Talk:Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 1500-metre freestyle

Discussion about qualification section

@Mpjmcevoybeta you removed nearly the entire qualification section without an edit summary, what is your reasoning? I added it because the information can be useful to the reader despite how other articles do not have it Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 03:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Yoblyblob, I think the qualification information is excessive detail for this article. I think some of it should be removed from Wikipedia entirely (most the material that cites purely primary sources, or doesn't cite at all), some should be moved to the athlete bios (for the less notable athletes), and the rest should be moved to the competitions they qualified from. It is a wonderful world (talk) 14:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world, I disagree with this, because Olympics pages are extremely bland. Most pages are a few tables of results and not much else, with some summaries of the larger events. The qualification information is helpful for readers, and generally provides more background that is usually not there. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:43, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@Yoblyblob Unfortunately it is true that currently most Olympics pages are extremely bland, but the solution to that is to make them better without going into unnecessary detail and violating WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I plan to de-stub this article as I have to a few others already (e.g. Swimming at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Women's 50 metre freestyle) so I don't think blandness will be a concern for much longer, at least for this specific article. IAWW (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world I would still say some qualification information is relevant, even if not at the scale of the current page Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, when I get around to doing this article I'll take a more in depth look. IAWW (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Yoblyblob, I condensed the information into a table in preparation for bringing the article to GA. I hope you agree this strikes a good balance? IAWW (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Sorry that I never got back to this. The table is a good way to condense the information Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:34, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Yoblyblob, I'm happy we found a balance! I ended up using this in all the other articles in this topic as well! IAWW (talk) 22:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

GA review

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 – Women's 1500 metre freestyle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: It is a wonderful world (talk · contribs) 22:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 19:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey :) Once again, well done for the article - it is well written and I can't see any major issues and earwig does not show any copyright violations. Here are my comments:

1.) "Defending Olympic champion Katie Ledecky of the USA was the favourite for the event" - Please clarify "favourite"

Changed to "to win the event". Hope this makes it clearer.

2.) "were also medal contenders" - I think add "considered" to the sentence

Agree. Added.

3.) "The USA's defending Olympic champion" - Please clarify "defending"

Changed to "The US' Katie Ledecky won the event at the previous Olympics in Tokyo"

4.) "held the fastest Olympic qualifying time of 15:26.27" - When was this?

Added "set at the 2023 World Championships". Technically this question was already answered later in the qualification table.

5.) "would take gold and Quadarella would take silver" - I think "take" should be replaced with "win"

Agree, less jargon

6.) Please clarify "heats" similarly to the other articles :D

Done :)

7.) "She was tied for the most decorated American female Olympic swimmer" - What does "most decorated" mean?

Changed to "She was tied for the American female Olympic swimmer with the best set of medals". It's still not ideal because "best" is a bit vague, but I think it's better than the jargon of "most decorated". What "most decorated" means is that she has the most gold medals. If there is a tie between gold medals I believe the silver medals are then counted, and then the bronze medals.

8.) Could "OR" and "NR" in the tables please be clarified?

Reluctant to do this for reasons stated in one of the other reviews. They do link to "list of Olympic/national records in swimming".

I have spotchecked Sources #4, #9, #11 and #14. When the changes above are addressed, I will pass the article. Please let me know if you need any help or clarifications! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives Points addressed! Time to get some sleep. Thanks one more time <3 IAWW (talk) 00:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world:Hey, I hope your sleep is going well. I am so sorry but I cannot see the changes - did you forget to press "submit"? I have done that before. No worries at all - I have done 1 and 2, so if you could please do 3 to 7 (don't worry about 8) that would be amazing :) DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 03:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Ah yes, I did exactly that. I clicked submit and it looks all good :) IAWW (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

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.

MOS-compliant lead: trivial race details removed for clarity and relevance

I trimmed the lead per MOS:LEDE to better summarize key points. There's no need to mention the pool is 50m long and how many laps. It dilutes the lede. Similar or same issue was raised earlier: see talk. See also User:IP49XX/Why MOS Matters for further explanation. IP49XX (talk) 00:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)