From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Biographical articles for professional bandy players[edit]

The currently played 2016 Bandy World Championship got me thinking. There need to be more articles on professional bandy players. Even if not all the players in the world championship are professional athletes, some of them are, especially those from Russia, Sweden, Kazakhstan and Finland, as far as I know. There should be articles written about them. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 00:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

that is a good idea, but where do we find information? Is the information on club pages a good enough source or does one need third party sources like articles in newspapers and magazines? Do they have to be in English or is it all right to use Swedish language texts? I don't know if I should look for something before I know where to look... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
I have added a few biographical articles on Swedish bandy players who played in this year's World Championship, collecting information from the Swedish Wikipedia. It is easy for me, since Swedish is my first language. I just translate to English. I hope other people can do the same for players from their home countries. I don't know Russian, so I cannot write very easily on Russian bandy players. Dammråtta (talk) 12:28, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Maybe I can write some. Ie :^) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:55EF:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:42, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Is this article talk page really the right place to discuss the creation of other articles, like these articles on people? This kind of discussion is better to have at the talk page of a wikipedia project, isn't it? This talk page is to discuss the article about bandy, and while it is the main article on the subject, this isn't the place for general discussion on Wikipedia's all articles on the subject. Keep those discussions at the project talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
While you do have a point, there is no WikiProject for bandy. Not enough people are interested in it, so this talk page has sometimes come to fill the void. Of course, a post might be posted at WikiProject Sport, but I am not sure it would give a better result in people raising up to the suggested task. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

National leagues and competitions[edit]

The sections about bandy in different countries should have more information about the cups and series in the different countries. At least some basic information is essential to know how the sport is played and followed by audiences in different places. This describes how popular it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to develop the text in this article and write something about the subject of national competitions, if you have good sources. I think it might be a good idea. Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree. This would be a very welcome addition. There should be some sort of club tournaments in most countries wherUkrains played, at least in the countries where they have a national bandy team, I think. Shouldn't it? However, I don't know where to find good sources. As bandy is a very small sport in many countries, in many countries it is unfortunately not covered in mainstream sports media. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 12:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, as far as my experience goes, it is very hard to find information about local bandy games in different countries except for in Sweden, Finland, and Russia and to some extent Norway. It is such a niche sport in other countries that there is virtually no independent sources, like sports news sites, writing about the sport. This is a pity, of course. At least, I think so. :-) Dammråtta (talk) 21:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
All national competitions, tournaments, cups and leagues should have their own articles, distinct from this one. However, a link to each top tier national league could be fitting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
In how many countries do they play bandy at a competitive level with leagues and such? Is it more than a handful? Is it anyone besides Scandinavia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:218:C10F:6C33:BE48:4C00:4280 (talk) 18:45, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes, there is, there are competititions in a lot of countries. Off the top of my head, I know there are national leagues or similar tournaments in Sweden, Finland, Norway (that's Scandinavia), and Russia, Belarus, the Ukraine, Kazhakhstan, and furthermore the United States of America and Canada, and, I think, the Netherlands and Germany, perhaps also in China, Mongolia and Japan. It's not professionally played in all those countries, but still, it is regulary played in all the mentioned countries and maybe, probably, more countries than that. So you see, it is a wide spread sport in the world. Bandy Blues (talk) 21:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I think, the least you should have for all the countries where it is played, is, or should be, a list of the national champions for every year. I think in most countires where bandy is played, there is a national championship. Teams winning the national championship should have their own articles and be linked from this page under the section of their country as long as they are reigning champions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:C893:0:0:0:1 (talk) 07:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Top links, hat note[edit]

Who removed the hat notes and links from this article and why? They are relevant. Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Still no answer for this question here. How hard can it be to explain your reasoning? This is not nice. Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
@Sportsfan 1234 (talk · contribs), I have asked you on your talk page to come here and give an answer. Don't you feel a responsibility to do so? Should I revert it myself without waiting for your explanation any more? Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I restored this now, together with another text section which Sportsfan 1234 (talk · contribs) also removed without explaining why. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 12:06, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Too bad consensus did not go this way, but you just have to accept it sometimes. It didn'nt end that bad after all, I can see the reason in the descission made. Skogsvandraren (talk) 09:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hockey on the ice[edit]

Do we really need to take this discussion again? "Hockey on the ice" is an old name of bandy, it does not mean ice hockey. It fell out of use in favour of bandy, because the term led to confusion with ice hockey, but this does not mean that hockey on the ice has ever been an official name for the sport of ice hockey. It has, however, officially been used for the sport now more often called bandy. Ice hockey is of course a form of hockey played on ice, but this does not mean that ice hockey has ever had the name hockey on the ice. Bandy is, by all standards and terms, also a form of hockey and also played on ice. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

For anyone's information, the term was discussed pretty thoroughly in September last year. The discussion is saved at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 September 16#Hockey on the ice and should preferably be read before you give any opinion on the matter. Please note, that the result was no consensus, which led to the result that the redirects were left pointing to bandy as they had been before. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:19, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
There's a new talking going on now at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_May_22#Hockey_on_the_ice. I don't know why it has been taken up again and why it was not noted here by the person nominating it. Röd Boll (talk) 07:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it seems Sportsfan 1234 did that, instead of discussing her/his edits here on this here talk page. Well, that's at least better than just keeping on editing without discussing at all, gotta give her/him that. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:37, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The discussion is over now, it seems. I don't know why there was no notice about the end given here. Anyway, the links hockey on the ice and hockey on ice is now redirected to hockey#Subtypes, which perhaps is just as well, even if I haven't seen any source which shows that these terms actually were used for ice hockey or any other form of hockey in older times. I'll accept it. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 15:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It is a bit strange, I think, that neither the person starting the discussion on redirecting the redirection pages (User:Sportsfan 1234) nor the person ending the discussion (User:BDD), made any note about it what so ever on this page. I don't know if they should have done that according to Wikipedia rules, but I think it would have been polite to do so, especially since the discussion was already going on here before the redirection discussion was started. Dammråtta (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It is pretty normal for redirect discussions not to be notified on the target page, only on the actual redirect. -DJSasso (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Is that so and is it a good thing User:Djsasso¿ Even if there's an ongoing debate about it on the target page? I don't know, I'm just asking... ie ? :^) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:55EF:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:38, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I might be missing the section but I don't see a section on this page talking about the redirect. -DJSasso (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
This section? You are writing in this section, which is about it (the ridirect) and the term hockey on the ice (the redirected term). The section immediately before is also about it. Röd Boll (talk) 12:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
@DJSasso, I started this section and before that User:Skogsvandraren started the Talk:Bandy#Top links, hat note section above obviously to invite User:Sportsfan 1234 to talk about the changes User:Sportsfan 1234 did, since they were about removing the hat links to this page connected to the redirected terms. I agreed totally with what User:Skogsvandraren wrote. User:Sportsfan 1234 for some reason, unbeknownst to me, choose not to explain or discuss what he had done, so it was restored by me. Then I started this section about the same question. At the same time, well knowing about my asking him to discuss here but obviously ignoring this, User:Sportsfan 1234 started the new debate on the redirect (even if this had been discussed before, less than a year ago). The new redirect discussion is noted here, in this very section. The redirect as such has no section on this talk page, but the term which is redirected has this abd the one immediately before it. If you look in the archive page for this talk page, you will find some notes about last year's discussion too. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Right but neither of them were really about the redirect. I get that it is a related discussion, but they are not talking about the redirect. That being said, if they were about the redirect, then that would indicate you were aware of the situation and heading to a forum to get outside views would also be a typical and normal action. -DJSasso (talk) 11:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe so, but first you usually try to solve a question at the talk page of the article where there is a difference of opinions. In this case, one user has been invited to take part in a discussion here about a certain term but just hasn't cared to join it and in stead gone on to start a discussion about a very related topic (the redirect of the said term), where there had been a discussion about exactly the same thing less than a year ago. It may not go against any formal rules or regular Wikipedia practice, but I find it presumptuous and rude. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 01:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Snowsuit Wearer, but I suppose there isn't much one can do about it. If Sportsfan 1234 don't want to talk about it, Sportsfan 1234 is not going to talk about it. There's nothing much anyone can do about it. *sigh* Skogsvandraren (talk) 22:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, the result of the discussion weren't that bad. I can live with it. And Sportsfan 1234 did not get it the way he wanted, which also pleases me a little bit. Skogsvandraren (talk) 22:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I still kind of wonder, why Sportsfan 1234 didn't want to take the discussion here. Skogsvandraren (talk) 09:56, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games?[edit]

Does anyone know if there will be any bandy at the Sapporo games in 2017? Sources I can find are not clear on this and I'd like to add information about it, wether they will play bandy or not. Skogsvandraren (talk) 23:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I suppose you have already read the answer at Talk:2017 Asian Winter Games#Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games – there won't be any bandy tournament at the 2017 games, so there will be no follow up from the last games held in 2011. Bandy is a sport which probably has too few followers in the host country Japan, even if Japan is now regulary taking part in the World Championships. Röd Boll (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it's sad. Bandy is such a nice sport and if it was played at the Asian Winter Games it would certainly grow a fanbase it never had before. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
It would be interesting to know, why it has been taken from the programme, but a discussion about sources for that should preferably be held at the talk page of the Games, i.e. at Talk:2017 Asian Winter Games#Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games. I asked the same question there. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Name of the sport?[edit]

I ALWAYS thought it was bandie. I also didn't know it was being played professionally, but here I learn that it is in Sweden, Scandinavia and Russia.

Shouln't the page be moved to bandie? I still think that is the more commonly used name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

No, it is bandy. It is always called bandy in Sweden and most other countries. The spelling with -ie is almost never used, even if I think I have seen it sometime in circumstances more connected with recreational sports not really following the usual bandy rules. The international governing authority of bandy has the spelling with a y in its name and it is used almost everywhere else too, even in other languages. Röd Boll (talk) 07:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
This wasn't really me asking, but a friend of mine who borrowed my computer for a while. I know it's spelled bandy and I think he knows too, but we came to discuss this and he wanted to check Wikipedia and apparently asked a question about it here. Bandy is not very common in his home country. Thank you. / (talk) 08:26, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
I didn't know much about bandy either, some years ago. However, I have learned more and more over the years, and the more I learn, the more I want to learn. It is a fascinating sport. I enjoy it and I recommend it to anyone. It is fast paced, dramatic, genuine and in a way what sport was all about once, i.e. fair playing games and having fun. I can also understand somewhat of the feeling of surprise and the want to ask. I sometimes come across information about sports which I have hardly ever heard anything about because they are not played in my parts of the world, but still, they might be interesting and it may be that the little you have heard about the sport in question might be proven wrong. Like how the name of the sport is spelled. But we are all here because we want to learn more, aren't we? I find it nice to be able to help, when people ask questions like this, even though the answer had already been given now. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:00, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
I have seen it spelled bandie or bandi, but only on very rare occations, like once or twice per version. When I have seen it, it has been in passing remarks by people who probably don't know that much about the sport. Skogsvandraren (talk) 10:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
"Bandie" is a redirect to bandy as it is. Bandi is a disambiguation page. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The bandy stick, which is bent, or bandied, was previously in it self also called a bandy, so thinking about it, calling a bandy stick a bandy stick is calling it a bandy bandy! Silly, isn't it? :-) Bandy Blues (talk) 21:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Bandy. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Rink bandy[edit]

I think there should be more written here in bandy article about rink bandy. They are virtually the same sport but on different size rinks. Is it logical to not have rink bandy here but in the same article as rinkball? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:320:8F03:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Rinkbandy deservs its own article but should well perhaps be separated from rinkball. So rinkball should also have its own article, I mean. Åke Lunk (talk) 20:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Åke Lunk. Rink bandy can be seen as a variant of bandy, but it is better to have information about it in its own article. There have been special international and national tournaments in rink bandy, and even if many players of regular bandy have been playing in these tournaments, they do not in any way count towards the points in bandy leagues or international rankings. They have their own record lists. Röd Boll (talk) 17:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I also agree. While rink bandy of course is a variant of bandy, it is also worthy of its own article. Just like rink ball also is, by the way. That's my opinio . Bandy Blues (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Still, rink bandy is played by regular bandy players too. In countries where full sized bandy fields are not readily available in any high number, rink bandy is often the form chosen by bandy clubs and by the national team when practicing. This is an important form to have in many countries where bandy is still under development and where it may be hard to arrange for a large sized artificially frozen pitch the size of a regular bandy field. In many of theses countries, winter is not long enough either to pour water on football fields to have them as bandy fields during the snowy season. In stead, artificially frozen ice hockey rinks, which may be more easily available, fill an important place for the bandy players and bandy teams. But, while rink bandy do have a very close connection to bandy, it is still also a sport of its own and should have its own article, as it is right now. As for rinkball, I am not sure how much it is played nowadays, but it was played regullary and followed by some considerable number of audiences in the 1990s I think. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
As far as I can gather, rinkball is still being played in leagues at least in Finland. I think this sport should have an article of its own, but let's keep that discussion there, i.e. at Talk:Rink bandy. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

About the authenticity of the 1913 European Bandy Championships[edit]

A post has been made at Talk:1913 European Bandy Championships about whether the 1913 European Bandy Championships really happened, refering to this page: [1]. I don't know what to think. Who are the "prominent hockey historians" who are said to have been researching the matter? Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It does not sound serious at all, it is written at a wiki which is less serious than Wikipedia (even counting all the people who question the seriousness of Wikipedia too) and it is written in a style like if it was someone who just as well could have made this up. I mean the question about the authenticity. I think the person writing has just made these "prominent hockey historians" up. Otherwise, he would have named them and provided a source to the book or magazine where they would have presented their research and its lack of positive results. It's just not serious. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Bandy in England[edit]

The information about bandy in England was recently amended with more information. This information was added by User:Old PN Editor Lyn, but Old PN Editor Lyn added no sources for the information. Is there any?

Also, the information was amended to say the national governing body in England was just started, but according to the old information which Old PN Editor Lyn replaced, and which was sourced, there already was a national federation for bandy in England since some years back. If this has restarted, that's fine, but is it really a new federation in England since recently? Does anyone know? Can anyone add good sources? Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

It is importante to have verifiable sources. In Wikipedia, verifiability means that other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. – This principle was previously expressed on this policy page as "the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth." See the essay, WP:Verifiability, not truth. – When reliable sources disagree, maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight.
All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Please immediately remove contentious material about living people that is unsourced or poorly sourced.
For how to write citations, see citing sources. Verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
Even when information is cited to reliable sources, you must present it with a neutral point of view (NPOV). All articles must adhere to NPOV, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. If there is disagreement between sources, use in-text attribution: "John Smith argues that X, while Paul Jones maintains that Y," followed by an inline citation. Sources themselves do not need to maintain a neutral point of view. Indeed, many reliable sources are not neutral. Our job as editors is simply to summarize what the reliable sources say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1 (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for giving us this text, 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1! I think it is taken from some of Wikipedia's guideline pages, isn't it? Even so, it is of course all right to have it here too, now when the question of verifiability came up. We ought to have some source added regarding the new English federation. I hope there'll be some added soon. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Name of the English federation[edit]

Please also see and give your view on what I wrote at Talk:Bandy Federation of England#Correct name. It seems the English national federation may have changed names – or has it been replaced by a new federation with a slightly different name? (If it is a totally new federation, I wonder if it is yet a member of the Federation of International Bandy.) Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Anyway, I moved the article on the English federation to England Bandy Federation now. This is obviously the present name of the federation, so there is no need to keep the old name as the article head line, even if we still would need some more sources as to the development of bandy in England and the name change of the federation there. If anyone has information, but finds it hard to add it to Wikipedia because of the wiki coding which maybe could look strange, I am more than willing to help. Just contact me, either here or at my talk page! I want the information to be up to date and presented nicely. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The popularity of bandy[edit]

Bandy is the second most popular winter sport in the world. That seems to be a fact. Only ice hockey is more popular, and ice hockey is not even close to being rivaled by any other winter sport.

I have just added another source to the statement that bandy is the second most popular winter sport over all. It is a very interesting claim. This source is now the Federation of International Bandy itself, and even if the FIB of course is eager to market their own sport like this, I don't think this is a source which cannot be relied on. I think FIB is among the best sources one can think of in this regard. So I added it. The link to the text as such is this: , which I added as a source. For some reason, there was no date given in the source text itself, but there was a date on the page on which where I found the link to the text, namely this one here: , as it can be read right now. I don't know if I should add that page to to the referenced source. Maybe I should, because dates are important.

It is interesting to note, that the diagramme at the page is not linear but exponential. This is probably done (I think) so that the bar for ice hockey in the bar chart should not get away way overhead of all the other bars. Still, you can see that bandy has thousands of more people participating in it than all the other winter sports – except for ice hockey, that is, of course! Still, the others have a presence in the Olympic Games whereas bandy does not. I find it interesting to see if the International Olympic Committee will take in these numbers and understand that adding bandy to the Winter Olympic Games would only benefit the Games. It would be beneficial for both the Olympics and for bandy and probably for all the other winter sports already at the Olympics too, because the different Olympic sports always attracts spectators to each other when the Olympic Games are going on. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The headline of that article says that bandy is destined for the Olympics. As long as I have followed the inner politics of the bandy world, the Federation of International Bandy and the national federations in Russia, Sweden, and other countries, they have always been talking about the Olympics and how the sport will be in the Olympics the next time the winter games is on. Sorry, I don't really buy it. As much as I would want it too, because I do think bandy would fit well and nicely in the winter games of the Olympics, I still don't think it is going to happen. It's just talk and talk, while other, younger sports get picked up at the Olympic agenda - such as snowboard and halfpipe and other strange gymnastics. Bandy still isn't there.
I think the problem is the financial backing. Let's face it. The money decides, and the money is in America, or more specifically the American television broadcasting industry and the companies backing it by the payment of advertising spots. Bandy is not a big sport in the United States, and so the television networks are not interested in broadcasting bandy from the Olympics or from any other event either. On the contrary. Bandy would compete with ice hockey, which is the very best television sport for the North Americans. While downhill skiing and figure skating may be shown when there is no ice hockey on, they think bandy would only disturb the focus on the ice hockey tournament and they think it wouldn't give any sponsor money to the television networks. That's how I think they are reasoning.
I'd like to be wrong, but I think I am not. Money is what is deciding it in the end and the Russians and the Swedes are not powerful enough to persuade the Americans to show an Olympic bandy competition just for the value of the sport it is. Örtstedt (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
This talk page is not here for discussing the possibility of Bandy becoming an Olympic sport or not, is it? I think you should write that some where else, Örtstedt ! The talk page is for discussing the page it is attached to, which is Bandy in this case. Anyway, I am not complaining, I'm just saying. I mainly write because I want to ask Bandy Hoppsan about his post. Bandy Hoppsan writes about something called 'linear' and 'exponential' for a diagramme. What does that mean? To understand his message about the statistics he bases his edit to the Bandy text on, this seems to be a bit crusial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:218:7D8B:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello 2A00:801:218:7D8B:0:0:0:1! (I suppose you might be the same as 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1 above. It doesn't matter, though.) A linear function is a function or row, where the constants are within equal length from eachother. An exponential function, is when the distance is ever increasing. If you look at the vertical graph in the link, you see that it says 1, 10, 100, 1000 etc., which means that the distance between every point is ever increasing on this vertical. This is, in this case, obviously done so that it should be easier to read the lower bars of the graph. If the vertical had had a linear scale, 100, 200, 300, 400, etc., the actual difference between more than 1 500 000 000 for ice hockey and just over 500 for luge would make the bar for the latter very hard to see as it would be so small in comparission, or else the bar for ice hockey would be breaking the upper edge of the picture... You see, while bandy has a number which is about 3.5 times the number for alpine skiing, it isn't 3.5 times higher, just because the exponential grades on the vertical line let you see the difference easily anyway and still taking into consideration the vast differences in numbers. It's actually pretty clever and beautiful, I think. I hope you understand my explanation, because I am not a maths teacher and don't know if I can explain things like this so that an audience can understand it. I hope I can. Please ask me again, if it is still unclear. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Örtstedt. You raise interesting questions, but I think I will not follow your example and write what I think on the subject. It would take up to much space. :-) Of course you can speculate about who and what makes the decisions about what sports are to be added to the Olympic Games programme and about what information, economic interests and opinions this may be based upon, but it is not really for us to discuss it here. I added the source merely for the statistics which it presents. Even if the article is a pamphlet about how bandy should be included in the Winter Olympics, it also has these numbers for the reader, which I think are interesting and which you must say are reliable as a source for what is now said in the article about the sport's popularity. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, of course, you do have a point. I agree with you in a way. This talk page is really not the place to have a debate on the subject on wether bandy should or should not be included in the Winter Olympics or not. Still, it is a question which is to some extent covered in the article and therefore it may still be reasonable and valid to at least discuss the discussion here. If we can find good sources, like you have done, it must be quite all right to use them as sources to add information to the article about this on-going debate which is out there in the bandy community and in the winter sport societies and the sports world at large. And as long as it is so, which I think it is, I also think it may be fine to at least discuss the discussion here on this talk page, to come to common conclussions among the Wikipedia writers about what to add and what not to add &ndasch; and how to add it – to the article bandy. This is after all what a talk page is and should be for. Then, of course, the line can be fine and a bit hard to draw between the discussion about the discussion, a meta discussion which thus should have its place here, and the discussion as such, which, as you say, should perhaps not really be had here. But if you do write about arguments being held and being put forward in the debate, it is very easily interpreted as if you are having these views yourself and putting them forward here to make a point and to be a part of the real debate in itself. Which is perhaps not the intent, but it is easily seen as such.
Still, the matter of economics I rise above is an important one and it is one which is really put forward in the real debate about the subject. Even if I do agree myself with this particular argument, I also admit that I should have been clearer with the fact that this is not just me talking, but it is me re-telling views and subject matters which some or rather quite many people have already stated in different fora before on this matter. Economics is always important. While a bandy rink, or rather an indoor bandy hall (which is what you would want nowadays for a major event, like for instance the Olympic Games), would be fine to build in Russia, Sweden, Finland or Norway, where bandy has a following all year long, in other countries it would perhaps be standing more or less unused later, or that is at least what the descission making men (because they are almost always men, not many women in those circumstances) in the top if the International Olympic Committee and the organizing committees and companies in potential future Winter Olympic host cities are thinking. Think about it: a slope used for downhill alpine skiing or a landscape used for cross-country skiing may just be there in the existing land forms. An ice hockey rink always draw crowds in thousands in Canada and winter sport interested parts of the United States. These men are not realizing, that with bandy becoming an Olympic sport, it would boost the interest even more for this sport in all the world and in North America too. Because it is a sport with the same potential tense and tactics as association football, which is the largest team sport in the world, and a speed in the game even greater than the speed in ice hockey, the most popular winter sport in the world (as we have already seen above, in the link posted by Bandy Hoppsan in the beginning of this thread). Economics and infrastructure is important – for bandy as well as for other sports.
/Örtstedt (talk) 01:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
By the way, here is the link to a group on Facebook called "We want Bandy to be a part of the Winter Olympics!", which is created for and promotes the idea that bandy should be included in the Olympic Games (the Winter Olympic Games, of course): . I forgot to add it. I was meaning to ask about it: I don't know if it is proper to link to a page like this in the article or if it would be seen as too politicial or something. What do you think? It is really not a source for something in itself, but on the other hand it could, I suppose, have texts and links posted in it which would be interesting to add here as a way of showing the debate and what support and reasons the proponants (and perhaps also the opposing side) might have on the subject.
/Örtstedt (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
A survey done in July 2015 by Sportbox, Russia's leading sports Internet portal, came to the concluession that bandy is 3rd most popular sport in Russia after ice hockey 1th and soccer 2nd with Biathlon 4th. So this is third over all, not only among winter sports. That is according to the link Órtstedt provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elliot Wing (talkcontribs) 10:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think there should be a link to this or any other Facebook groups from Wikipedia. A group there of course shows there are people having this opinion, but it is not very accurate to use the existence of a group like this to show that this opinion is put forward in the debate. You should rather link to debate texts in other media, like in newspapers and preferably written by people who might have some say in the matter. If you find something written on the matter in an editorial or some debate article written by some sports executive, I think this could be linked to in this article on bandy here at Wikipedia, but not just any grassroot initiative like a Facebook group. Anyone can start a Facebook group. Anyone can start a Facebook group about anything and invite all of his or her pals to make it look like a view held by many. With that said, of course, this group could perhaps be a place where you might find editorials or debate articles on the subject of bandy in the Olympics, because members of the group who might find articles like that would probably post links about it there in the group. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 08:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
As far as the financial issues go, which Örtstedt writes about here in a long and well-formulated text, I tend to agree. I just want to say this, so Örtstedt does not think I am ignoring his comments and points of view. There has been numerous examples of Olympic host cities, which after the end of the Games have had a hard time living up to maintaing the facilities. It doesn't matter how fine they are, if they cannot be filled with events and paying audiences in all the years after the Games. Building an arena must pay off.
The IOC actually is aware of this, and nowadays they wnat to have what is called a "legacy plan", which sorts out the prospective future for the host city and surrounding area after the Games have been held. In this plan, the city, together with the IOC (if I understand this correctly), makes a kind of budget to the time following the arrangement for the city, the areans built and the infrastructure, buildings and other parts of the city built for the Games held. I think this is good. You can read more about it at Winter Olympic Games#Host city legacy here at Wikipedia, and in the sources given there. I have also seen other sources for information like this.
However, when it comes to bandy, you can have it in the same arena as where you have long track speed skating. There has been speed skating at the Winter Olympics for every Winter Olympic Games since 1924, so it is not likely that this sport will be taken away from the Winter Olympic programme. An arena for speed skating needs to be about as big as is needed for an internationally meassured bandy rink, the form which would (or at least should) be used at the Winter Olympic Games when bandy is included. All you need is for the ice surface to cover all of the field and not just the skating track closest to where the audience sit. This is also what is done now in some of the new, full-sized skating arenas which are being built at the moment. So if you think about it, including bandy in the Winter Olympic Games would not demand a much higher investment than what already is done for any Winter Olympic Games. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)