Talk:Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics

Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 10, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Olympics Low‑importance

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Post games analysis?[edit]

Assuming that some analysis of just why and where it went so badly for the UK team is carried out, it would be a good idea to include it (or mention of it) in this article. After all the money spent it is a shockingly poor result to finish 14th in terms of European countries - behind the likes of Belarus, Slovakia and the Netherlands (who have absolutely nothing in terms of mountains or alpine conditions). Worse still, in terms of medals won, the UK even finished behind countries like Slovenia, Latvia and Croatia around joint 18th in Europe. Wembwandt (talk) 10:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It will be included in the article if/when it happens in fact there is already some reaction in the targets section. It should be noted that all but one of the Netherlands medals were won in speed skating which requires no mountains or specific weather conditions. As such it is a sport that there has been a lot of discussion about as a potential medal source for GB but has had very little investment relative to the other sports. Unfortunately the policy of those providing the funding is all too often to focus it at where we have outside medal shots now and not where we should/could win medals in the future Basement12 (T.C) 11:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. And I think you make a very good point re: focus on where you could/should win medals. Shame folk like you aren't going to be on any committee! I expect the funding will remain elitist and spread too thinly. And in the meantime, every other country in the EU will win more medals. Much as with Tennis. Wembwandt (talk) 14:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review[edit]

This review is undertaken at the request of an editor on the talk page of the Olympics Project. I know that the article is still a ways away from being ready so I'll give more over arching suggestions. The athletes entering the stadium image creates formatting problems for the rest of the Medalists section, at least in my browers. There's a large white space between the section heading and the rest of the text. Consider moving this image, perhaps up into the info box, it's a bit more interesting than the Union Jack (no offense intended of course). More prose content, without it the article looks more like a set of lists. Any interesting stories about the athletes? Any struggles or difficulties they overcame? Any disappointments where expected medals were not won? The image of the ice dancers is from the European Championships, not very topical to the article. There are some sections that need referencing. Namely: alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, women's curling, freestyle skiing, and luge. Check the tense throughout the article. Sometimes it's present tense and sometimes it's past tense. Since the Games are over I would put the prose in the past tense. Check the lead as an example. I hope that helps give some direction. I did some copy editing on the prose. H1nkles (talk) 23:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem image (File:2010 Olympic Winter Games Opening Ceremony - Great Britain entering cropped.jpg|thumb|The athletes entering the stadium during the opening ceremonies.) removed for now, I think putting in the infobox would go against WP:OLYMOSNAT and against all precedent for these articles. Hopefully I can slot it back in somewhere - Basement12 (T.C) 11:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images in section titles[edit]

Why are there images in the section titles? I realise that this may be the convention for articles about the Olympic Games, but it seems quite odd and possible contrary to the MOS to me. – Pee Jay 16:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything in Wikipedia:Mos#Section_headings against it, and it's a style used in other Olympic GAs. It would only be a concern if it messed up the table of contents or links, which it doesn't. I quite like it personally. Malleus Fatuorum 16:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Great Britain at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]