calendar year 2006 (only one of which was faster than 3 hours. Please weigh in with your views. Xcstar (talk) 09:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• This article continues to be a problem. It has received so many edits that it has been listed on . Are there any project members who seriously believe that this runner meets notability standards? Xcstar (talk) 19:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• If there is anyone here -- including User:Xcstar -- who believes that the Dane Rauschenberg article does not satisfy the Misplaced Pages:Notability standard, I strongly encourage and invite the submission of a new AfD. Alansohn (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• This article continues to be a problem, because of WP:COI violations. The subject of the article is trying to use it to promote a vanity-press published book as well as a race that he wants to organize this summer. The article continues to draw snickers at meetings of local running clubs. 66.173.140.100 (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

• It is rather humorous that all of the sockpuppets have gathered here in one place. It is even more humorous that an editor with a rather clear axe to grind raises issues of "WP:COI violations" from other editors. You have already been caught red-handed with your User:Xcstar sockpuppet, and blocked for your abuse of User:Runreston yet another banned sockpuppet. Can we get an explanation of why you are pushing your agenda regarding Rauschenberg here using an IP address and not your real user ID. An explanation of this abuse might help with minimizing the length of the block (or the well-deserved ban) that should result from this continued agenda pushing. Alansohn (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposal for Notability of Runners

The following is an explaination of age-graded results posted on active.com:

Age-Graded Results

"AGE-GRADED" results are calculated using tables developed by the World Association of Veteran Athletes (the world governing body for masters track and field, long distance running and race walking). These tables were first published in 1989 and are frequently updated. The tables can be used in two ways: first, by comparing your time to a standard for your sex and age, you can determine your Performance Level Percent. These percentages can be interpreted as follows:

• 100% = Approximate World-Record Level
• Over 90% = World Class
• Over 80% = National Class
• Over 70% = Regional Class
• Over 60% = Local Class

I would propose that only runners with age graded performances of 85% be deemed worthy of including as the subject of articles in Misplaced Pages. WP:BIO sta

Competitors and coaches who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them).

The problem is that in the running context, the "highest level" is hard to apply. It could mean more than the Olympics (perhaps the Olympic Trials or the NCAA National Championships).

I am worried that runners are starting articles about themselves or their friends that are not world-renowned, and because there is trivial local coverage in a local newspaper, AfD discussions become confused. The 85% test could end a lot of needless debate. Xcstar (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you worried based on any other articles besides Dane Rauschenberg? If you are, point them out so others can see what you're talking about. If it's just the Rauschenberg article that causes this concern, there's not much point in worrying about it. CruiserBob (talk) 05:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I could see the "age-grade" as one of many potential indicators of whether someone competes at the "highest level", but I would be reluctant to endorse it as a litmus test. If we relied primarily on the "age-grade", people who have never participated in a major race but who can run at 85% would theoretically be granted articles. Kaldari (talk) 15:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Possible concerns might include Dean Karnazes and Don Kern. I am worried that we don't have an objective standard, so that when the next Dane Rauschenberg comes along, we won't have an objective standard to apply in the AfD discussion. Xcstar (talk) 13:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I can see your concern about Don Kern, although his two near-misses at the Guinness record for shortest time to complete marathons on all 7 continents would make a somewhat tenable argument for notability. With regard to Dean Karnazes though, looking at the biography that Runner's World has on their website http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-243-362--10915-0,00.html along with their other coverage of him, there's no way to deny notability, both as an author and as an ultramarathoner. The problem with your 85% criteria is that there will always be people who don't have world-class speed who are still notable - the best use I can see of such a criteria would be to say 'Anyone who meets this criteria can be defined as notable without any further evidence.' Even that isn't particularly useful - if you take a look at http://www.mastersrankings.com/rankings.php?dispcategory=Distance&sex=MEN&pseason=Outdoor&cyear=2007 (for example) you'll see dozens of people who meet that standard but aren't really 'notable' as runners. I'm certainly in favor of developing criteria, but the age-graded tables don't seem to fit the bill.

IAAF.org website changes

There seems to have been a lot have changes made on the IAAF.org website - mostly over the last few days. This means that in many Misplaced Pages pages with footnotes/references that link to running events on IAAF.org, those links no longer go anywhere useful. Instead you get an error page.

For example:

• 2006 IAAF World Road Running Championships main page used to be http://www.iaaf.org/WRU06/
• 2006 IAAF World Road Running Championships new page: http://www.iaaf.org/history/WRU/season=2006/eventCode=3491/index.html

I'm going to take a look at some of the footnotes/references on pages I have edited and fix the links where possible. Hopefully everyone else that has used links to the IAAF.org can find these dead links and replace them with the new ones. In most cases google doesn't yet know about the new links, but hopefully that will change soon. Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 00:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion attempts

• David Ayoub, MD, who one year as a high schooler clocked the third fastest time in the entire world for 800 meters, a feat on par with earning an Olympic bronze medal, has been deleted via AfD. He accomplished the rare feat of being published, while still a college undergrad, as the first author of a paper in the journal Science. Ayoub's biography needs to be restored and updated to include mention of the two papers he recently published that shed light on the vaccine controversy that has escalated exponentially in concert with suppression of information about skyrocketingvaccine injury rates and related controversies in autism.

• The biography on Don Paul, an accomplished polymath who held the unratified US and world 50k record for many years, needs to be restored in the wake of an AfD. He was the youngest recipient ever of the prestigious Stegner Fellowship at Stanford University for his writing. Virtually every other recipient of the Stegner Fellowship has a WikiBio, but Paul's bio became collateral damage in an ongoing effort to cleanse the Wiki of articles and bios related to the poorly explained collapse of the 7 World Trade Center building. He is one of the main contributors to the widely acclaimed WTC7.net website, which is often recognized as the leading authority for information about the rarely discussed collapse of a third building at the World Trade Center. WTC7 was detroyed along with surveillance records maintained by the FBI, CIA and NSA, which had major offices there to monitor events at the WTC. Although Paul retired from a successful second running career in masters competition earlier this year, he has continued his pursuit of many significant projects as a musician, publisher, poet, and activist in both the 9/11 Truth Movement and Hurricane Katrina recovery effort.

• Dane Rauschenberg has been voted down for a first nomination for deletion. There are serious WP:COI concerns with this article and its companion fiddy2. The policy question is whether any runner is free to post his running history on Misplaced Pages as if this were facebook.com or letsrun.com. The self-promotional nature of these articles has provoked vandalism and nasty comments on various running bulletin boards. Perhaps Wikiproject Running can establish some objective notability criteria to avoid 3:20 marathon runners from posting their racing histories and autobiographies.

• The fiddy2 article is being debated for deletion. It is a separate article about Dane Rauschenberg's fund raising website. Efforts to fix the NPOV problems are met with further edits that have obvious WP:COI problems. The project should adopt notability standards regarding marathon performaces. Otherwise every member of the Marathon Maniacs club will post his/her race list as a Wikitable in an autobiographical article.

Articles needing improvement

• Association of International Marathons and Distance Races - this is a stubby article which has been marked with maintenance tags since Oct 2007. It's an organization that regulates some of the largest and most widely publicized events in the world, and deserves a better entry on Misplaced Pages. Is anyone up for improving it? NSH001 (talk) 23:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

This one appears to have been deleted. The reason cited was Blatant copyright infringement. So I'm guessing that someone went to www.aimsworldrunning.org and copied and pasted text into the article. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 05:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Help request: GA backlog

Hello. There has been a large backlog at the Good Article Nominations page for a while, and some articles wait up to 50 days for a review. Since most of my editing is in the Sports and Recreation category, that is the area that I am currently focusing on. To try to cut down on the backlog, I'm approaching projects with the request that members from that project review two specific articles over the next week. My request to WikiProject Running is to try to find time to review Barry Bonds and Jeff Hardy. If these are already reviewed by someone else or you have time for another review (or you'd rather review something else altogether), it would be great if you could help out with another article. Of course, this is purely voluntary. If you could help, though, it would help out a lot and be greatly appreciated. The basic instructions for reviewing articles is found at WP:GAN and the criteria is found at WP:WIAGA. I recently began reviewing articles, and I've found it fairly enjoyable and I've learned a lot about how to write high quality articles. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Running

The article Running deals with the human activity and also with the running gait (in humans). I would appreciate help disentangling these two topics, perhaps with a new article Running (gait). Thanks. --Una Smith (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

TOC

Why is the table of contents on the Project Page so far down, and why is it labeled "Autism Assesment?" 206.53.197.12 (talk) 14:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

No idea why it was like that but I've fixed it. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 04:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Dwain Chambers

The article on this sprinter is currently at FAC, aiming to be the first featured article for a sprinter. I would really appreciate help with read throughs for prose problems and minor editing or missing info. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 03:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Shannon Rowbury

Her article could possibly be speedy deleted right now because it's basically copyright infringement of her official bio page. http://www.shannonrowbury.com/shannon_rowbury/biography.html. Someone please rewrite this! --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessment etc

Hi I've just joined. Is the project going to join Misplaced Pages:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment, only I've been doing it on another wikiproject and it's quite fun? Or to the ratings given on the wikiproject page, we could add start and stub class., it might be helpful? Sticky Parkin 00:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Spirit of the Marathon

Just created this article, would love review/help . Thanks --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Athletics

Due to reasons of inactivity here and broadening of scope, I have proposed WikiProject Athletics which will cover all track and field events as well as the marathon and road running, and most other running articles too. I hope that people are interesting in improving these articles in which there is much work to be done! Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 11:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

• I am not sure that this will advance the cause. Perhaps we should make clear that the scope of this project includes track and field. Racepacket (talk) 13:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:RUN --> WP:Athletics task force_WP:Athletics_task_force-2009-06-02T17:10:00.000Z">

What do members think of integrating the athletics and running projects? This way (as a taskforce) the running project won't be bogged down with other track and field articles, will be able to focus its scope in this way, and will inherit a quality and importance scheme through the Athletics project. Running and Athletics seem inherently related and the large majority of running project articles naturally fall within Athletics. What do people think of this idea? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 17:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)_WP:Athletics_task_force"> _WP:Athletics_task_force">

If this is going to produce an active, consolidated project that involves middle/long distance runners and races with an evaluation process, I'm all for it. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaking here as a WP Athletics member: WP:RUN has nothing to lose, and has much to gain. After only five days of fairly light work by several editors (including myself), we already have 180 or so articles assessed. All these assessments could be instantly applied to WP:RUN, and yet articles related to running would still be tagged as such, and would not be drowned in non-running related athletics articles. Even finer grain is possible, with multiple taskforces suited to individual interests. (WP:MILHIST is perhaps the best example.) In our case, people interested in sprints tend to be less interested in long-distance running, and vice versa, so splitting these into two taskforces is perhaps also a possibility. GregorB (talk) 17:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a decent idea, but I would hold off branching out into numerous task forces just yet – MILHIST has a large number of members (900 and counting!) who can support these task forces. The Athletics WikiProject should expand to multiple taskforces when there are, say, at least ten different editors who would support each task force. I think there's a bit of cross-over at the moment so keeping things centralised has its advantages. My own interests include sprinters, field events, and Marathon-related material. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 18:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this can't be more than an idea at the moment. What we know right now is that WP:RUN is feasible as a single taskforce of WP:Athletics; whether running can be split into more taskforces or not, remains to be seen. GregorB (talk) 10:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that WP:RUN has always included track and field and that "Athletics" when used as a synonym of "track and field" is very confusing to the general public. So I would just keep WP:RUN and invite the people who had just signed up to start a new WP:Athletics to join our on-going project. Racepacket (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)