Talk:Weight training/Archive 1

message: I saw nothing about endorphins. endorphins are the best part of working out. --Cyberman 22:32, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

message: I like the work you've done on this, thankyou. However, I feel this article is shaping up to be too long. When an article gets this long it's often good to trim it down or split it up into several other articles and link to these in the article.
Furthermore, it should perhaps be mentioned that any prospective beginners should seek out advice from a doctor and fitness specialists before starting out on a regime? MasterDirk 04:52, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree. The nutrition section is fine, as it focuses on what is relevant to weight training. All I see that would keep this article from being a "featured article" is that novices would be confused by the listing of specific exercises without pix or descriptions of just what they are.Sfahey 00:40, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good work, but maybe too good? 

message: My suggestion is to read the following article: weasel words. Also, it might not be such a good idea to have so many bullet points in the article. Otherwise, good on you for having a go at editing that article! - Ta bu shi da yu 09:56, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Body building]] 

message: The introductory paragraph of the "Safety" section has a very good explanation of how beginners tend to round their backs during deadlifts, and why it is better to keep the back straight.  However, the accompanying image is of a woman doing dumbbell squats; the caption incorrectly identifies the action as a deadlift.
I like the text and the image, but we either need to change the text to describe the importance of keeping the back straight during squats or we need an image of somebody doing deadlifts properly. - jredmond 15:45, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumbbell squat vs. deadlift in Safety section 

message: In the opening paragraph it refers to bodybuilding as a sport. Is this really acurate? As far as i know when the competitors are up there on stage the judges aren't at all interested in who can lift the most or who put the most hours in at the gym, the only thing the judges concern themselves with is the visual / asthetic presentation of the competitors i.e. how they look. In that sense i think bodybuilding has more in common with beauty contests than sports. What do you all think? Incidently the bodybuilding article could do with a lot of expansion, especially in the area of proffesional competitions.  - Dog Johnson
:While I agree that to me bodybuilding competitions look more like beauty pageants than sporting events, bodybuilders themselves refer to the "sport of bodybuilding" . I don't think that it makes a huge difference for this sentence: its aim is just to convey the fact that bodybuilding is not the same as weight training (which is a very common misconception). But if you can see where bodybuilding article can be improved, then please feel free to share your knowledge and help expand the article. Be bold. GeorgeStepanek\talk  20:24, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: bodybuilding is a sport; it's just a sport with a very high ratio of training before competition to athletic output in competition. and posing properly to meet form standards and show the muscles to their maximum effect is an athletic skill. Blair P. Houghton 08:54, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bodybuilding as a sport

message: I'm done with that one.  I'll be working to improve the lead paragraph further, but after being blocked unjustly I'm not really interested right now.  I'll just include the words of the admin who unblocked me, because I think everyone here should pay attention to them.  Blair P. Houghton 07:08, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New issues

message: It's interesting that the reference  in the Weight Training#Progressive Overload section doesn't use the term "progressive", much less the term "progressive overload", never explains what it means by "overload", and actually seems to imply that "overload" leads to injury along with the possibility of improvement.  What this section really needs is to be part of a larger section on training patterns vs. goals (as I mentioned above).  Blair P. Houghton 00:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Progressive

message: I've got the lead clean and the aerobic/anaerobic section flowing better (much less redundant, and with some new stuff, too).  (Taxman, I actually liked your change from the POVish "Most often" to the less presumptive "commonly", it's a shame the whole paragraph got morphed, but the sense is still there.) I'm going to remove the dispute tag and take some time off this article, then come back and look into the training patterns/goals issue.  There's some there already; and I think the "progressive" focus in the lead needs to be minimized and moved to the body.  Blair P. Houghton 20:53, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Regressing to Progressive