Talk:Race for Life

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Race for Life article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Athletics

	Sport of athletics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the discussion.AthleticsWikipedia:WikiProject AthleticsTemplate:WikiProject AthleticsAthletics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Who can you race for

who can you race for in the race for life —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.127.97 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 17 June 2008

Anyone you like. It is usually dedicated to someone who has/had cancer. ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 12:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

The criticisms section in this article has significant WP:UNDUE problems. It accounts for the majority of the article, but is based on a single reliable source - a news report from The Press. The supporting citations are blogs, not reliable sources and there is a fair bit of soapboxing too: (Such discrimination is compounded by the fact that men are at a significantly greater risk of cancer than women and have a higher rate of mortality too [7]). The link for source [7] is dead, but I very much doubt it supported that particular statement (and even if it did, its an opinion and therefore needs to be explicitly attributed). Notice: I plan to rewrite it a little later. Rockpocket 18:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Rockpocket 19:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To the anonymous editor who is reverting this section without discussing the concerns above: please stop. If you continue to do so I will seek to have the page protected. Rockpocket 12:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing a section wholey including reliable sources isn't a solution to WP:UNDUE and seems like bias. Just write it in a neutral manner. Such as 'Race for Life has been criticised for being discriminatory against men by Equality campaigner John Taylor who said 'that men should not be excluded from the Race For Life'. --90.214.129.162 (talk) 15:37, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was this section 7 the same one as this: [1]? ("The link for source [7] is dead, but I very much doubt it supported that particular statement (and even if it did, its an opinion and therefore needs to be explicitly attributed)"). If one were to exclude the gender-specific cancers (along with breast cancer, which is a whole different can of worms) then men are only less likely to contract malignant melanoma than women, and are significantly more like to contract other forms of the disease. The link above was working fine as I write this, so maybe this needs revisiting? Terryc73 (talk) 04:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Run for Moore

This has been not be run in the last 2 years. Its mention should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSDarrow (talk • contribs) 18:01, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

unsubstantiated edits

(cur | prev) 11:17, 4 January 2014‎ 82.22.122.145 (talk)‎ . . (4,403 bytes) (-97)‎ . . (Undid revision 589051520 by Saffron Blaze (talk) Who is Saffron Blaze and what makes her an expert on this topic?) (undo)
(cur | prev) 23:08, 3 January 2014‎ Saffron Blaze (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,500 bytes) (+97)‎ . . (Undid revision 588873948 by 212.188.195.154 (talk) To substantiate this edit you will need a reference. Edits must be verifiable and this one is not yet.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 22:00, 2 January 2014‎ 212.188.195.154 (talk)‎ . . (4,403 bytes) (-97)‎ . . (Undid revision 588559993 by Saffron Blaze (talk). Jim Cowan did come up with the original idea and organised the very first event in 1994 as confirmed by the ICRF in writing at the time.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 19:02, 31 December 2013‎ Saffron Blaze (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,500 bytes) (+97)‎ . . (Undid revision 588554738 by 86.18.148.192 (talk) unsubstantiated edit, added commercial external link) (undo)
(cur | prev) 18:17, 31 December 2013‎ 86.18.148.192 (talk)‎ . . (4,403 bytes) (-97)‎ . . (→‎History) (undo)

I am not going to edit war on this issue, but the latest edit is unsubstantiated and should be removed until it is. The overall sense a reader gets is personal politics is at play and affecting NPOV. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:58, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gender separation and funding aims

It would be interesting to get this straight - it appears the early Races for Life organised by ICRF were women-for-women events [2], despite a man being credited with a key early role, but that around the same time as the CRUK merger it was expanded to being general fundraising with a simply cultural gender separation, although still often run in pink, generally associated with breast cancer; meanwhile various men's events have sprung up with a definite focus on men's health. Billwilson5060 (talk) 19:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My wife and daughter participated in the 2011 and 2013 events in Cheltenham. Only women participated in the runs themselves. A few men could be seen as volunteers. I understand this is the case for all the RFL events in the UK. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]