Talk:Mt. Van Hoevenberg Olympic Bobsled Run

message: This page should probably be renamed "Olympic Sports Complex," as that is the official name of the track.  - RPIRED (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The Lake Placid track is just one part of the Lake Placid Olympic Sports Complex. You also have to include the ski jumps, hockey arena, and cross country/ biathlon course. There are other venues that have hosted previous Winter Olympics that are part of combined Olympic park, most notably Calgary with Canada Olympic Park and Turin with Torino Olympic Park. Chris (talk) 14:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *That would seem to make this article properly a section within the Lake Placid Olympic Sports Complex article.  This article title would, then, be redirected to that one. Any objections? -- Mwanner | Talk 20:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This track is part of the Olympic sport complex, but it also includes ski jumping, nordic combined, biathlon, and cross country skiing. I think it would be best to leave it separate. Examples of separate bobsleigh luge and skeleton track articles for the Winter Olympics would be Canada Olympic Park, Utah Olympic Park, and Torino Olympic Park. Chris (talk) 20:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Each of which you wrote.  At least the Torino example had a separately named facility for the bobsled et al.  I have real trouble imagining anyone doing a search for "Lake Placid bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton track".  Is there a good reason for leaving it so named?  Wikipedia naming convention calls for articles to be named using their most commonly used name.  Do you think this qualifies as such? And what virtue do you see in the present title?  -- Mwanner | Talk 23:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The tracks should be their own separate article. I am familiar with the naming conventions as required by Wikipedia, but since they are part of the respective parks. If you have to merge this article with the Sports Complex, then another user could in the future create the ski jumping part that could be as detailed as mine. If that is the case, then you an issue with article size and it would result in a split discussion. Chris (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To the best of my knowledge, the article-size thing is no longer an issue-- there are lots of long articles out there (American Revolution comes to mind).  I'm not in a big hurry to take this on, but I can all but assure you that it will happen at some point.  BTW, when you start thinking of an article as "mine", it's time to step back and recognize that no one owns these articles (even when you wrote the whole thing). You might want to think about why you want to keep the present title-- is it so "your" work won't be trammeled by others?  Think about it.  Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 01:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was looking at the orda.org website and saw that the track is part of the complex after all. You are correct on this though I think we could do this like the Canada Olympic Park article where the track is separate from the main article or we can combine it like you mentioned earlier. I understand the concept of the WP:Own, but I agree with you on this. Your thoughts on this. Chris (talk) 01:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, due to the differences in size, it would make sense to have a brief description of the luge et al track in the Olympic Complex article, with a "main article"-type link. -- Mwanner | Talk 14:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can do the BLS track brief description in the Lake Placid OSC with a link to the BLS. I won't be able to do that right now, but will tomorrow. Chris (talk) 15:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Put a brief description of the track in the Lake Placid Olympic Sports Complex article earlier if you wish to have a look. Chris (talk) 14:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great!  Thanks, Mwanner | Talk 17:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming 

message: I just added NRHP infobox, link to NRHP nomination document, a quote from the National Park Service, and a little more.  The NRHP nomination is a detailed, reliable source with a ton of information that would be useful for the article, i think.  Some of the information seems contradictory, about when the track was completely demolished several times vs. some original parts supposedly still being in use.  Could use some TLC! --doncram (talk) 02:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NRHP listing and revisions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Mt. Van Hoevenberg Olympic Bobsled Run. 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/20070929091333/http://sports123.com/bob/mw-2.html to http://sports123.com/bob/mw-2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071218194001/http://sports123.com/lug/mw-s.html to http://sports123.com/lug/mw-s.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080410085042/http://www.la84foundation.org/6oic/OfficialReports/1932/1932w.pdf to http://www.la84foundation.org/6oic/OfficialReports/1932/1932w.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929111059/http://sports123.com/ske/mw.html to http://sports123.com/ske/mw.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://usaluge.org/aboutluge/lugetracks.php
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) 15:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified