Talk:Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 400-metre individual medley

Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 400-metre individual medley has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 13, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Olympics

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Swimming

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA review

Passed. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 400 metre individual medley/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: It is a wonderful world (talk · contribs) 11:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TNM101 (talk · contribs) 16:50, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will start this review. Please be patient as it may take me a couple of days to review everything

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Images

Only one image in the article, that is available freely on commons. It is relevant and has a suitable caption. Thus, I am passing this for the image criteria

Stability

Article is rarely edited, and has less than 100 revisions during its existence. Passing for that criteria

Prose

I gave a copyedit to the article myself. Please let me know if I got rid of anything important

For this event, the OQT was set at 4:12.50. World Aquatics then filled the rest of the event places with athletes qualifying through universality Q: What is Universality? I think there should be a small explanation for those who don't know what it is.

Agree, I changed it to "World Aquatics then filled the rest of the event places with athletes qualifying through universality places, which were places reserved for athletes from under-represented nations". I also added a red link to "universality places", as a quick internet search deems it notable. Do you think this is sufficient? IAWW (talk) 13:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the paragraph is good to go now TNM101 (chat) 14:25, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am passing this for prose TNM101 (chat)

I have now passed this for MOS compliance, NPOV (which I did while checking the prose) and proper reference formatting TNM101 (chat) 07:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

Earwig shows an 18% similarity for the SwimSwam source, but I checked it's just because you used a quotation from the source. Therefore, I pass this for having no copyright violations

@TNM101: Hey, what's the progress for this GA? You've done a good review so far! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 02:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives It doesn't look as though @TNM101 is going to finish this (?). Would you be able to finish it? IAWW (talk) 07:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey yes sure! I'll do it in the next few days. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 07:32, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! There is just this GAN, three more GANs and an FLC left before this becomes a good topic! IAWW (talk) 07:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @It is a wonderful world: I have just reviewed it and it looks very good! I have only the following points:

1.) In the lead and rest of the article – Can you please clarify "heavy favourite", "contenders", "led from beginning to end", "seed", "heats" and "defending", "splitting the first 50 metres"? (Sorry that I always ask this)

Done

2.) " At the 100 and 200 metre marks, Daiya Seto was in second and was followed by Carson Foster in third, but over the breaststroke leg (200 – 300 m), Foster overtook Seto for second. Over the final 100 metres, Seto moved down to seventh while fellow Japanese swimmer Tomoyuki Matsushita moved up from fifth to second, pushing Foster to third and claiming the silver medal with a time of 4:08.62" – I found this bit difficult to understand – could you please try rewording certain parts for readers unfamiliar with Swimming terminology (particularly the "leg" parts)

Done

3.) Could you please clarify "biggest margin"?

Done

4.) "Great Britain's Max Litchfield finished fourth for the third consecutive Olympics" – does this mean that in the previous 2 Olymoics in the exact same event?

Done

When these have been done I will do a source spotcheck and pass the article :) DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 20:27, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives Thank you again for this. I have responded to all your points. IAWW (talk) 11:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I have spotchecked Sources #2, #12, #16 and #22. I will pass it - well done! :) DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:14, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA icon symbolizing Good topic candidates on Wikipedia.

Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Men's 400-metre individual medley is part of the "Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics" series, a current good topic candidate. A good topic should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet several criteria. Please feel free to leave comments.

Past consensus reached for MOS:LEDE

If people want to know how to do a medley or how big a pool is. They can go to the general individual medley page or the Olympic swimming page to find that info. But not in a specific event page. I edited lead to reflect encyclopedic priorities per MOS:LEDE. This also isn't a new concern (Talk:Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 100 metre freestyle#top). Also see: User:IP49XX/Why MOS Matters. IP49XX (talk) 02:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]