# Talk:Israel at the 2016 Summer Olympics

This article is Israel at the 2016 Summer Olympics, not Jews at the 2016 Summer Olympics. The Jewish-American athletes may be eligible to represent Israel under IOC rules, but they are not representing Israel. We don't list all the Jewish  members of any other country, nor does any other similar article list the dual-nationals who may be eligible to represent  that country. In short , this does not belong here . Epson Salts (talk) 03:18, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I completely disagree. The article talks about Israel in a general sense dealing with the olympics, not just those competing under the Israeli flag. For example, you left the part about someone who previously competed for Israel and now the UK. She is just as eligible to compete for Israel as these American Jews are. If you have anything about Jews competing for other countries as well, I feel it should be included, but the US and the UK were the only RS I saw. Additionally Israeli news sources cover these individuals see [1] and [2] as a couple of examples. - GalatzTalk 12:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
The article talks  about  Israel, but these athletes are not Israeli. I am not sure if the one line about Alice Schlesinger belongs here, either, but she at least is an Israeli, and  has represented Israel in the olympics, and would have done so again in Rio, were it not for the much publicized dispute  she had with the IJA, so there's a colorable argument to be made for the inclusion. None of that applies to Jewish athletes who are not not Israelis and never represented Israel. Epson Salts (talk)
I could go either way on this. However, the one sentence about the Olympian competing for UK who previously competed for Israel is certainly appropriate to keep. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
I wholly agree with Epson on this. There is a significant difference, in my mind, between someone who actually has Israeli citizenship, and someone who could get Israeli citizenship if they wanted it. The former may well be relevant to discussing who might have or could have competed for Israel at the Olympics, but the latter is not. Most American Jews don't hold dual citizenship with Israel, even though they could get it if they wanted it. By the same token, anyone who has a grandparent who was an Irish citizen born in Ireland is eligible to become an Irish citizen themself (see Irish nationality law#By descent). But that doesn't mean that Ireland at the 2016 Summer Olympics should list all the athletes with Irish grandparents who are competing for other countries, and it doesn't. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:07, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

could someone elaborate on what the "possible acts of discrimination" were? such as the lebanese team refusing to share a bus with the israeli team, and the egyptian judoka player who refused to shake the israeli judoka player's hand. see http://www.timesofisrael.com/egyptian-judoka-loses-to-israeli-refuses-to-shake-hands/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.104.180 (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2016 (UTC) 

Those two, plus a situation where a Saudi woman withdrew from a competition before meeting an Israeli, ostensibly because of an injury, but there are differing sources as to whether or not there was really an injury. I think we should let the Olympics play out, and then try to summarize when they are over. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
I think these are adequately covered in the article now. I'm going to make a minor change to make it a little more transparent in the lede. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

The images meet the criteria of WP:images, and specifically Wikipedia:Image use policy. The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people ... described in the article. The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central. Here, that is the case -- the individuals who are all notable who participated in the Olympics for Israel are the very focus of the article's subject matter. Please do not delete again. If you disagree, please address at the relevant talk page. --2604:2000:E016:A700:9CA6:8252:9E19:4456 (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

You are wrong on so many levels. If you read WP:IG it states Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text. You have added so many pictures that they are no where near the listing of that person, in some cases being 2 or 3 events lower than where they belong. Additionally per MOS:PERTINENCE it very clearly says every article needs images, and too many can be distracting. With how many you've added its extremely distracting. - GalatzTalk 18:23, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
It looks better with the images, which were - as is typical, but not uniformly the case - interspersed throughout the article near the relevant text. The relevant text in this case is the mention of the name of the athlete representing Israel at the 2016 Olympics.  Which is the name of this article (the last few words). I've been working on individuals on this list, and think the use as it stood better and appropriate and in line with our policies at the Project. I disagree with Galatz's view here. On my computer the images are near the appropriate text. And far from distracting - they serve the purpose of illuminating the text. Let us not edit war. 17.255.236.41 (talk) 20:10, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
By as is typical you mean nothing like the norm? Lets look at comparable examples: United States at the 2016 Summer Olympics, Great Britain at the 2016 Summer Olympics, China at the 2016 Summer Olympics, Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics, and Germany at the 2016 Summer Olympics. Those are the top 5 nations in the games in terms of medals, therefore their pages will most likely be the most notable to compare with. The top 4 do not have more than 1 picture on the entire page. Germany is the only one that has more than 1 and its still only 7. There is no reason that the US and China pages have zero pictures and Israel needs 20. Its just not logical. - GalatzTalk 01:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Give them time - Great Britain at the 2012 Summer Olympics has 17 images. Johnbod (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Nothing on wikipedia is "necessary." The reason given by Galatz for deletion. Galtatz- discuss this on the talk page, rather than edit war. This meets the purpose for which images are added to Wikipedia. It relates to the persons who are the main content of this page -- the Olympians who took place in this Olympics. No more (and less than) one image per person. It is in fact logical. This is why we have images on WP pages. Other stuff doesn't exist is not an answer. Those pages could be improved as well. You would not delete an article on an Olympic athlete because "look - there is no page on another Olympic athlete in this sport, who participated in the same sport in the same year." We are slowly improving wikipedia. By discussion on talk pages. And by making articles that did not exist. And making existing articles better. These images serve the purpose that wikipedia says benefit articles. 2604:2000:E016:A700:9DE8:6DBF:9D60:CE98 (talk) 04:52, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Why exactly are you using the word necessary in quotes and saying its my reason? I never used to word - GalatzTalk 14:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Because when you last again deleted the images, even after not achieving consensus support on this talk page, you gave as your reason in your edit summary that the images you were deleting were "unnecessary". If you dont remember giving that as your reason, read it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel_at_the_2016_Summer_Olympics&diff=737947698&oldid=737586774
The images (in the versions with most) are fine, and not unusually numerous. The cry that images must be right next to relevant text is a classic mistake, not reflecting the guidelines. Johnbod (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
As I mentioned above if you read WP:IG it states Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text. What would be the point of references something and having the image be three sections lower? GalatzTalk 14:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, John. Galatz seems to not respect IPs. And has been reverting based on his own subjective view being more important. So it helps that you weighed in. Galatz - first of all, the language you quoted, very importantly, includes the word "typically." That is not permission for you to delete everything you see that you do not feel is typical. Especially if others disagree with you, and you do not have consensus. Also, on my computer it looks fine. Different computers display it differently. Finally, it "could" even be far from the text, in a gallery, at the bottom. That would look worse. But is completely acceptable. So obviously what is "typical" is not a hard and fast rule that gives you the right to delete anything else, especially when other editors don't view it the same way you do. 2604:2000:E016:A700:C5EF:6A7:2C9B:78EC (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I love how you draw these conclusions that make absolutely no sense. I gave him the same answer as I gave you. That means I respect him more? Wow I see logic is your strong suit. - GalatzTalk 19:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Could each of you please post the archive URL to the version that you like the most, so that we can easily compare? Thanks! Syced (talk) 09:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
@Syced:Here is the version I think is much cleaner [3] - GalatzTalk 14:02, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Sorry to reach this conclusion, but I clearly prefer the current version which I don't think has too many images. I would even add an image to the last two sections, because they don't have any at the moment. Are you using a very wide screen/window? I tried reading the article on various devices, and it looks clean and balanced on most screens, especially on mobile. Cheers! Syced (talk) 05:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Israel at the 2016 Summer Olympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 23:50, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

@DatGuy: I have completed my assessment. If you disagree with any of the above, please let me know, I am very open to suggestions, and my word is of course not the final say. I would rather you discuss items you disagree with than be a 'yes man.' Let me know via here or IRC. Thanks! Kees08 (talk) 03:48, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kees08: Totally forgot I even nominated this. I'll work from bottom to the top. Also, first thing I notice is that the website does have an English option. On the top-left there is the flag of GB. Finally, I believe that NewsWeek is a tabloid/not known for fact-checking? Dat GuyTalkContribs 10:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Could I please have more than 7 days? I am on vacation, and especially things such as Christmas and New Year slowed it down. Thanks. Dat GuyTalkContribs 08:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I am in no rush. Kees08 (talk) 08:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
@Kees08: Is there anything else in the article that needs attention or correction? Nimrodbr (talk) 10:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
@Nimrodbr: Added cn tags. I'll do a ce on the article and verify the rest of the citations verify the information they are supposed to, and we'll be done. Kees08 (talk) 19:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Also need to move the citations from the intro paragraph to be in the article instead. Kees08 (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I think I finished. Nimrodbr (talk) 00:02, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
All is good, the very last thing that needs done is the citations in the lead need to be moved to the article and removed from the lead. Kees08 (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Done. Nimrodbr (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for all the hard work performed by everyone on this, what a big effort. The article grew by several times in both size and quality. Kees08 (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh my, I definitely forgot about this. @Nimrodbr and Kees08: thanks for your amazing work on the article. Dat GuyTalkContribs 21:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Israel at the 2016 Summer 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160508130917/http://bwfbadminton.com/2016/05/05/provisional-list-of-olympic-qualifiers-published/ to http://bwfbadminton.com/2016/05/05/provisional-list-of-olympic-qualifiers-published/
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 16:38, 17 November 2017 (UTC)