Talk:Science Olympiad

message: Thoughts on what to do with these? Eventually they're going to take up a lot of space. 71.204.62.62 (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon me if I'm wrong but I thought that Wikipedia articles had unlimited space. If you don't like how people will have to scroll past all of it, you can change the format in a number of ways. I'd do it it it was an actual problem and I had the time. :) FluxLightSpectrum (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that we should remove past years' events or note the events that changed between years. I'll get around to that at some point.Rey grschel (talk) 05:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Is that vandalism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.53.218.27 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 31 January 2006  (UTC)
*Yep, got it. You can always be bold and take care of it yourself! (ESkog)(Talk) 05:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Are you sure the method given for scoring is correct? I know at state and regional copetitions 1st is given 11 points (it's higher at state), 2nd gets 10 points, etc. highest score wins.
: The article is correct for New York regional and state, at least. --AySz88^-^ 01:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wandered over to the SO forums after posting my question, and the way stated there is the SO recomended way of doing it.
not to be rude,but what do you think about plattsburg MO"s team? i mean they always smoke regionals and they do really well. i think they might go all the wya this year
__
Scoring wise, I think the article is correct- there are many different ways to do it. At nationals, and the way it is done in NJ, they give 1 point for first place, 2 for second, 3 for third and so on. At the same time, I believe some states do it differently.
Ursypretty 22:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scoring 

message: Should Science olympiad aritcles be a subcategory of Olympiad? I just thought of that. Munkee madness 19:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A number of people have tried to do that in the past, but their articles have been typically merged back with this main article.  I think I'll set up a table for events and descriptions soon, if I can get some more feedback on it in the above entry. --Havocrazy 22:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category?

message: I'm not sure in other places, but in Ohio, Awesome Aquifer was removed, as was heredity.  I don't want to make changes because I'm not sure of the other locations. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s (Talk to Me) 01:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating 

message: I fixed the winner for the 2006 B-divison competition. Booth was the winner. http://www.indiana.edu/~nso/tournament/news.shtml for official results if you want to verify.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.209.157 (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past national champions 

message: I haven't ever heard of Canada competing. They are not on the results sheets from the national competition. They aren't on the membership map either. http://www.soinc.org/aboutso/membership.htm Smartkid2 (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canada 

message: The Storm the Castle article seems too short to stand on its own; its content would be better merged into the main article. If the events content gets large, then a Science Olympiad Events article may be justified, but probably no specific event would be sufficiently substantial enough for its own article. Dl2000 (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly agree. The content should just be moved and shortened. SpencerT♦C 01:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: After numerous days, Storm the Castle is now a redirect. The only reference link for that game actually went dead, so it doesn't seem warranted or notable to include any additional detail for this game, at least compared to the other games mentioned. Dl2000 (talk) 04:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[Storm the Castle]]

message: BTW gj with updating the 2009 national winner so fast. I didn't think it would be done so quickly. Anyway thanks for doing the work for me I guess. 209.6.208.21 (talk) 00:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random Comment 

message: Should we put state winners on the page? 
I think it is a good idea but it would take up to much space. How do all of you think of it? GotMoney999 (talk) 21:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  State Winners? 

message: I think this article should show images of the competitions. Sfoske70 (talk) 02:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Nationals would be a good place to start on that. But then again, you'd have teams constantly trying to put their picture on this page then. Ifly6 (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: What is considered a secondary source? A significant amount of interpretation is posted to online discussion forums (e.g. the Science Olympiad Student Center) with little that I can find in the way of accurate secondary sources - news articles written about Science Olympiad are frequently rife with blatant inaccuracies. What parts of the page specifically could benefit from more secondary source references? --71.59.14.12 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondary sources 

message: For subjects not currently in this years contest, do we remove them or something else or just plain out keep them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marshmallo3535 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep or remove 

message: Should I migrate the "Events and event history" section to a list article?
Also, if I were to migrate, should I get rid of past years' events and only list the current year's? Should I also get rid of past years' events in the main article as well?
Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Events