Talk:Doping at the Olympic Games

message: Please can someone let me know where to find the stats used in the tables of banned athletes?  It's not obvious from the article.  Thanks, --Tomhannen (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  References? 

message: The link to WADA links to the page of a North Carolina AM radio station.  This should point to World Anti-Doping Agency. 128.42.152.100 (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Issues 

message: This article does not mention sources. I'm not really worried about legal problems, as this list includes inadvertent doping violations as well as deliberate ones, but it's something that the article could do with. Andjam 11:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: There's no mention of the snowboarder who was initially found positive for dope. He was allowed to keep his medal, but I suspect it's still worth mentioning here. Andjam 11:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  1998 Winter Olympics 

message: Should the cases of cross-country competitors banned from competing due to red blood cell counts (or whatever) be mentioned? Andjam 11:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 Winter Olympics 

message: This is not an article on the subject of Doping at the Olympic Games, it is a "shame list" and hsould be List of people disqualified for doping at the Olympic Games.  It appears that a proper article has yet to be written, and the intent of this page is nothing more than to list the "dishonour roll".  I came here expecting/hoping to find a List of substances banned by the International Olympic Committee but apparenlty that's not hte goal of whomever wrote the page.  Let the witch hunt continue....Skookum1 (talk) 01:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV/misleading title

message: since this is only a shame-list, and taking my cue from the wording of the lede, this should be the title:
*List of athletes disqualified from the Olympic Games for doping.Skookum1 (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: * I've done a lot of work on the Olympic Games article, and specifically on the doping section.  I'd like to take a crack at expanding and improving this article to take it from being a list to being an actual article.  I completely see the point in not making this a shame list.  If you can give me a week I think we can make something of this.  I also want to be able to refer to this article from the Olympic Games article so as to remove some of the detail out of the doping section and make it more summary in nature.  As it currently stands it's too detailed and this article would be the perfect place to put it.  Your thoughts? H1nkles (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure never in a rush, though I'm sometimes hasty ;-)  This motion is a spin-off of work on Anabolic steroid (see Talk:Anabolic steroid which is also sort of in abeyance for a week as Xasofudh (sp?) is away for a week and he's been doing most of the "equalizing"; he also created Ergogenic use of anabolic steroids as a catch-all for non-medical applications and issues of varying kinds and today I just discovered Performance-enhancing drugs which I'm not sure should have the OG tag or not.  One suggestion is that your tables here are inclusive of people who were "charged then acquitted" like Mr. Rebaglisti in teh following section (apparently his medal was re-instated because marijuana is not considered, officially, a performance-enhancing drug, though LOL many in the snowboarding community would likely agree that it is...sure helps with guitar-playing that's all I know :-)).  But perhaps, still, a list should be split off from a general history/ethics/policy article at this "address".  Just some thoughts, I'm not an expert although I do think it's all a bit hypocritical because of the prevalence of "performance-enhancing technology" in nearly all sports.Skookum1 (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is why at the ancient Games the rules were "barefoot and naked" (including for coaches, to make sure none were female as they weren't allowed in the sanctuary at Olympia at all...); speaking of which in a history section here doping at the ancient Games was also controversial, and special foods, herbs etc were used, this is all very citable in most classical works on ancient sport....Skookum1 (talk) 19:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

text: *Excellent thoughts.  The chore of documenting each and every instance of someone being banned or being accused and then exonerated would be burdensome.  I'm wondering what the benefit is of having the lists in the first place.  I like you're comment on the witch hunt aspect of this whole mess.  It is truly a case of guilty until proven innocent.  I will get to work on the text part of this article, I have some good sources to help augment the mediocre citations, and then we can see how it stands.  BTW good catch on the Ancient Games, I truly hadn't considered that angle on why they competed naked.  The whole gender issue is another can of worms that performance enhancing drugs have opened up and made complicated - East German "women".  H1nkles (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

text: * I've done some work on it.  I'm not through with it but it's better than it was.  I'm still not convinced that the list (which amounts to a wall of shame) is necessary, especially since there already are lists of stripped Olympic medals and list of doping cases in sport.  While I haven't reviewed these lists, I'm wondering what benefit would come from creating a derivative list of just doping cases at the Olympics?  What about all the athletes that were tested outside of the Olympics, found guilty but not banned (Carl Lewis for example).  Then you have to look at all the athletes from East Germany who were doping (or better said were being doped by their coaches) but no test was available to prove it except historical documents and witness testimony.  H1nkles (talk) 17:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name change proposed

message: I already changed the "the IOC was forced to act" in the intro paragraph, but I just noticed this as another example of blatant "crusader" language:
:the IOC took the initiative in a more organized battle against doping
"initiative", "battle" etc are military-campaign terms, and I dislike the word "doping" as pejorative in the first place; it may be that, yes, it's current in sports institution and media p.r. but that doesn't make it any less POV than referring to Israelis and/or Jews as Zionists.  So long as this article and its sister articles use "doping" in the title, they will have POV titles because the source usage of that term is deliberately POV; see my comments on the talkpage at the Wiktionary article on "dope".  The better title here is either "Use of performance-enhancing drugs at the Olympic Games", which is indeed how the lede sentence is worded ("substances" could include the special materiarls in carbon-fibre bike frames and polymers used in speed suits...it could even refer to K-Y gel).  For now I realize that the battle to get Wikipedia to avoid the built-in negative p.r. of the IOC's choice of words, but this article could at least sound a bit less like a self-justification tract by the Spanish Inquisition, "doing battle with evil" etc.  I realize the quoted wording was not deliberately POV on teh part of the editor who used it, who was no doubt reflecting the widely published propaganda campaign, which in true NewSpeak form has become part of the language - changing language to change ways of thinking/seeing/knowing - but this article, and Wikipedia, should avoid the tirades and prejudices of sources; again, as an absolute comparison, if one POV had its way the Israel article would be titled Zionist State and the United States would be titled Great Shaitan.  These may seem like extreme comparisons, but they're a reminder that what has become a commonplace term in one culture is entirely pejorative in its origin, and also in its offensiveness to those who don't ascribe to the same belief-system.  I haven't fully looked over this article to see if there's much in there from sports ethicists about whether or not there is any actual validity to these policies in ethical terms, but if not that's a gaping hole in this article; I note on Talk:Doping in sport there's WP:Philosophy listed but I didn't see much in the way of ethics discussions on that article....is there a corresponding article, by teh way, on corruption in the IOC itself?Skookum1 (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: * Interesting thoughts/comments.  My problem with the use of the term "doping" has more to do with its unprofessional "feel" if you will.  It does not sound very encyclopedic.  That said I am a strong proponent for keeping wikipedia as neutral as possible.  Newspeak has introduced the term "doping" into the popular lexicon, which does not necessarily justify its use in wikipedia and I can see how one would view it as prejorative.  I will sift back through the article to remove the term and replace it with more neutral phrases.  It would be a good conversation to discuss the overall aim of this article.  Is it to look at the use of performance enhancing substances as a whole (including technological advances like clap speed skates and carbon fiber hockey sticks) or is it to look specifically at the instances of "cheating" by the use of chemicals to enhance one's physical abilities?  If it is the former then the lists and the entire tone of the article will need to be redone.  Is this what you are advocating?  If it is the later, then the article will have a negative POV.  What positive aspects could be included to make the article balanced?  Is this necessarily bad?  Perhaps the debate circles around the philosophical idea of cheating in sports, I am not a sports ethicist and I confess to subscribing to the populist belief that a cyclist who uses blood infusions to gain a competitive edge is cheating, while the cyclist who uses carbon fiber bike frames is not.  Is this a bias?  Is it "right" to accuse the blood doper of cheating?  I don't know that this is the place to hold that debate.  Perhaps a blog or chat room is a better forum.  How should the article be formulated so that it does not fall off the POV cliff while also not dissolving into an esoteric debate on the philosophy of cheating in sports?  H1nkles (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *See the Olympic Games article for scandals and controversies revolving around the IOC.  They certainly aren't without their faults.  H1nkles (talk) 18:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to go out in moments, but thank you for the recent edits addressing this and also for your roster of issues to be addressed; there are indeed sports ethicists and their debates out there that are citable on all of this, especially the artificial separation between "internal" technology and "external" technology, but also as one ethicist has pointed out the IOC's current crusade to pre-empt "genetic doping" falls flat in its face because of teh existing genetic superiority of one idnividual over another, never mind the invasion of privacy issues involved in collecting and analyzing DNA to see if it's been altered (which may prove impossible, as also GH testing has proven, despite propaganda that they now have tests).  In bodybuilding circles there's often chatter about have drug-open competitions "balls to the wall", basically, since tehre are so many ways of cheating tests (NPC/IFBB testing is typically polygraph-only, easily breakable)....the greater dangers are from protein poisoning and diurectic use than from stsroids, yet steroids get he bad copy.  Also please note that only :Category:Anabolic steroids is a subcat of :Category:Doping, not :Category:Amphetamines or :Category:Barbiturates, which is an accidental yet obvious display of the particular biases of teh anti-"doping" movement.  Anyway what I was going to try and say briefly before I finish my chow and head out the door for the gym, is that some ethicists and critics of the IOC have pointed out that the anti-doping campaign was launched as a way to divert attention from bribery and other scandals within the IOC itself, i.e. it's a manifestation of hypocrisy.  And those opinions are citable out there somewhere; I'll try and find some of the sports ethicists material later when I come home, there's lots of it....see also Talk:Anabolic steroids, Talk:Ergogenic use of anabolic steroids, my commetns at Talk:Doping in sport and also on the talkpage of the wiktionary article on "dope".  later....Skookum1 (talk) 19:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

text: *I agree that citing the debate on this issue between sports ethicists would be beneficial and encyclopedic.  I also feel as though it would fall into the scope of an article about drug use at the Olympic Games.  This would help to balance the article.  In that light I am leaning more and more towards removing the lists as prejorative and POV.  I do feel as though an article encompassing all performance enhancing materials (including technological advances etc.) would be a huge topic to cover in one article.  I also feel as though it serves to differentiate between internal and external enhancements.  But bringing up issues such as genetic "doping" will help to highlight the complexity of the issues.  Thank you for engaging in a cogent, corraborative effort to improve this article.  It is this process that shows the best in Wikipedia and it's editors.  I will review the talk pages and articles suggested above.  H1nkles (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: POV phraseology and title

message: I am assessing this article as class=C across all wikiprojects. The article is beginning to show some clear definitions and organization, and is starting to have some good citations. However, it has a long way to go. I am unclear whether this article is a list, or an actual article -- it appears to start off as an article, discussing the topic of performance-enhancing drug use at the Olympics, but then goes on to just list various cases, in tabular format. Perhaps those tables should be moved to a separate list article? Dr. Cash (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: assessment

message: recent news on Luiza Galiulina:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g17pTGN3SdH-3EzqCXMa-UcOTlHA?docId=0936cc06cb7e42b5bfcb240af56a2685  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:470:8:866:8E89:A5FF:FE1A:4C37 (talk) 16:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 London 

message: the chinese team also accused micheal phelps of doping. so basically we have A calling B dirty and B calling A dirty, yet, only the accusations against the chinese girl are considered notable. even though she was cleared. im not saying it shouldnt be featured, but like rape alegations, it has its own stigma. and i dont understand why As account is featured and Bs account is ignored. it seems very culturally biased and ethnocentric for wikipedia. 
Affording the young chinese swimmer the traditional innocence until proven guilty (or even innocent until evidenced as suspicious on anything other than a good performance), she has worked her whole life and performed amazingly, just to be tagged on wikipedia as a drugs controversy. in the absence of any objective evidence beyond a great performance, this could just as easily be an article entry about american bad sportsmanship and paranoia over chinas success. either way it reeks of casual racism and cold war era bigotry masquerading as legitimate comment.
furthermore, Bs allegation is actually sourced and attributed to a significant figure. As allegation on the wiki entry has none of these merits, and depends on the common ignorance of unspecified western media gossip.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.133.57 (talk) 18:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, this is a place to discuss this article, not a forum. Ye Shiwen is not mentioned in this article for obvious reasons. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 02:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: She was when the comment was left.  And then Phelps was added.  And then both were taken out. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 13:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your wise advice. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  biased account of the chinese swimmer.  

message: Would someone who is fluent in both English and Spanish mind fixing this paragraph?
"Spanish athlete Ángel Mullera was first selected for the 3000 m steeplechase and later removed when they were published some e-mails in which he dealt with a trainer how to use EPO.[36] Nevertheless he appealed to the TAS which ordered to the Spanish Olympic Comitee to let Mullera to participate.[37]" 88.115.114.3 (talk) 16:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 London, Ángel Mullera 

message: Are these substances still banned? I know McDonald's has made their coffee the official coffee of the Games. Hard to believe it's still banned. And if they are not, any discussion on what used to be banned and now isn't? --Kvasir (talk) 16:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethanol and Caffeine 

message: -> History: 2nd clause, last sentence:
By the mid–1960s, sports federations were starting to ban the use of performance enhancing drugs, and the IOC followed suit in 1967.[6]
is not quite accurate if you can trust the history of doping presented by WADA on their page:
"In 1928 the IAAF (athletics) became the first International Sport Federation (IF) to ban doping (use of stimulating substances)" 
->(2nd Headline First Sentence of http://www.wada-ama.org/en/About-WADA/History/A-Brief-History-of-Anti-Doping/)
I do not have access to the source [6] though, so I'd like to discuss this with someone who has. Additionally, I honestly have no idea how to edit a Wikipedia article, I'll look how to do that some time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.52.241.181 (talk) 02:15, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request: Doping ban of other institutions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Doping at the Olympic Games. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Antidoping/SanctionedAthletes/2004ResultsManagement_1162.pdf
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=c6fe77bd-5a79-40e7-a7e4-d6fa2f7192da.pdf&urlslug=List%20of%20athletes%20currently%20serving%20a%20period%20of%20ineligibility%20as%20a%20result%20of%20an%20Anti-Doping%20Rule%20Violation%20under%20IAAF%20Rules
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=64099fcf-1e9a-444d-97d9-ea03d79fd4c5.pdf&urlslug=List%20of%20athletes%20currently%20serving%20a%20period%20of%20ineligibility%20as%20a%20result%20of%20an%20Anti-Doping%20Rule%20Violation%20under%20IAAF%20Rules
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Doping at the Olympic Games's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "IAAF News 168":
From List of doping cases in athletics: 
From Biological passport: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 03:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Either one will do. They are identical. Jeff in CA (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Doping at the Olympic Games]] 

message: The information provided in this article reads as follows:
 "The organizers of the Los Angeles games had refused to provide the IOC doping authorities with a safe prior to the start of the games. Due to a lack of security, medical records were subsequently stolen."
This is the actual information as it appears in Dr. Hall's dissertation:
"Although U.S. athletes won a spectacular eighty-three gold, sixty-one silver, and thirty bronze medals, not a single American was included on the list of those found to have been doping. Indeed, the fact that only twelve Olympians tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs showed that the IOC’s doping control efforts had made little progress since the 1960s. Unfortunately, the absence of positive drug screens was perhaps due less to Olympic doping policies than with the destruction of test results before they could be disclosed to the public. Before the opening of the Games, the Los Angeles Organizing Committee had refused to provide IOC doping authorities with a safe. This resulted in the theft of a number of medical records at the competitions. With few exceptions, the consequent lack of evidence made sanctions impossible."
Information as it appears in this article:
 "A 1994 letter from IOC Medical Commission chair Alexandre de Mérode claimed that Tony Daly, a member of the Los Angeles organizing committee had destroyed the records. Dick Pound later wrote of his frustration that the  
 organizing committee had removed evidence before it could be acted on by the IOC. Pound also claimed that IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch and Primo Nebiolo, President of the International Association of Athletics 
 Federations (IAAF) had conspired to delay the announcement of positive tests so that the games could pass without controversy."
The actual information as it appears in Dr. Hall's dissertation:
"While some suspected that de Merode played a role in the scheme, others who remembered Ueberroth’s hostility towards rigorous tests placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of local authorities. In a 1994 letter, de Merode claimed that the organizing committee’s Dr. Tony Daly at first explained that the documents had been shipped to IOC headquarters in Switzerland, but then, after further questioning, admitted that the papers had in fact been destroyed. Describing his frustration over the episode, IOC member Dick Pound later wrote that the elimination of documents led to the perception that the IOC was soft on drugs and that it did not want to find positive cases at the Games, but it was the L.A. organizing committee that had removed the evidence before it could be acted on by the IOC. Local officials, of course, denied any complicity. Dr. Craig Kammerethe associate director of the laboratory that handled the tests, claimed that “we were totally puzzled initially and figured that something must be going on, politically or a cover up.” As a self-described “cynical idealist,” Pound also did not absolve the IOC leadership from all responsibility. According to Pound, IOC President Samaranch conspired with his IAAF counterpart, Primo Nebiolo, to delay the announcement of a positive test result to make sure that the competitions in Los Angeles ended without significant controversy.”
The selective editing of Dr. Hall's dissertation leaves the impression that this was evidence of some kind of crime involving athletes, the IOC, the LAOC, the IAAF, and/or some combination of them all. Dr. Hall states in his dissertation that 1) the episode regarding the safe and the records was attributable to the LAOC and 2) that doping concerns centered around the safekeeping and storage of testing-documents and, afterwards, the belief that those in the IOC desired to obfuscate any news regarding positive tests (officially there were twelve). 
The way this information is positioned in the article not only inflates its importance, but paints a narrative that is, at best, confusing, and at worst, misleading. I believe that this curious reading of Dr. Hall's dissertation ought to be removed from the article, or at least reworded so that it more closely aligns with the spirit and intent of the original author.
The following information included in the article is additionally troublesome:
 "The American cyclist Pat McDonough later admitted to "blood doping" at the 1984 Los Angeles Games. Following the games it was revealed that one-third of the U.S. cycling team had received blood transfusions before the  
 games, where they won nine medals, their first medal success since the 1912 Summer Olympics. "Blood doping" was banned by the IOC in 1985, though no test existed for it at the time."
The above information is lifted from a secondary source with no paraphrasing. The source its taken from is not the original source, rather, it is a source within a source. Instead of citing the original source, the wiki article editor has simply copied the secondary source's retelling of the information practically word for word. The copied reference is here →  The original source is here →  — SpintendoTalk 14:17, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Information taken out of context from a source

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Doping at the Olympic Games. 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/20120806180641/http://www.thestkittsnevisobserver.com/2012/08/03/tameka-williams.html to http://www.thestkittsnevisobserver.com/2012/08/03/tameka-williams.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170807080756/https://greatest.info/media-reported-about-the-possible-deprivation-of-the-figure-skater-sotnikova-gold-sochi-2014/ to https://greatest.info/media-reported-about-the-possible-deprivation-of-the-figure-skater-sotnikova-gold-sochi-2014/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030322190904/http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_21.pdf to http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_21.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Doping at the Olympic Games. 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  tag to http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/athens/team/2004-08-09-greek-baseball-ban_x.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150712145108/http://www4.biathlonworld.com/media/pdf/presse/2015-07-10_b25fe93c04fb445.pdf to http://www3.biathlonworld.com/media/pdf/presse/2015-07-10_b25fe93c04fb445.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151210214859/http://www4.biathlonworld.com/en/press_releases.html/do/detail?presse=2518 to http://www4.biathlonworld.com/en/press_releases.html/do/detail?presse=2518
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140315185401/http://www.therepublic.com/w/OLY--BOB-Doping-Zalewski to http://www.therepublic.com/w/OLY--BOB-Doping-Zalewski
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:22, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Doping at the Olympic Games. 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  tag to https://www.reuters.com/london-olympics-2012/articles/2012/07/24/testers-nab-more-100-athletes-prior-london-wada
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120814021335/http://www.reuters.com/london-olympics-2012/articles/athletics/womens-1500m/2012/08/10/gold-medals-tainted-time-served-dopers to https://www.reuters.com/london-olympics-2012/articles/athletics/womens-1500m/2012/08/10/gold-medals-tainted-time-served-dopers
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:18, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Doping at the Olympic Games's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "sr":
From 1980 Summer Olympics: 1980 Moskva Summer Games. sports-reference.com
From Dragomir Cioroslan: Dragomir Cioroslan. sports-reference.com
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Doping at the Olympic Games]] 

message: Can the source from the DAWA be trusted?
https://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/the-truth-about-knud-revisiting-an-anti-doping-myth/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.112.247 (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knud Enemark Jensen's death. 

message: A case of doping has been found for Beijing: https://twitter.com/IntTestAgency/status/1491434296762335236 Summary: A out of competition test has suspended Iranian Skiier Hossein Saveh Shemshaki, for DHCMT Metabolite.  TheCorriynial (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2022 Games