Talk:2020 Summer Olympics

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 June 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

Official Bids

I think a section should be added for official bids. Some cities and/or national olympic committees have officially announced that they will bid for 2020, such as Rome. With some cities its not longer a proposal, its an official bid. I think a new section should be added for official bids. --Alextwa (talk) 15:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Because the actual bidding process does not start for several years, and bidding cities are notoriously changeable, we wait until we have a documented source from the IOC announcing actual bidding cities. There have been numerous cases where a city says they will bid and pull out at the last minute, or a seemingly minor bid suddenly emerges. Therefore, all cities should be kept under potential bids for the moment. However, you may continue to add detail to a bid; after all, the more documented the bid, the more likely it will become an "official bid".-Cbradshaw (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

NEW: The Olympic Rule

We should make a rule to only make a page for ONE (1) Olympic Game that have yet to be unassigned. For example... Since 2008 is Beijing, 2012 is London, 2016 is unassigned and thus the Olympic articles should stop. So when 2016 gets assigned, don't make a 2024 page until 2020 is assigned. Same can go for other events. So we're not just making pages for the sake of making pages, but we're not waiting until the last minute to make the page. It'll sort of be a compromise, so these pages don't get too far out of control. Agree/Disagree? Moonraker0022 08:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with not "making pages for the sake of making pages," but I think this one deserves to be here. The coverage is real and the nomination process noteworthy. \/\/slack (talk) 21:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

How about doing it this way? Combine the articles on the Olympics-yet-to-be-announced into a single article, entitled simply, "Future Olympiads", and just put it all in there? That way the article itself would continue to exist regardless of what had been announced. As it is, this article on 2020 is just ridiculously speculative, six years before even the host city is announced. Much of the 2020 speculation will probably overlap with the speculation for 2016 or 2024. Just put it all in one place. What do you all think? Unschool 04:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

If there is no objection, I may try in the future to join together the articles on all future Olympiads which do not yet have announced host cities, for the reasons given above. Unschool 12:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've gone ahead and done it. It certainly seems to me that there is entirely too much speculation in these articles, maybe that will be easier to see now. Unschool 04:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Auckland bid?

Can someone source a reference for Auckland's bid? It was added on 27 March 2006 in this edit by 210.54.173.115.

I've googled "auckland olympic games bid" and have found nothing that hints that Auckland might bid to host any Olympic Games, let alone games which are this close (with Auckland's developing public transport system and lack of sporting facilities, and so on). That "rumours" exist for Auckland to bid is insufficient; at least semi-solid evidence, or demi-semi-solid evidence needs to be present if Wikipedia is to claim that Auckland is a potential bid.

If no reference is given within seven days, that is, on or before 2 July 2006 (UTC), I will remove the entire section on Auckland. Neonumbers 07:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the entire section on Auckland (three days after I promised to).

Please do not revert this edit. I feel I have explained the removal reasonably above. If you have a proper reference for the claim that Auckland is considering a bit, and rumours do not count as a "reference", then be sure to list the source on this page first (if this is the case then you can revert the change). Neonumbers 23:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• • Please take a look at 2024 Summer Olympics - there is a section on an Auckland bid there, which refers to a 2020 bid.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 06:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Logo

Just something neat found on the web. http://www.xs4all.nl/~fwb/hano2020.gif

Slow news day

http://www.deadspin.com/sports/wikipedia/wikipedia-already-has-an-entry-for-the-2020-olympics-224006.php

Deadspin, a Google News registered blog about sports, has an article about there being an article on 2020. -- Zanimum 17:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Euro 2016 - Denmark

Here it says that Denmark is bidding for the Euro football championships with Sweeden in 2016, yet if we look at that page, it says that the Bid is Sweeden and Norway??? TJ 16/04/07 16.34 UTC

Clarification

Could somebody who is knowledgeable about the 2020 games please clarify the last paragraph about possible bidding changes after the 2016 games have been decided? Canada is also a part of the Americas, so that would also eliminate Rio. (At the very least, add South America or something) Thanks in advance. Crisco 1492 08:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Bangkok

I removed this text because it clearly states no one from Thailand has even discussed a bid. However, it is well written, and since they may bid if the Youth Olympics bid fails, it will save time to keep it here:

• Bangkok, Thailand

  Whilst neither Thailand nor the city of Bangkok have officially expressed any interest in holding the Olympics, Bangkok's location in the world creates a great advantage for any possible bids. As the IOC have expressed interest to awarding the games to a city in one of the regions of the world where there has not yet been an Olympic Games hosted, along with Kuala Lumpur, The Thai capital's Southeast Asian location, prominence in the region and the fact that it is a well known city internationally, high population and advanced infrastructure (for the region) make it an obvious choice for applicancy. Most of the development in Thailand takes place in Bangkok, and the city has one of the highest GDPs in the region.

--Cbradshaw (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Dubai

Can someone clarify the five regions never to have hosted statement? It makes little sense and if no justification is forth coming I'm going to delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.28.201.63 (talk) 00:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hobart

That is comedy gold. Hobart! LOL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.1.209 (talk) 10:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, yes it is comedy gold... the bid was started by a pair of radio hosts on a local community radio station as a joke. However, it got people talking, the people mentioned in the section (Premier, lord mayor, etc) HAVE in fact given their in-principle support to the bid! The hosts are now taking it seriously, even gone so far as contact the AOC to endorse it! So I guess it is an actual bid and should stay! -- Chuq (talk) 02:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

No its an april fools day joke - hence it was announced on April 1st. Hobart is large enough to host the Commonwealth Games and it is there that the City intends to place its attention. As Gold Coast have got 2018 expect Hobart to either be the next Australian city after Gold Coast or the one after that. Given that Australia gets one every four games probably will see Hobart host the Commonwealth games around 2030 or onwards.

Thank you above poster for not signing your comment, how nice. It started as a joke, and now has official backing by members of parliament so I would say it's less joke-like than other bids. 124.177.0.8 (talk) 06:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic

The government of the Dominican Republic is planning a strong bid for the 2020 Summer Olympics. Santo Domingo would definetely be the candidate city for this country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.19.193.222 (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Philippines

No news on this yet. The source is unreliable. I'm removing this for the time being. Whoever wrote it must be in for satirical purpose. I should know, I live in the country. ^__^ Xeltran (talk) 04:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Good call. As I live in the country also, I'm having doubts about this. Did President GMA give an official statement? No. 121.58.205.126 (talk) 16:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Some Recent Edits

I'm a bit shocked at some recent edits... it seems a few editors have been making tons of unilateral changes with no discussion. Many of the deleted potential bids should have been tagged for needing proper citations instead of just deleted. -MichiganCharms (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

This article is of such a speculative nature that it is just begging for people to come in and add whatever notion comes into their head. The only protection we have against it becoming a place for psychic graffiti is swift elimination of all non-sourced speculation. I mean, even 90% of the sourced stuff is just speculation, but I'll respect it if it's actually coming from semi-official authorities.

Frankly, I'm not convinced of the wisdom in even having an article like this, when the beginning of the bidding process is still years away. But if it's going to exist, it needs not to be allowed to become a trash dump. Unschool (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm in basic agreement with Unschool. I'd give some leeway to sourced speculation for now, though - since that's all a reader could expect if they were interested in the subject. Unsourced speculation should be removed and the article will need a lot of overhaul as facts eclipse whimsy. --Dystopos (talk) 22:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

While it is true that a discussion is first needed before making revisions to unsourced potential bids, going for that method may entice other editors or anon ones to just keep adding more and just put a "citation needed" tag. For now, since the official bidding process is years away, we have to rely on sources that have original research and are reputable, like news sites, for instance. Xeltran (talk) 13:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ostensible Melbourne bid

Ron Walker has stated that Melbourne WILL bid for the 2020 olympics and the Premier of Victoria has also supported this decision. Well, first of all, Ron is no longer in any position of authority, is he? And even if he is, we need a source that is not just someone's personal fan page. I'm not doubting that Melbourne is going to submit a bid, I'm just saying, show some proof, just like all the other cities listed here. Please don't put this back in using this website as a reference. Unschool (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The Australian OC has confirmed that if a bid will be logged from Australia for the 2020 Olympics, it will be Brisbane, not Melbourne that bids, although at this stage bid is more likely for 2024 Robert4011

Toledo, Ohio

the Toledo, Ohio article states that Toledo will be putting in a "strong bid" for the 2020 olympics, there is no citation and I plan to ask for one on that discussion page too. Anyone know anything about this? Mwv2 (talk) 23:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Brisbane, Queensland

As cited in Reuters, the AOC states that the earliest Brisbane can bid for is 2020, with further possibility for 2024 and 2028. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foundationexpo88 (talk • contribs) 10:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the earliest they can bid. Doesn't mean they will. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 10:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Please avoid reverting edits until a consensus is made whether Brisbane would indeed make a bid or not, if this continues, a violation of WP:3RR might be committed. I'll need to read the source first so I can give my own personal judgment. Xeltran (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that. We really need to come up with some kind of standard for what constitutes a potential bid. If the minimum requirement is an article that notes that 2020 is the earliest year any city can bid, then this page is really going to fill up fast. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 10:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Perhaps when more editors participate in the article, a consensus can be met. For now, we need to stick to solid sources regarding potential bids. If we just keep putting up tags, the article will be swarmed up with dubious statements. Xeltran (talk) 10:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't even bother with the fact tags, I just remove them. We could start a topic at WP:OLYMPICS, but we should probably wait until after the current games are done because most of the Olympics editors are very busy at the moment. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 10:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Brisbane declared to be the next Australian host city? Only a matter of time before it returns to Australia? I think, considering these two facts, it is absurd that Brisbane, Australia is NOT mentioned. The only question is how long until -- not if -- it comes to Brisbane (something that can be said for only a handful of cities); and because 2020 has been mentioned, and because Brisbane is also officially bidding for the 2018 Commonwealth Games, and because the Games will have been to Asia, Europe (at least twice) and presumably the Americas in 2016 (and everywhere except Australia for the Winter Games) in the time since Sydney, a 2020 bid is highly likely and deserves a mentioning, especially at the moment while interest in the Olympics remains high.BowieX (talk) 13:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Brisbane has no intention of bidding for the 2020 games. Queensland and the Queensland government is concentrating purely on the 2018 Commonwealth Games. This section should be removed and replaced with the Hobart bid that has been removed for no reason

NYC 55david (talk) 12:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

New Delhi, India

Yes, New Delhi, India plans to bid for 2020 Olympics. India was planning for 2016, but decided to bid for 2020 instead. (Mahendra Singh, NJ USA). http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/6603449.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.211.109 (talk) 03:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Portugal

In 2016 OG article, the Lisbon reference talks about a possile biding in 2016 or 2020, as it's not possible to host the 2016 OG, I think that the reference should [1] should be taken as a good reference and a true one. I ear by many time from now, the Portugal (especialy Lisbon, as it's the capital), wants to host the games, at least one time. In 2020, we will have a all new aeroport, TGV (Lisbon Madrid - Lisbon Oporto Valencia), a new bridge, many new construction and reabilitations all over the city, the underground will increase by 30Km conecting important parts of Lisbon, etc, I think with this reference, and with all this projects, Lisbon is really considerating hosting the games João P. M. Lima (talk) 13:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Here is another reference that speaks about Lisbon 2020, an island to e constructed in Tagus (Rio Tejo), to be incorporated in the biding project for the olimpics. I will look up for more references, and i will put all of them here as i found them João P. M. Lima (talk) 13:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

another one [2] João P. M. Lima (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg

Valentina Matvienko, Peter's mayor said in july 2007 that St. Petersburg hoped to host the games of 2020...“We will not put off these plans. Certainly, we will not apply for hosting the Games of 2016, because we understand: there exists a principle of continents’ rotation. But we will definitely apply for the next Olympics,” said she. . I'm certain that St. Petersburg will bid for 2020 games.

Unsourced bids

Both Monterrey and Guadalajara have multiple references, but all the referenced pages are either irrelevant or broken links. I'm going to spend some time trying to find a source of some merit, but if I cannot, I will remove both of these entries. If anyone can source a government official or planning committee, please feel free to include that city again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk • contribs) 03:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

After continuing to look through the sources, I've managed to verify that all of the current Asian and African cited cities, all of these at least have some level of referenced verification, though tenuous. I'll check the rest tomorrow and probably strike the unsourced Mexico stubs. The section on Romagna, Italy also only cites two random italian language blog posts, as are the references for Lisbon. ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk) 04:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Birmingham, Alabama Bid

I've added language to this section detailing the fact that this bid is solely an aspirational proposal of what appears to be a slightly delusional mayor. The cited articles show essentially no support on a local or national level and apparently Birmingham's mayor has a history of unfunded grandiose proposals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk • contribs) 15:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, double post.

UAE wants to host both Olympic Games and Expo in the same year?

I thought that was illegal to do that. After the fiascos that were Paris 1900 and St. Louis 1904, when they combined the Olympic Games into the World's Fair sphere, I thought that the IOC said back then that the Olympic Games will be independent of the World's Fair and it will not go through that "joint hosting" again. So, I hope that the UAE is not going to be foolish to do that and try to justify it to the IOC. It would result in the way Doha was denied bidding for the 2016 Summer Olympics as a candidate city. Rockies77 (talk) 05:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC) rockies77Rockies77 (talk) 05:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC).

US -no bids?

I restored US cities to the Cancelled bids section. The head/spokesperson for the National Olympic Committee has more authority than any city in bidding for the Olympics, as the city cannot bid without the approval of the NOC. Therefore, at this time, the US is out of the race. If we have documented negotiations of a city working with the NOC, we can re-add them later. Cheers-Cbradshaw (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

He didn't specifically say they would not bid, he just said that at this time (with three years until a city is chosen), The United States doesn't have a bid planned, and won't until they have negotiated with the IOC. Hence, the cities are still appropriate, as they have announced their intentions to possibly bid, should the US change their mind. In my opinion, the other way is better, with the top of it being that the head of the USOC made that statement, and there isn't a plan to bid. Once it is official, as in not just a press conference statement, but an official release from the USOC, we can move them to the cancelled section. Thanks, Onopearls ^(t/c) 16:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay so i was looking up recently and found this article <http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/olympic_bids/1216135029.html> It fully states that the United States will not bid - AddZack —Preceding unsigned comment added by AddZack (talk • contribs) 00:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

2020 (or 2024/2028) Summer Olympic candidate cities/ bids

Please note not every single city has a source, or through the local media, or just speculation. Paris was very close in getting the 2016 summer olympics, or would be the substitute/alternative site in case Rio de Janeiro can't host the games on schedule. The 2028 summer game thing is based on petition and just talk by the cities. Also included are 2018/2022 winter olympic candidate cities (the most likely are Denver, Colorado in the USA- declined to host the 1976 winter games; Munich, Germany - if approved, they are the first city to host both summer and winter olympiad events in its history- Munich 1972; and Santiago, Chile, if approved may be the first winter games held in the Southern hemisphere, although South Island, New Zealand is on the list). The high interest of a future summer olympic game event in Italy and Australia, and winter olympic games in Switzerland and Sweden are indications of these countries want to host the sets of next IOC games. + 71.102.7.77 (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

FUTURE SUMMER OLYMPIC GAMES CANDIDATE CITIES Highest chance goes to Paris, France, followed by Rome, Italy. Amsterdam, Netherlands or with Rotterdam; Antwerp/Brussels, Belgium; Atlanta, Georgia, USA; Bahrain (could be shared with Doha, Qatar); Barcelona, Spain; Belgrade, Serbia; Birmingham, Ala, USA; Bruselles, Belgium; Bucharest, Romania; Budapest, Hungary; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Bogota, Colombia; Caracas, Venezuela; Cairo, Egypt; Cape Town/Durban or Johannesburg/Pretoria, So. Africa; Chicago/Gary, Ind./Milwaukee, Wis., USA; Cincinnati/Cleveland/Columbus, Ohio, USA; Copenhagen, Denmark with Oresund region, Sweden; Detroit, Mich. USA or with Windsor, Ont., Canada; Delhi, India; Dubai, U.A.E; Dublin, Ireland; Dresden/Leipzig, Germany; Frankfurt/Cologne, Germany; Genoa, Italy; Glasgow/Edinburgh, Scotland, USA; Havana, Cuba; Helsinki, Finland; Houston, Tex, USA; Indianapolis, USA; Istanbul, Turkey; Jakarta/Javaputra, Indonesia; Jerusalem/Tel Aviv, Israel; Kansas City, USA or with St. Louis, Mo.; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Kuwait City; Lagos, Nigeria; Lisbon, Portugal; Lille, Nord, France; Lima/Callao, Peru; Los Angeles, Cal., USA (with Long Beach and Anaheim); Madrid or Seville, Spain; Manchester/Liverpool, England, UK (with Birmingham, Eng.); Manila/Quezon City, Philippines; Marseille/Nice, Sud, France; Medellin/Cali, Colombia (could be with Bogota); Memphis/Nashville, Tenn., USA with Knoxville; Mexico City, DF, Mexico with Guadalajara or Puebla; Miami-Dade, Fla., USA; Milano, Italy with Torino or Genoa; Monterrey, N.L., Mexico; Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Moscow, Russia; Munich, Bavaria, Germany; Nairobi, Kenya; Naples, Italy; New York City/Newark, NJ, USA; New Orleans, Lou., USA; Oklahoma City/Tulsa, OK, USA; Orlando/Tampa, Fla., USA; Philadelphia, or with Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Phoenix/Tucson, Ariz., USA; Prague, Czech Rep./Bratislava, Slovakia; Rabat, Morocco; Rome, Italy; San Diego, Cal. USA/Tijuana, Mexico; San Francisco, Cal., (the bay area), USA; Seattle, Wa., USA/Vancouver, B.C., Canada; Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina; St. Petersburg, Russia; Stockholm, Sweden; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Santiago, Chile; Tehran, Iran; Texas (Dallas-Ft. Worth); Toronto, Ont., Canada (with Montreal or Ottawa); Tunis(ia); Venice, Italy with Udine or San Marino; Vienna, Austria; Cardiff, Wales; Washington, DC, USA; Warsaw, Poland; Winnipeg, Man. or Edmonton, Alb., Canada; Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Brisbane, Queensland; Sydney, N.S.W., Adelaide, So. Australia, or Perth, Western Australia.

FUTURE WINTER OLYMPIAD GAMES CANDIDATE SITES Highest chance goes to Munich, Germany, followed by Denver, USA. Almaty, Kazakhstan; Annecy, France (or with Gap, Grenoble and Lyon, France); Anchorage, Alaska, USA; Big Bear Lake, Cal., USA (may not happen, may require new facilities in San Bernardino and use of sports arenas in L.A. and Anaheim); Christchurch/Dunedin, New Zealand; Colorado Springs, USA (or with Denver); Denver, Colo. or Aspen/Vail, Colo. USA. Bern, Davos, Geneva, Luzerne, Sion, St. Moritz or Zurich, Switzerland; Oresund (Malmo-Helsingor), Falun, or Ostersund, Sweden; Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina; Ljubljana, Slovenia; Presovo Valley, Romania; Sofia/Montana, Bulgaria; Quebec City, Canada; Reno, Nev./Tahoe, Cal, USA ; Salzburg/Innsbruck, Austria; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; Santiago, Chillan or Temuco, Chile; Ben Gavis, Scotland, UK; Reykjavik, Iceland; Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; Cortina D‘Ampezzo, Genoa, Sud-Tirol or Udine, Italy; Tromso, Norway or Lillehammer, Norway. +

GamesBids.com

This website is notoriously unreliable and should NOT be used as a Primary Reliable source in a bid citation. This website expected more than 20 bids for the 2018 Winter games and in truth, there were three. This blog does not cite sources or official support, but posts about quasi-possible bids coming from cities that have made little or no support for an actual bid. At some point we'll need to trim down this list to include cities that have some kind of official support. ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk) 14:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. The website did not "expect more than 20 bids for the 2018 Winter Games", it predicted about four. It reports (as we do here) cities that "indicate interest", hence potential bids. Whether or not the cities which indicate interest actually apply is not the fault of the website. A definition of an unreliable source in this context is, for example, a Facebook support group. A city official, reported in the news-and by extension-on Gamesbids, is reliable.-Cbradshaw (talk) 16:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Lima, Peru Bid

While Peru will likely bid for an Olympic games in the future, there is no official or unofficial support for a 2020 bid. During the bidding process for the 2015 Pan-American games, Peruvian officials suggested that the infrastructural investment for those games might Eventually lead to an Olympic bid. Even then, there was no talk of a bid in 2020, more likely 2024 or later. Since Lima lost the Pan-American games to Toronto, this timeline may be pushed back further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk • contribs) 15:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

As unlikely as a successful bid for Peru in 2020 may be, the article that you deleted clearly said "Woodman said Peru would also try to bid for the 2020 and 2024 Summer Olympic Games." -Cbradshaw (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Hobart bid

This is not an April Fools joke, this page was vandalised with somebody claiming it to be an april fools joke. If you read the above quote from the person saying about the bid no longer being a joke you will find that to be true. Brisbane are no longer bidding for the games in 2020 as the Gold Coast are bidding for the 2018 Comm Games. The bid for the Hobart games is official and does have support. Unfair edits and removal of sources etc keep being made for no reason with people doing so with no knowledge of what is happening with the bid itself.

NYC 55david (talk) 12:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I never said it was an April Fools joke nor did a bloody vandalise so I suggest you get the facts right. The content you are adding is not OFFICIAL a Government bid (second source states that on the end if you bothered to read it) but just some crap from a wanna be radio station advert/promotion and does not belong here on Wikipedia as it isn't notable and a crystal ball. You also have a COI with the radio station. Bidgee (talk) 13:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

It did start as an aprils fools joke - see my further comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board&action=edit&section=20 - and http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/olympic_bids/future_bids_2016/1216135135.html SatuSuro 14:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

it did not start as an april fools joke. I am inovled in the bid, live in Hobart so I am aware of the bid and know it's legitamacy. If you feel it is illegitame then you clearly do not know the full details of it and are basing your opinions on that of edits claiming it to be an April Fool's joke. Please point out this 'evidence' that shows it was an April Fool's joke. A vandalism post by another user clearly does not back this up. As for Bidgee your comments, again, coming from somebody involved, I think I would know how it is legitimate and if we have spoken to the government or not. Brisbane has no intent to bid for 2020 yet remain on this page, so where is the balance in that?

NYC 55david (talk) 05:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The Games Bid article (Which is really story which they lifted from the AAP which is the only media org to write about this with 3 other media outlets reprinting the AAP [Really only one media outlet has reported this]) does say it started as a joke, it also has no support from the AOC nor the Tasmanian or Federal Government. You also have a COI and all your claims are OR. Bidgee (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

It did start as an april fools joke - and as I have said elsewhere until such time as there are 'reliable 3rd party sources giving any credence to any sense of an official bid - then it all this is continuing Soapbox material and not wikipedia standard material. SatuSuro 08:06, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

It did start as a joke, it is no longer a joke. As detailed in a reliable 3rd party media source (ie: AAP, Australia's national news agency, perhaps the MOST DEFINITIVE media source in Australia). The story can be read in the Sydney Morning Herald, http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/hobart-olympic-bid-is-serious-20100415-sgnh.html a major newspaper read nationally. While it may be considered that only one 'media outlet' has written about this, it's clearly not true. AAP is owned and controlled by News Ltd., Fairfax, West Australia Newspapers, and Rural Press Limited - who own pretty much every major media source in Australia. If something was reported on Fox News and in the Wall Street Journal, they would be considered different stories. More information on the bid can be found at http://www.hobart2020.org/why/faq which includes the admission that no federal, state or local government authority has given official backing to the bid. In terms of IOC, I am not involved in the bid apart from having joined the facebook group as a joke when the bid was a joke. Methulah (talk) 05:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes but Fairfax (Rural Press), News Ltd and WAN is typical at using any story from any of its newspapers to use in other newspapers but it is still one source as it was written by Australian Associated Press. This joke does not belong here as it is not an official bid but a bid by some wanna be little known small time radio presenters. Bidgee (talk) 05:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't really care if they're wannabe small time radio presenters, or even if this is a calculated career move to gain them personal publicity. It isn't Wikipedia's place to decide what constitutes a valid tentative and speculative unofficial bid. It is easily verifiable that there is discussion in Hobart and a movement to make a bid for the games. That's more than most cities on this list. Wikipedia does not just report things which you find non-ridiculous. 59.167.203.48 (talk) 02:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Fact is a single purpose account who also used an IP was using Wikipedia to publicize there joke/unofficial bid (A breach of WP:SPAM and WP:ADVERT) which isn't notable since it is unofficial (As stated by the AOC in the only article published by the media). Bidgee (talk) 02:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel it matters if the account is an SPA, or if they didn't log in to edit, either. I'm also not sure that there is such a clear cut distinction between advertising and reporting upon, and I know for a fact that there is no iron clad rule against someone reporting upon an area in which they are involved, and I strongly feel that such a rule would be against the ethos of Wikipedia. The bid is notable because it exists and has attracted national media attention. It's as notable as most of these bids listed (considering that so far, very few of them are 'official'). Certainly, Brisbane's bid is unofficial, and there has been less discussion in the media about that than there has been about Hobart's. In fact, I would ask you to point out the differences between Hobart's bid and Brisbane's, neither of which exist at this stage in an official capacity. Could the main difference to you be that you feel that Brisbane would be taken seriously? Methulah (talk) 08:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I would say that most expected bids stated are not yet official so why is the Hobart bid being taken as a joke. It now has official backing by members of parliament, which is more than Brisbane's "bid" can say. Brisbane has also stated that they do not intend to make a bid, so even if the AOC wants Brisbane to be the next bid, they don't want it. 124.177.0.8 (talk) 06:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC) Agreed with above comment. The bid has support from members of parliament and has more public support than the likes of Brisbane, despite no official backing from the AOC. Auckland was added to this page on the basis of a comment by the cities Lord Mayor, and has no backing from the NZOC or Government either. Hobart has a lot more support and backing than Auckland does, but is constantly belittled due to it's public perception and size. If anything Hobart has more right to be on this page than both Auckland and Brisbane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.202.91 (talk) 13:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Time Zones

Since when have Time zones ever been a factor in the awarding of Host Cities. One user went as far as to say that The Americas are all in the same time zone, which is why the IOC would not award the 2020 games to a North American City. Well considering that Rio is UTC -2 and the eastern most North American city likely to bid (New York) is UTC -5 and the Western most city likely to bid (Seattle) is UTC -8. I don't feel time zones will be a factor. To further reiterate the point look at the map on the following Wikipedia Page.[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas]

To any readers miffed by my choice of the cities, as likely to bid. I used those cities as examples only. As they are both on either sides of the continent.--Subman758 (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hobart?

I know it is taken as a joke but it is being supported by top Tasmanian government officals including the Premier. Also the bid has been featured on newspapers and news stations. The bid also has relased a 3d version of the stadiums they plan to make if the bid goes far. I know the bid isnt supported by the National Olympic Commitee but with Tasmanian government support i think it should be put on the list. If you look at the St. Petersburg bid it only says the governor announced his intention but it says nothing of the Olympic Commitee suport. Spongie555 (talk) 06:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I was just thinking that. Surely Hobart, Australia should be on the list.IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 17:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)