Wikipedia:Peer review/Bids for Olympic Games/archive1

Bids for Olympic Games[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it for Featured list.

Thanks, Felipe Menegaz 18:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment This really needs some images, somwehere, before going to FLC. Stadiums, skylines, something to give the page some spice. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead could easily be expanded: information on most selected city, country and so fourth. Table: explain bold type. Notes need references. It is unclear what is references where: what's the ref for candidate city / host city / year / IOC session? Pictures wd be nice, yes. Sandman888 (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by H1nkles

Thank you for your efforts to create a list of all the bids for all the Olympics Games. This is a commendable effort to be sure. I'll leave my comments below.

Lead

I agree with Sandman888 that the lead could be expanded. It would be good to include the bid process. This can be found at the Olympic Games article.
The statement that the IOC revived the Ancient Olympics is a very controversial comment. I have been addressing this issue on the Olympic Games article off and on for two years now. I would recommend a source for the statement (yes even in the Lead), better yet I would reword to indicate that it was one of the contributors to the revival of the Games. There is a small but vocal faction who believe Evangelis Zappas was the actual founder of the modern Olympics and that the IOC and specifically Coubertin usurped the credit. I don't necessary hold to this line of thinking but the comment is nonetheless a bone of contention that is best avoided if possible.

IOC-IPC cooperation

Watch using abbreviations before you spell them out. I see you spell out the IOC in the Lead but I don't see mention of the IPC. Perhaps reword the title as "Cooperation with the Paralympic Games" Or "Cooperation with the International Paralymic Committee".
In my research I think the agreement goes through 2012, you may want to check on this and add it if you can verify.
The second para discussing "one bid one city" is a bit confusing to me. What exactly are you trying to get at? How were these bids different from 2008 and 2010?
Consider combining the paragraphs into one, several short one or two sentence paragraphs isn't good prose.

Lists

Why the parentheses around St. Louis in 1904? The note doesn't really clarify that enough for me.
Good use of color, well laid out.
Forgive me for my ignorance, I'm not as versed in the Featured List protocols but I thought that the lists had to be referenced. Is that right? If so it seems to me that they are not adequately referenced. I do see the use of notes but those are sporadic.
In the All-Time bids list I would clarify what the Bold year means. It may be self-explanatory but I think it would help the readers if it was spelled out.
This is a little nit picky but have you considered using the flag that the country used at the time of the bid in the all-time bids lists? That can be tricky when there are bids that span several decades (probably can't do it in those cases) but I do see the Canadian Montreal bids are all before 1960 and I think that Canada had a different flag back then. Just looking for things that might come up at FLC.

Overall

I'd say you're on your way. The biggest problem may be the referencing of the lists. I don't feel the notes in the article sifficiently reference all the lists. That may be the biggest challenge (if lists have to be referenced).
The text of the article could be improved and I would recommend adding a section on the bid process. I think people will find that very interesting.
You could also add something about bid scandals like the 2002 Salt Lake City bid scandal. Not sure if that falls within the scope of this article though. Just a suggestion. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 21:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reviews, they are very helpful! However, I am somewhat busy with Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics/archive1. After promoting it to FA, I will restart the work on this list. Best regards; Felipe Menegaz 23:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]