Talk:Bandy/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

History

What's left of the origin after I've removed what turned out to be a copy of this page, isn't very nice IMO. Needs reworking. The page I'm linking to could certainly be used as a source. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Suede (talk • contribs) 22:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC).

• Whoops. Probably shouldn't be named Origin now that the scope has changed. Changing to History... Suede 22:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Essentially field hockey?

I dislike the wording "essentially field hockey", since bandy has fewer similarities with field hockey than with soccer. Linkan 13:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ancestor of ice hockey

I dispute the statement that bandy is an ancestor of ice hockey...in my opinion they probably developed in parallel out of shinny (informal ball and stick on ice game)... whereas ice hockey developed its own set of rules, bandy adopted the rules of association football...further evidence is contained in the official code dates...whereas ice hockey was codified in 1875 in montreal Canada, this article states that bandy was not codified until 1890... who is the ancestor... I attempted to correct this in the article but my edit was deleted...granted it wasn't very eloquent but I beleive it was more factual —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.172.55 (talk) 03:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that "ancestor" may not be the right word. Doesn't it imply that bandy in no longer played? I also find the history section confusing. The Bury Fen Bandy Club is sometimes credited with introducing the sport to other countries, but it would appear that some countries, for example, Russia, already had a form of bandy.81.102.15.200 (talk) 10:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Nature of the game

"Although players usually use their sticks to move the ball around, they may use any part of their bodies other than their hands or arms and may use their skates in a limited manner. Heading the ball will result in five minutes in the sin-bin." This is not correct. You are, for example, not allowed to kick the ball. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.10.233.85 (talk) 21:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Long foreign-language segment

The very long part of "The bandy stick" section that is in a non-Englisn Nordic language needs to be removed, as this is the English-language Wikipedia. If this is text that needs to be translated and then added, it should first be translated, then added, not the other way around. 75.200.196.157 (talk) 01:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

England

Do they have reliable natural ice of sufficient extent for this game in England ?Eregli bob (talk) 12:12, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Ball in and out of play

I think the number of methods is incorrect, because:

• there are listed only 6;
• 8 methods are on football (part of article is copied from that);
• In football there are throw-in, indirect free kick and direct free kick, but in bandt they are merged in one - free-stroke.

That`s why i`m changing the number of methods in this article.--DJ EV (talk) 10:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Bandy

I have proposed to create a WikiProject for bandy. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Bandy. Andrew S. Knight (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be much support for a project. — For those of us who likes bandy and writes about it now and then, I created this userbox anyway: {{Userbox bandy}}. Feel free to use it on your user page. Bandy boy (talk) 20:53, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Offside (bandy)

Offside, a Bandy rule, seems to belong in an article about the sport Bandy, or in a unique article about the sport's rules. It seems out of place for one rule to be floating about in its own article. Similarly any other floating rules should be consolidated either into this article, or an article about the rules. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:15, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't agree. The article was created to be a subpage to offside (sport) rather than to bandy. The article is a stub right now, but I was planning to expand it to something like offside (association football). Would you merge that article into association football? Bandy boy (talk) 20:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Bandyboy I probably wouldn't, but A) I am commenting as a passerby with little familiarity of the specifics and B) we're comparing apples to oranges as the stub is not at all like the offside (association football) article yet. I don't mind making a losing proposal. Bring on the consensus! Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:44, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Update: Hey Bandyboy. I saw your updates to Offside (bandy) and I have withdrawn my merge proposal. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

User boxes

User boxes for bandy players and bandy supporters are available at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Bandy. Bandy boy (talk) 12:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Soviet/Russian League

Does anyone have details of this league and its seasonal champions? Also, are there any good English language sources for the subject? Thanks. --Jack | ^{talk page} 04:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Jack, take a look at Russian Bandy Super League. Of course, more could be done to it, but it's a start (which wasn't around in '09 when you asked about this, I suppose). Bandy boy (talk) 12:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Fields are naturally frozen or ??

Hello for someone who has never heard of Bandy before .. I strongly suggest, adding a section explaining how the fields are made? Its' hard to believe you can freeze, using machinery, something that big! Is it only played in mid-winter on naturally frozen surfaces? (perhaps lakes, or??) It's unclear even if all bandy fields are indoors, or outdoors?? It would be great if some Bandy experts could explain this! Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.213.172.10 (talk) 08:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Originally, all bandy games were played on frozen lakes, but since the middle of the 20th century, more and more artificially frozen fields have been used. Indoor bandy arenas began to be built in the 1980s. I agree it should be something written about this, I'll see what I can acomplish. Bandy boy (talk) 12:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I have looked into it a bit now. I think it is enough to refer you to what is written in ice rink. There is no problem using artificial freezing for the ice even if it is of this size. It is done in many places in Sweden, Russia and other countries. Bandy boy (talk) 12:44, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

The world's first artificially frozen bandy field was actually built as early as in 1923, in central Budapest, Hungary. [1] Bandy boy (talk) 01:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Bandy vs ice hockey

According to Google Books, bandy was more written about than ice hockey until sometime on the 1970's, see https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=bandy%2Chockey+on+the+ice%2Cice+hockey&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cbandy%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Chockey%20on%20the%20ice%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cice%20hockey%3B%2Cc0 , and I think this ought to be reflected in this encyclopedia, but still, Wikipedia has much more information about ice hockey. How come? Is it just because ice hockey is more popular nowadays and since Wikipedia started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.236.120.178 (talk) 05:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

No Picture ?

At least one picture of this game would be great. It'd help to understand what this game looks like. Lvr 22:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

There are pictures there! Anonymous 16:18, 6 July 2006 (62.127.25.108)

Yes, now there are some, but they were probably not there yet when Lvr made his comment. 84.217.123.200 00:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

How about the picture near the bottom of the page be moved up to the top, since it seems to be the only decent picture that shows what a bandy game looks like. Perakhantu 00:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking about the same thing myself when I realized that it took a looong time to get to it, reading a lot of rules and stuff. :) I've moved it into "Nature of the game". Suede 06:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the pictures are quite allright as they are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.78.142.196 (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

World map

The Federation of International Bandy has 25 members now, http://www.internationalbandy.com/viewNavMenu.do?menuID=45 . Can anybody add the missing countries to the map?

Already done, it seems. Irony iron (talk) 15:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The nickname

How come the word 'football' is lower on the line than the word 'winter'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.78.142.196 (talk) 16:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I can't see that. It has probably something to do with your browser. Irony iron (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

More indepth on the rules

I'd like to have more in-depth articles on the rules in bandy. The information here is fine, but more information should be written in separate articles. Could someone accomplish this? Irony iron (talk) 15:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Question for give up

How many remain players in the team will the match terminated early?--PierceCheng (talk) 17:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand this question. What is it you want to know? Could you perhaps refrase the question? Bandy boy (talk) 11:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Probably all. It's not that common that someone gets a red card.

I think this question should be asked at the reference desk instead. Irony iron (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The referee will end the game if one of the teams have less then half the amount of players left in the game than the opponent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joakim Löfkvist (talk • contribs) 05:44, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Asian championship?

Many Asian countries have taken up bandy. Will there be any Asian championship? Örtstedt (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Bandy was played at the 2011 Asian Winter Games and will be played at the next such games in 2017 too. Irony iron (talk) 09:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Year in article head

Articles for Bandy World Championships have recently been moved from (e.g.) Bandy World Championship 2015 to 2015 Bandy World Championship. Is this due to some rule in the Manual of Style which I can't find? Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:42, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I received an answer at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Year in article head. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Blue card

I think the use of blue cards as described in the article is obsolete. Can someone verify this? If so, the text needs to be updated. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

It seems it's only Sweden which has chosen not to use these cards. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Bandy WikiProject

I can't find any WikiProject for bandy. Shouldn't there be one? Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if there are enough interested people, I suppose... Boot Blues (talk) 17:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Separate articles on the Bandy Playing Rules

I think it could be a good idea to have more in-depth articles about the different rules in the Bandy Playing Rules. There should of course be an overview in this article, but longer, more thorough articles which also may take up examples for when rules have been implemented would fit in separate articles. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 09:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Medals for Russia and Soviet Union

Should Russia and the Soviet Union be counted as one in medal tables? Please give your thought at Talk:Bandy World Championship for men#Medals for Russia and Soviet Union! Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 10:50, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Bandy in the Olympics

I'd like to know more about the discussions to add bandy to the Olympic Games. Who can write more about it in this article? Örtstedt (talk) 22:28, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. Why don't you try to find some information yourself and add to the article? I think there are some news articles to be found if you search the Internet. ;-) Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 12:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Strange

Why don't they play hockey? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:61C7:B15A:493F:7FA2:8A5D (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

In a way, they are. Bandy is a form of hockey. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 19:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Double

There were two references to Wikiproject sport above, so I removed one. 176.71.141.46 (talk) 16:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

History

Shouldn't the history section be further to th top of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:7146:C966:8B56:5D95:D5A1 (talk) 15:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you may be comparing with articles about countries and towns. They often have the history section among the top sections. That is rational for articles like that. While the history is important as well as interesting, I think that for a sport article as this one, it is more important to write about rules and present organisation. On the other hand, the history section is higher up f.ex. in this article in Swedish. It doesn't have to be wrong, I suppose. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Many sports, like association football, ice hockey, field hockey, and others, do have a history section almost at the top of their Wikipedia articles, so this seems to be the common way of sorting things in sports articles. Maybe we should do the same here too? For consistency at least. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 11:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. It should be near the top, because it's very often the main thing people are looking for. WP is not a sports journalism site, and current stats are not what people come here for.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  23:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should have such information in the top. Good to see it has been changed now. There also needs to be some amendments made to the sections about world championships etcetera, where information which seems to be (mostly previously) current is spelled out in some parts, for instance about results in what at the time of writing seems to have been the last competitions of some kinds. We must not let facts written like that linger. 176.71.141.46 (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Some done. 2A00:801:210:7EEF:83C:B888:740F:6AF5 (talk) 17:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Good call. It always annoys me a bit when formerly up-to-date information like that is left in an article. Also: The history section in this article is interesting but a bit short. A longer text should perhaps be broken out to an article of its own. Skogsvandraren (talk) 05:58, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Switzerland is still a tourist haven

It says here, in the section on Switzerland, that "[i]n the late 19th and early 20th Century, Switzerland was a popular place for winter vacations". I think it still is.

I understand that the person who wrote this section wanted to say something about how it was at the time, but still, it gives the impression that Switzerland would not be popular for winter sport tourists at present, when in fact it is (even if they may not play bandy as much any more). I think the sentence ought to be re-phrased. Elliot Wing (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I see your point, but how do you want to rephrase it? You know you can do it youself. I will consider the phrasing myself too, I think. (If I remember to do it.) Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I replaced "was" with "had become". I hope this removes the risk, the text might be interpreted as meaning Switzerland is not a popular winter sport destination anymore in our time. What do you think? I also rewrote a passage which sounded a bit too subjective in its view ("no wonder"). There is always room for improvements at Wikipedia, it seems! :-) Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:23, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Professionalism

Bandy is played professionally in Russia and Sweden but I wonder if it will ever reach the same popularity in other countries. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 17:09, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

What about it? How does that affect how this article should be designed? Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't. I'm sorry, I must just have written down some thoughts about the sport I had, which this talk page of course really isn't the place for. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 11:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Even if your post seems a little like a personal reflection rather than some idea about how to edit Wikipedia, I think it is all right to raise the question on professionalism of a sport. This question can be valid for how the article should be developed and also for the relevance of other articles regarding the subject. Should amateur clubs have their own articles, or should only professional clubs have them? Professional or amateur tournaments and leagues? There may be interesting lines to draw regarding what to include in the encyclopedia, and professionalism in a sport is a key element to take in consideration, even if it is far from the only one. Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

"Hockey on the ice"

Hockey on ice is up for discussion, see the RfD. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 04:13, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm just curious... is this the IP number for User:Tavix? Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 13:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't ever use my IP. 70.51 is actually an RFD regular. I don't know why he's never bothered to get an account, but that's a different story... -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, I see. I just figured it could be, since you were the one taking up the discussion at RfD but the IP number was the one who posted a note about it here. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 14:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Now this discussion is over. The redirect is still to bandy but is not working. It seems, this is because someone has written a statement there about the usefulness of the redirect. This does not seem so good, especially since it seems to be someone's own subjective view. Shouldn't it be removed? Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

By the way, I realised when testing, the redirect does work when written in the search field. (Isn't that strange?) So it's just when it is written out in text it is not working. I hope noone uses it in an article then. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Bandy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://2017almaty.com/en/sports-venues.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.internationalbandy.com/viewNavMenu.do?menuID=26
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.internationalbandy.com/viewNavMenu.do?menuID=124
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140116134313/http://www.ndparking.com/serve.php?lid=500843&dn=nrbb.nl&fn=domainpal to http://www.ndparking.com/serve.php?lid=500843&dn=nrbb.nl&fn=domainpal

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I know nothing about things like this, Cyberbot II. How is it checked and why should it be checked? Isn't the bot good enough to make proper links? Is there any guide somewhere on how to check things like this? I would want to help, but how do I go about to do it? Skogsvandraren (talk) 20:23, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Start

When does the bandy season start? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:212:9528:C0A0:AB3D:265D:376E (talk) 20:26, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

It depends on the country, but usually in mid autumn. Skogsvandraren (talk) 20:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

In Sweden, the Swedish Cup is finished this weekend and then the regular league play will commence. Skogsvandraren (talk) 20:34, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Sponsorship

Sponsors are important in modern sports. It would be interesting with a section about sponsors in bandy. Skogsvandraren (talk) 20:48, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

No, no, please don't. Not here. This is Wikipedia. 1Sozi (talk) 21:54, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? Why don't you want it? Why wouldn't it fit Wikipedia? Skogsvandraren (talk) 22:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is non-commercialized and should stay that way. I see no reason for bringing up information about capitalists messing around with sports, which should be an free endeavour, not commercialized. Wikipedia also. Wikipedia is non-commercialized and should stay so and not take in informercials about commercialized sponsors making the sport into a business for their own only good. It is of no interest and importance and has not place in Wikipedia. 1Sozi (talk) 22:09, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Wow, you are making it a political issue. That is not what I was thinking. Not at all.

It is a fact, that sponsors are paying for much of the costs of professional sports clubs and players. National teams and governing bodies also have sponsors. Modern professional sports wouldn't survive without it. Writing about this does not in any way compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. There is information about sponsorship deals in many sports articles at Wikipedia and I think there should be some information about sponsors in bandy too. I just hope someone knows enough about it to write an interesting section in this article. That's why I asked for it here. Skogsvandraren (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• If it is relevant, and properly reported on in-depth in reliable sources, sure. Drmies (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

  What Drmies said. Wikipedia isn't here to "right great wrongs" but to neutrally document the world. The inclusion of sponsorship in sport these days is perhaps regrettable—but also a practical requirement for the considerable expenses of large-scale sporting contests. Sports like Formula 1 probably would not be possible without the huge amount of money used to build the cars, pay for the considerable engineering, global travel and so on. If there are sources, cover the role of sponsors. But covering the role of sponsors does not mean an endorsement of those sponsors. It isn't a choice between not mentioning sponsors at all and Wikipedia becoming a place for "informercials". —Tom Morris (talk) 13:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

  • • Thirded. Mentioning that teams and leagues are sponsored (and saying who those sponsors are) is factual and neutral (as long as it keeps to the facts). Intentionally omitting it in a (quixotic) campaign is the true POV pushing here. It cannot be allowed. oknazevad (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
      • Fourthed. Of course sponsorships can be over-covered in some cases, but team and stadium sposorships are absolutely something readers would likely be interested in. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, bandy is from the 17th Century

I quote from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/bandy

BRITISH & WORLD ENGLISHBANDY

There are 3 main definitions of bandy in English:123 bandy 3 See definition in Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary Line breaks: bandy Pronunciation: /ˈbandi/ noun

[MASS NOUN] 1A game similar to field hockey or ice hockey, played with a ball and large curved sticks. 1.1 [COUNT NOUN] (plural bandies) The curved stick used in the game of bandy. Origin

Late 17th century: perhaps from bandy2.

Definition of bandy in: US English dictionary English synonyms US English synonyms

SHARE THIS ENTRY

Shouldn't this be reflected in the history section of this article? Now it says that bandy was invented in the 19th Century. The present text also implied an older heritage, but this is not developed upon in the text. I think this is important and a more qualified source is hard to imagine. Bandy Hoppsan]century. er talk:Bandy Hoppsan|talk) 18:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I think this is reflected in the article. Your dictionary quote does not say much more than that the word was used for a sport in the 17th century, and this is what the article says already. It is a good source, but the knformation kn the article is also sourced. A language dictionary does not say much about the game as such and how it was played. So your source is good, but does not add to the information already present in the article, as far as I can see. Boot Blues (talk) 08:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Boot Blues. The source is from a dictionary, it only says how old the word is, it says nothing about the sport as such. This information is already covered in the article. Modern bandy, with common rules, started in the late 19th Century (just like many other sports). Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

yess, modern bandy is from the late nineteenth century. the word has certainly Bern used before organised bandy begun to be played, bit this döds not in any way mean that bandy in its organised modern rules form is older than that. just like football. people havet Bern playing with balls for centuries but Möre as a passtime than as a real, regulated sport in the way we see it today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.245.194 (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2016‎ (UTC)

Top importance

Of course the main article about a main sport should be considerd top importance. I think so. Don't you agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:54FE:5158:8BA1:BCA2:2855 (talk) 07:04, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

When comparing to other articles in that category, I see nothing wrong with this reassesment. We are all allowed to have our opinions and as long as they're not too far out there, you are of course allowed to do a change of this kind. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Maybe this question should better be discussed at the project's talk page? Now I don't think this change is controversial, but for a discussion about principles it might have been better to do it there. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

However, now it has been changed from "top importance" to "high importance" by User:CUA 27 without any previous debate as far as I can see. I cannot decide wether I think it should be "high importance" or "top importance", but I do think it would have been better to raise the question for debate like User:2A00:801:210:54FE:5158:8BA1:BCA2:2855 did, instead of just changing it. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 01:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Bandy appears to be popular in about five countries. Top importance seems more appropriate for sports and sports competition with broader appeal. CUA 27 (talk) 21:43, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. There are more people playing bandy than curling for instance, and curling has been considered top-important, but curling is played in more countries and is an Olympic sport, a fact which always makes information about a sport more sought after since the Olympic games are followed by such a huge TV audience around the world. I think it is not certain what facts makes one sport more important than the other, but I accept your view. Mostly because I don't think there is any point in changing the assessment back and forth. Skogsvandraren (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

While there is some merit to these arguments, I have given it some thought too and when comparing it with the other sport articles in the top and high importance categories, I am of the opinion bandy should be considered top importance. This article clearly fits better there. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 21:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm curious — which top importance and high importance sports are you comparing to? CUA 27 (talk) 05:46, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

I am comparing to all of the articles in both of those two categories. I find bandy fits better in the 'top' category than in the 'high' category. In the latter, there are also articles about some persons and about some events, while main articles about a sport are mostly found in the former. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Did you see any articles discussing a sport with limited geographical popularity (eg, popular in fewer than 10 countries) that were rated top importance? If so, which ones? CUA 27 (talk) 03:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Is that the only criterium you think should matter, the geographical importance? You could compare bandy with American football, which is very popular in the United States but not in other countries even if it is spread around the world. American football is regarded as top important. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 07:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

WP:SPORTS

I added some proposed generally applicable importance criteria at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sports#Importance. I hope you take a look, and make any edits you think appropriate, or start any broader discussions of importance on the talk page there. CUA 27 (talk) 03:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Nice, I'll take a look at it. There really should be more people weighing in on this discussion. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 07:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Bandy is the second biggest winter sport, not just second biggest winter team sport

According to sources referenced by footnotes and links in the lead of this article, bandy is the second biggest winter sport in the world, when the number of participating athletes are counted. User:Ryecatcher773 changed this to say second biggest winter team sport, but that is not what the sources say. The sources say second biggest winter sport, period.

You may of course discuss how to compare team sports to individual sports. There are many, many people who are skiing in their free time. However, most of them are not competing. They just do it for recreation. So you can't count them when considering how many people are participating in down-hill or cross-country skiing as a sport, i.e. a competitive sport. It's like if you are out on your own on the ice, skating and playing with a ball – you are not playing bandy when doing so. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 10:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

The first of the two cited sources is currently '404' (i.e. it is 'not found' and was apparently in Swedish regardless) and the second source is flawed in its statistical application of 'second most participated' as the commenters on the source point out... not to mention, the sentence in question (found in the lead of this article) makes no distinction between competitive/organized/professional sports and amateur/leisure pursuits -- who, regardless of lack of professional/collegiate status are no less participants in any sport. It simply says 'sport'. And there are more skiers in the world than people who play bandy. Make the distinction or you're trying dispute the indisputable. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 06:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

You are interpreting this wrong. The fact that a source is not available doesn't make it less reliable as such, nor the fact that it is in another language. I can read Swedish (it's my first language) and I know what it said. You can't just invent that it was talking about team sports when in fact it was not. Also, both the sources and the text in this article's lead is about athletes, i.e. active, competing sportspeople. That does not include recreational sporting people, whether they are skiing, playing bandy or doing something else. I will undo your change. If you want to uphold the text you are advocating, you should reference a reliable source supporting your opinion. Comments on a web page is not a reliable source. Dammråtta (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I also would like to add, that the phrase "[b]ased on the number of participating athletes..." clearly states that this is one way of counting. That was the way it was counted in the source. There may be other ways of counting, in other sources, but then those sources must be presented. You should not compromise the given source by adding words which are not supported by the source. Dammråtta (talk) 22:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bandy. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.internationalbandy.com/viewNavMenu.do?menuID=45

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:32, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

A!

I REALLY LIKE THAT WIKIPEDIA HAS INFORMATKON IN ENGLISH ABOUT BANDY. ITS SO COOL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.245.246 (talk) 15:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, caps look. Should I change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.245.246 (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

What links are ok to have from this page?

Would it be ok to add a link to for instance the this page on scores in games → http://www.flashscore.com/bandy/ ?

Is it ok to add links to pages about bandy which are written in Swedish language or should they all be in English? The latter could be a problem since there are so few serious pages about bandy in English even if there ought to be more. Röd Boll (talk) 07:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

No, it is formally quite all right to link to pages in other languages, even if it is usually better if you can find sources in English for the English language Wikipedia. Dammråtta (talk) 21:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Culture around

There is a lot of culture around bandy, it beong mentioned in pop songs and other cultural expressions. Wouldn't it be fitting to write something about it here? In this monography avbout bandy. Bandy has spurred a lot of music and other culture. i think iy should be writtenn abpout here! So why don't you? Isn't it a good idea, isnt it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.255.40 (talk) 18:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

This should be done. It is just so. Just dö it liksom just do it. Also I kind of think there is a lot moorre to br written about this sport. There is a lots of things and facts missing so to say. Shoulf be written in hwre just be written . I love you. But you got to dö this. It is so things that should be done IF you knoe what I medan. This is a gooood site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.243.68 (talk) 20:30, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Edum edum edum e nothings hapeni g here. But it is fine anyway for I like it as it is as it of it of you know couldd be better anyway. It's good good. O okej line it. Now. I like bandy and want this article about to be as good as possible. Bandy is so much more than the sport. It's everything around the games too. The culture among the spectators,the supporter fans. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:801:211:e252::1 at 21:30, 2 July 2016‎ (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Bandy. 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/20100129095906/http://www.fuzilogik.com:80/index.php/Bandy/Bandy-Glossary.html to http://www.fuzilogik.com/index.php/Bandy/Bandy-Glossary.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016213857/http://www.worldbandy.com/members.asp?pageID=11 to http://www.worldbandy.com/members.asp?pageID=11
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/Colosseum/Track/2049/English/Buryfen.gif
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222012600/http://www.bandynet.ru/node/6643 to http://www.bandynet.ru/node/6643
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dn.se/sport/festligt-och-fullsatt-pa-stora-bandydagen-1.231109
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/bandytips/English/Bandyhistory.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Top links, hat note

Who removed the hat notes and links from this article and why? They are relevant. Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Still no answer for this question here. How hard can it be to explain your reasoning? This is not nice. Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

@Sportsfan 1234 (talk · contribs), I have asked you on your talk page to come here and give an answer. Don't you feel a responsibility to do so? Should I revert it myself without waiting for your explanation any more? Skogsvandraren (talk) 06:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I restored this now, together with another text section which Sportsfan 1234 (talk · contribs) also removed without explaining why. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 12:06, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Too bad consensus did not go this way, but you just have to accept it sometimes. It didn'nt end that bad after all, I can see the reason in the descission made. Skogsvandraren (talk) 09:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hockey on the ice

Do we really need to take this discussion again? "Hockey on the ice" is an old name of bandy, it does not mean ice hockey. It fell out of use in favour of bandy, because the term led to confusion with ice hockey, but this does not mean that hockey on the ice has ever been an official name for the sport of ice hockey. It has, however, officially been used for the sport now more often called bandy. Ice hockey is of course a form of hockey played on ice, but this does not mean that ice hockey has ever had the name hockey on the ice. Bandy is, by all standards and terms, also a form of hockey and also played on ice. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

For anyone's information, the term was discussed pretty thoroughly in September last year. The discussion is saved at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 September 16#Hockey on the ice and should preferably be read before you give any opinion on the matter. Please note, that the result was no consensus, which led to the result that the redirects were left pointing to bandy as they had been before. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:19, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

There's a new talking going on now at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_May_22#Hockey_on_the_ice. I don't know why it has been taken up again and why it was not noted here by the person nominating it. Röd Boll (talk) 07:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it seems Sportsfan 1234 did that, instead of discussing her/his edits here on this here talk page. Well, that's at least better than just keeping on editing without discussing at all, gotta give her/him that. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:37, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

The discussion is over now, it seems. I don't know why there was no notice about the end given here. Anyway, the links hockey on the ice and hockey on ice is now redirected to hockey#Subtypes, which perhaps is just as well, even if I haven't seen any source which shows that these terms actually were used for ice hockey or any other form of hockey in older times. I'll accept it. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 15:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

It is a bit strange, I think, that neither the person starting the discussion on redirecting the redirection pages (User:Sportsfan 1234) nor the person ending the discussion (User:BDD), made any note about it what so ever on this page. I don't know if they should have done that according to Wikipedia rules, but I think it would have been polite to do so, especially since the discussion was already going on here before the redirection discussion was started. Dammråtta (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

It is pretty normal for redirect discussions not to be notified on the target page, only on the actual redirect. -DJSasso (talk) 19:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Is that so and is it a good thing User:Djsasso¿ Even if there's an ongoing debate about it on the target page? I don't know, I'm just asking... ie ? :^) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:55EF:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:38, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I might be missing the section but I don't see a section on this page talking about the redirect. -DJSasso (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

This section? You are writing in this section, which is about it (the ridirect) and the term hockey on the ice (the redirected term). The section immediately before is also about it. Röd Boll (talk) 12:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

@DJSasso, I started this section and before that User:Skogsvandraren started the Talk:Bandy#Top links, hat note section above obviously to invite User:Sportsfan 1234 to talk about the changes User:Sportsfan 1234 did, since they were about removing the hat links to this page connected to the redirected terms. I agreed totally with what User:Skogsvandraren wrote. User:Sportsfan 1234 for some reason, unbeknownst to me, choose not to explain or discuss what he had done, so it was restored by me. Then I started this section about the same question. At the same time, well knowing about my asking him to discuss here but obviously ignoring this, User:Sportsfan 1234 started the new debate on the redirect (even if this had been discussed before, less than a year ago). The new redirect discussion is noted here, in this very section. The redirect as such has no section on this talk page, but the term which is redirected has this abd the one immediately before it. If you look in the archive page for this talk page, you will find some notes about last year's discussion too. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Right but neither of them were really about the redirect. I get that it is a related discussion, but they are not talking about the redirect. That being said, if they were about the redirect, then that would indicate you were aware of the situation and heading to a forum to get outside views would also be a typical and normal action. -DJSasso (talk) 11:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Maybe so, but first you usually try to solve a question at the talk page of the article where there is a difference of opinions. In this case, one user has been invited to take part in a discussion here about a certain term but just hasn't cared to join it and in stead gone on to start a discussion about a very related topic (the redirect of the said term), where there had been a discussion about exactly the same thing less than a year ago. It may not go against any formal rules or regular Wikipedia practice, but I find it presumptuous and rude. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 01:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Snowsuit Wearer, but I suppose there isn't much one can do about it. If Sportsfan 1234 don't want to talk about it, Sportsfan 1234 is not going to talk about it. There's nothing much anyone can do about it. *sigh* Skogsvandraren (talk) 22:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, the result of the discussion weren't that bad. I can live with it. And Sportsfan 1234 did not get it the way he wanted, which also pleases me a little bit. Skogsvandraren (talk) 22:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I still kind of wonder, why Sportsfan 1234 didn't want to take the discussion here. Skogsvandraren (talk) 09:56, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Biographical articles for professional bandy players

The currently played 2016 Bandy World Championship got me thinking. There need to be more articles on professional bandy players. Even if not all the players in the world championship are professional athletes, some of them are, especially those from Russia, Sweden, Kazakhstan and Finland, as far as I know. There should be articles written about them. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 00:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

that is a good idea, but where do we find information? Is the information on club pages a good enough source or does one need third party sources like articles in newspapers and magazines? Do they have to be in English or is it all right to use Swedish language texts? I don't know if I should look for something before I know where to look... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.241.81 (talk) 16:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I have added a few biographical articles on Swedish bandy players who played in this year's World Championship, collecting information from the Swedish Wikipedia. It is easy for me, since Swedish is my first language. I just translate to English. I hope other people can do the same for players from their home countries. I don't know Russian, so I cannot write very easily on Russian bandy players. Dammråtta (talk) 12:28, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Maybe I can write some. Ie :^) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:55EF:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:42, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Is this article talk page really the right place to discuss the creation of other articles, like these articles on people? This kind of discussion is better to have at the talk page of a wikipedia project, isn't it? This talk page is to discuss the article about bandy, and while it is the main article on the subject, this isn't the place for general discussion on Wikipedia's all articles on the subject. Keep those discussions at the project talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.255.20 (talk) 06:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

While you do have a point, there is no WikiProject for bandy. Not enough people are interested in it, so this talk page has sometimes come to fill the void. Of course, a post might be posted at WikiProject Sport, but I am not sure it would give a better result in people raising up to the suggested task. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Name of the sport?

I ALWAYS thought it was bandie. I also didn't know it was being played professionally, but here I learn that it is in Sweden, Scandinavia and Russia.

Shouln't the page be moved to bandie? I still think that is the more commonly used name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.251.64.88 (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

No, it is bandy. It is always called bandy in Sweden and most other countries. The spelling with -ie is almost never used, even if I think I have seen it sometime in circumstances more connected with recreational sports not really following the usual bandy rules. The international governing authority of bandy has the spelling with a y in its name and it is used almost everywhere else too, even in other languages. Röd Boll (talk) 07:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

This wasn't really me asking, but a friend of mine who borrowed my computer for a while. I know it's spelled bandy and I think he knows too, but we came to discuss this and he wanted to check Wikipedia and apparently asked a question about it here. Bandy is not very common in his home country. Thank you. /83.251.64.88 (talk) 08:26, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I didn't know much about bandy either, some years ago. However, I have learned more and more over the years, and the more I learn, the more I want to learn. It is a fascinating sport. I enjoy it and I recommend it to anyone. It is fast paced, dramatic, genuine and in a way what sport was all about once, i.e. fair playing games and having fun. I can also understand somewhat of the feeling of surprise and the want to ask. I sometimes come across information about sports which I have hardly ever heard anything about because they are not played in my parts of the world, but still, they might be interesting and it may be that the little you have heard about the sport in question might be proven wrong. Like how the name of the sport is spelled. But we are all here because we want to learn more, aren't we? I find it nice to be able to help, when people ask questions like this, even though the answer had already been given now. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:00, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I have seen it spelled bandie or bandi, but only on very rare occations, like once or twice per version. When I have seen it, it has been in passing remarks by people who probably don't know that much about the sport. Skogsvandraren (talk) 10:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

"Bandie" is a redirect to bandy as it is. Bandi is a disambiguation page. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

The bandy stick, which is bent, or bandied, was previously in it self also called a bandy, so thinking about it, calling a bandy stick a bandy stick is calling it a bandy bandy! Silly, isn't it? :-) Bandy Blues (talk) 21:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

About the authenticity of the 1913 European Bandy Championships

A post has been made at Talk:1913 European Bandy Championships about whether the 1913 European Bandy Championships really happened, refering to this page: [2]. I don't know what to think. Who are the "prominent hockey historians" who are said to have been researching the matter? Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 20:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It does not sound serious at all, it is written at a wiki which is less serious than Wikipedia (even counting all the people who question the seriousness of Wikipedia too) and it is written in a style like if it was someone who just as well could have made this up. I mean the question about the authenticity. I think the person writing has just made these "prominent hockey historians" up. Otherwise, he would have named them and provided a source to the book or magazine where they would have presented their research and its lack of positive results. It's just not serious. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Bandy in England

The information about bandy in England was recently amended with more information. This information was added by User:Old PN Editor Lyn, but Old PN Editor Lyn added no sources for the information. Is there any?

Also, the information was amended to say the national governing body in England was just started, but according to the old information which Old PN Editor Lyn replaced, and which was sourced, there already was a national federation for bandy in England since some years back. If this has restarted, that's fine, but is it really a new federation in England since recently? Does anyone know? Can anyone add good sources? Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

It is importante to have verifiable sources. In Wikipedia, verifiability means that other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. – This principle was previously expressed on this policy page as "the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth." See the essay, WP:Verifiability, not truth. – When reliable sources disagree, maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight.

All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Please immediately remove contentious material about living people that is unsourced or poorly sourced.

For how to write citations, see citing sources. Verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.

Even when information is cited to reliable sources, you must present it with a neutral point of view (NPOV). All articles must adhere to NPOV, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. If there is disagreement between sources, use in-text attribution: "John Smith argues that X, while Paul Jones maintains that Y," followed by an inline citation. Sources themselves do not need to maintain a neutral point of view. Indeed, many reliable sources are not neutral. Our job as editors is simply to summarize what the reliable sources say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1 (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for giving us this text, 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1! I think it is taken from some of Wikipedia's guideline pages, isn't it? Even so, it is of course all right to have it here too, now when the question of verifiability came up. We ought to have some source added regarding the new English federation. I hope there'll be some added soon. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Name of the English federation

Please also see and give your view on what I wrote at Talk:Bandy Federation of England#Correct name. It seems the English national federation may have changed names – or has it been replaced by a new federation with a slightly different name? (If it is a totally new federation, I wonder if it is yet a member of the Federation of International Bandy.) Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Anyway, I moved the article on the English federation to England Bandy Federation now. This is obviously the present name of the federation, so there is no need to keep the old name as the article head line, even if we still would need some more sources as to the development of bandy in England and the name change of the federation there. If anyone has information, but finds it hard to add it to Wikipedia because of the wiki coding which maybe could look strange, I am more than willing to help. Just contact me, either here or at my talk page! I want the information to be up to date and presented nicely. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games?

Does anyone know if there will be any bandy at the Sapporo games in 2017? Sources I can find are not clear on this and I'd like to add information about it, wether they will play bandy or not. Skogsvandraren (talk) 23:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I suppose you have already read the answer at Talk:2017 Asian Winter Games#Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games – there won't be any bandy tournament at the 2017 games, so there will be no follow up from the last games held in 2011. Bandy is a sport which probably has too few followers in the host country Japan, even if Japan is now regulary taking part in the World Championships. Röd Boll (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's sad. Bandy is such a nice sport and if it was played at the Asian Winter Games it would certainly grow a fanbase it never had before. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 22:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

It would be interesting to know, why it has been taken from the programme, but a discussion about sources for that should preferably be held at the talk page of the Games, i.e. at Talk:2017 Asian Winter Games#Bandy at the 2017 Asian Winter Games. I asked the same question there. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

National leagues and competitions

The sections about bandy in different countries should have more information about the cups and series in the different countries. At least some basic information is essential to know how the sport is played and followed by audiences in different places. This describes how popular it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.251.82.102 (talk) 20:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to develop the text in this article and write something about the subject of national competitions, if you have good sources. I think it might be a good idea. Skogsvandraren (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree. This would be a very welcome addition. There should be some sort of club tournaments in most countries wherUkrains played, at least in the countries where they have a national bandy team, I think. Shouldn't it? However, I don't know where to find good sources. As bandy is a very small sport in many countries, in many countries it is unfortunately not covered in mainstream sports media. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 12:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, as far as my experience goes, it is very hard to find information about local bandy games in different countries except for in Sweden, Finland, and Russia and to some extent Norway. It is such a niche sport in other countries that there is virtually no independent sources, like sports news sites, writing about the sport. This is a pity, of course. At least, I think so. :-) Dammråtta (talk) 21:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

All national competitions, tournaments, cups and leagues should have their own articles, distinct from this one. However, a link to each top tier national league could be fitting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.255.20 (talk) 06:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

In how many countries do they play bandy at a competitive level with leagues and such? Is it more than a handful? Is it anyone besides Scandinavia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:218:C10F:6C33:BE48:4C00:4280 (talk) 18:45, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, there is, there are competititions in a lot of countries. Off the top of my head, I know there are national leagues or similar tournaments in Sweden, Finland, Norway (that's Scandinavia), and Russia, Belarus, the Ukraine, Kazhakhstan, and furthermore the United States of America and Canada, and, I think, the Netherlands and Germany, perhaps also in China, Mongolia and Japan. It's not professionally played in all those countries, but still, it is regulary played in all the mentioned countries and maybe, probably, more countries than that. So you see, it is a wide spread sport in the world. Bandy Blues (talk) 21:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I think, the least you should have for all the countries where it is played, is, or should be, a list of the national champions for every year. I think in most countires where bandy is played, there is a national championship. Teams winning the national championship should have their own articles and be linked from this page under the section of their country as long as they are reigning champions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:210:C893:0:0:0:1 (talk) 07:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The popularity of bandy

Bandy is the second most popular winter sport in the world. That seems to be a fact. Only ice hockey is more popular, and ice hockey is not even close to being rivaled by any other winter sport.

I have just added another source to the statement that bandy is the second most popular winter sport over all. It is a very interesting claim. This source is now the Federation of International Bandy itself, and even if the FIB of course is eager to market their own sport like this, I don't think this is a source which cannot be relied on. I think FIB is among the best sources one can think of in this regard. So I added it. The link to the text as such is this: http://www.worldbandy.com/newspost_7640.html , which I added as a source. For some reason, there was no date given in the source text itself, but there was a date on the page on which where I found the link to the text, namely this one here: http://www.worldbandy.com/news_archive.html , as it can be read right now. I don't know if I should add that page to to the referenced source. Maybe I should, because dates are important.

It is interesting to note, that the diagramme at the page is not linear but exponential. This is probably done (I think) so that the bar for ice hockey in the bar chart should not get away way overhead of all the other bars. Still, you can see that bandy has thousands of more people participating in it than all the other winter sports – except for ice hockey, that is, of course! Still, the others have a presence in the Olympic Games whereas bandy does not. I find it interesting to see if the International Olympic Committee will take in these numbers and understand that adding bandy to the Winter Olympic Games would only benefit the Games. It would be beneficial for both the Olympics and for bandy and probably for all the other winter sports already at the Olympics too, because the different Olympic sports always attracts spectators to each other when the Olympic Games are going on. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 11:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The headline of that article says that bandy is destined for the Olympics. As long as I have followed the inner politics of the bandy world, the Federation of International Bandy and the national federations in Russia, Sweden, and other countries, they have always been talking about the Olympics and how the sport will be in the Olympics the next time the winter games is on. Sorry, I don't really buy it. As much as I would want it too, because I do think bandy would fit well and nicely in the winter games of the Olympics, I still don't think it is going to happen. It's just talk and talk, while other, younger sports get picked up at the Olympic agenda - such as snowboard and halfpipe and other strange gymnastics. Bandy still isn't there.

I think the problem is the financial backing. Let's face it. The money decides, and the money is in America, or more specifically the American television broadcasting industry and the companies backing it by the payment of advertising spots. Bandy is not a big sport in the United States, and so the television networks are not interested in broadcasting bandy from the Olympics or from any other event either. On the contrary. Bandy would compete with ice hockey, which is the very best television sport for the North Americans. While downhill skiing and figure skating may be shown when there is no ice hockey on, they think bandy would only disturb the focus on the ice hockey tournament and they think it wouldn't give any sponsor money to the television networks. That's how I think they are reasoning.

I'd like to be wrong, but I think I am not. Money is what is deciding it in the end and the Russians and the Swedes are not powerful enough to persuade the Americans to show an Olympic bandy competition just for the value of the sport it is. Örtstedt (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

This talk page is not here for discussing the possibility of Bandy becoming an Olympic sport or not, is it? I think you should write that some where else, Örtstedt ! The talk page is for discussing the page it is attached to, which is Bandy in this case. Anyway, I am not complaining, I'm just saying. I mainly write because I want to ask Bandy Hoppsan about his post. Bandy Hoppsan writes about something called 'linear' and 'exponential' for a diagramme. What does that mean? To understand his message about the statistics he bases his edit to the Bandy text on, this seems to be a bit crusial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:218:7D8B:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello 2A00:801:218:7D8B:0:0:0:1! (I suppose you might be the same as 2A00:801:210:86CB:0:0:0:1 above. It doesn't matter, though.) A linear function is a function or row, where the constants are within equal length from eachother. An exponential function, is when the distance is ever increasing. If you look at the vertical graph in the link, you see that it says 1, 10, 100, 1000 etc., which means that the distance between every point is ever increasing on this vertical. This is, in this case, obviously done so that it should be easier to read the lower bars of the graph. If the vertical had had a linear scale, 100, 200, 300, 400, etc., the actual difference between more than 1 500 000 000 for ice hockey and just over 500 for luge would make the bar for the latter very hard to see as it would be so small in comparission, or else the bar for ice hockey would be breaking the upper edge of the picture... You see, while bandy has a number which is about 3.5 times the number for alpine skiing, it isn't 3.5 times higher, just because the exponential grades on the vertical line let you see the difference easily anyway and still taking into consideration the vast differences in numbers. It's actually pretty clever and beautiful, I think. I hope you understand my explanation, because I am not a maths teacher and don't know if I can explain things like this so that an audience can understand it. I hope I can. Please ask me again, if it is still unclear. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Örtstedt. You raise interesting questions, but I think I will not follow your example and write what I think on the subject. It would take up to much space. :-) Of course you can speculate about who and what makes the decisions about what sports are to be added to the Olympic Games programme and about what information, economic interests and opinions this may be based upon, but it is not really for us to discuss it here. I added the source merely for the statistics which it presents. Even if the article is a pamphlet about how bandy should be included in the Winter Olympics, it also has these numbers for the reader, which I think are interesting and which you must say are reliable as a source for what is now said in the article about the sport's popularity. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, of course, you do have a point. I agree with you in a way. This talk page is really not the place to have a debate on the subject on wether bandy should or should not be included in the Winter Olympics or not. Still, it is a question which is to some extent covered in the article and therefore it may still be reasonable and valid to at least discuss the discussion here. If we can find good sources, like you have done, it must be quite all right to use them as sources to add information to the article about this on-going debate which is out there in the bandy community and in the winter sport societies and the sports world at large. And as long as it is so, which I think it is, I also think it may be fine to at least discuss the discussion here on this talk page, to come to common conclussions among the Wikipedia writers about what to add and what not to add &ndasch; and how to add it – to the article bandy. This is after all what a talk page is and should be for. Then, of course, the line can be fine and a bit hard to draw between the discussion about the discussion, a meta discussion which thus should have its place here, and the discussion as such, which, as you say, should perhaps not really be had here. But if you do write about arguments being held and being put forward in the debate, it is very easily interpreted as if you are having these views yourself and putting them forward here to make a point and to be a part of the real debate in itself. Which is perhaps not the intent, but it is easily seen as such.

Still, the matter of economics I rise above is an important one and it is one which is really put forward in the real debate about the subject. Even if I do agree myself with this particular argument, I also admit that I should have been clearer with the fact that this is not just me talking, but it is me re-telling views and subject matters which some or rather quite many people have already stated in different fora before on this matter. Economics is always important. While a bandy rink, or rather an indoor bandy hall (which is what you would want nowadays for a major event, like for instance the Olympic Games), would be fine to build in Russia, Sweden, Finland or Norway, where bandy has a following all year long, in other countries it would perhaps be standing more or less unused later, or that is at least what the descission making men (because they are almost always men, not many women in those circumstances) in the top if the International Olympic Committee and the organizing committees and companies in potential future Winter Olympic host cities are thinking. Think about it: a slope used for downhill alpine skiing or a landscape used for cross-country skiing may just be there in the existing land forms. An ice hockey rink always draw crowds in thousands in Canada and winter sport interested parts of the United States. These men are not realizing, that with bandy becoming an Olympic sport, it would boost the interest even more for this sport in all the world and in North America too. Because it is a sport with the same potential tense and tactics as association football, which is the largest team sport in the world, and a speed in the game even greater than the speed in ice hockey, the most popular winter sport in the world (as we have already seen above, in the link posted by Bandy Hoppsan in the beginning of this thread). Economics and infrastructure is important – for bandy as well as for other sports.

/Örtstedt (talk) 01:29, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

By the way, here is the link to a group on Facebook called "We want Bandy to be a part of the Winter Olympics!", which is created for and promotes the idea that bandy should be included in the Olympic Games (the Winter Olympic Games, of course): https://www.facebook.com/bandyolympics/ . I forgot to add it. I was meaning to ask about it: I don't know if it is proper to link to a page like this in the article or if it would be seen as too politicial or something. What do you think? It is really not a source for something in itself, but on the other hand it could, I suppose, have texts and links posted in it which would be interesting to add here as a way of showing the debate and what support and reasons the proponants (and perhaps also the opposing side) might have on the subject.

/Örtstedt (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

A survey done in July 2015 by Sportbox, Russia's leading sports Internet portal, came to the concluession that bandy is 3rd most popular sport in Russia after ice hockey 1th and soccer 2nd with Biathlon 4th. So this is third over all, not only among winter sports. That is according to the link Órtstedt provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elliot Wing (talk • contribs) 10:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think there should be a link to this or any other Facebook groups from Wikipedia. A group there of course shows there are people having this opinion, but it is not very accurate to use the existence of a group like this to show that this opinion is put forward in the debate. You should rather link to debate texts in other media, like in newspapers and preferably written by people who might have some say in the matter. If you find something written on the matter in an editorial or some debate article written by some sports executive, I think this could be linked to in this article on bandy here at Wikipedia, but not just any grassroot initiative like a Facebook group. Anyone can start a Facebook group. Anyone can start a Facebook group about anything and invite all of his or her pals to make it look like a view held by many. With that said, of course, this group could perhaps be a place where you might find editorials or debate articles on the subject of bandy in the Olympics, because members of the group who might find articles like that would probably post links about it there in the group. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 08:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

As far as the financial issues go, which Örtstedt writes about here in a long and well-formulated text, I tend to agree. I just want to say this, so Örtstedt does not think I am ignoring his comments and points of view. There has been numerous examples of Olympic host cities, which after the end of the Games have had a hard time living up to maintaing the facilities. It doesn't matter how fine they are, if they cannot be filled with events and paying audiences in all the years after the Games. Building an arena must pay off.

The IOC actually is aware of this, and nowadays they wnat to have what is called a "legacy plan", which sorts out the prospective future for the host city and surrounding area after the Games have been held. In this plan, the city, together with the IOC (if I understand this correctly), makes a kind of budget to the time following the arrangement for the city, the areans built and the infrastructure, buildings and other parts of the city built for the Games held. I think this is good. You can read more about it at Winter Olympic Games#Host city legacy here at Wikipedia, and in the sources given there. I have also seen other sources for information like this.

However, when it comes to bandy, you can have it in the same arena as where you have long track speed skating. There has been speed skating at the Winter Olympics for every Winter Olympic Games since 1924, so it is not likely that this sport will be taken away from the Winter Olympic programme. An arena for speed skating needs to be about as big as is needed for an internationally meassured bandy rink, the form which would (or at least should) be used at the Winter Olympic Games when bandy is included. All you need is for the ice surface to cover all of the field and not just the skating track closest to where the audience sit. This is also what is done now in some of the new, full-sized skating arenas which are being built at the moment. So if you think about it, including bandy in the Winter Olympic Games would not demand a much higher investment than what already is done for any Winter Olympic Games. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Including bandy would also add another team sport to the Winter Olympic Games. There are just one team sport in the winter Olympics at present, and that is ice hockey (I don't really count curling, the "teams" in that sport are just four people). Adding bandy would benefit the games in this way. While the Summer Olympics have association football, basketball, field hockey, volleyball, and water polo, the Winter Games only have one real team sport. By adding bandy, this deficit could be bettered. So this is another reason for bandy to be added to the Olympics. I think the arguments for adding this sport to the Olympic programme is legio and plentyfjl and the reasons against is modtly just formalities which the International Olympic Committee could come around if it just wanted to. It would give the Winter Olympics a fine and old sport with great traditions, which really ought to have been part of the Winter Games from the start. That's my 5 cents... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.251.64.88 (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Association football is not football, it's soccer

The usual way of abbreiviatting association football is by calling it soccer, not football. When you say football without any further speccification in the English language, you mean American football, not Association football. This should be reflected in the lead. Do not change this back again @Sportsfan 1234 and @Bandy Hoppsan, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.243.104 (talk) 13:06, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Actually no. Football across the world is known as association football, not some game played by Americans called gridiron. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Sportsfan 1234 on this. Football is often used to mean association football and in this case, it is also clear from the context in this case, as in the sentence before it, association football is mentioned. So even if you happen to be from a part of the world where football usually means some other form of football than association football, it is obvious football in this case is association football. So let the text stand as it is: football. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 19:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

In British English is "Football" meant football played with the feet. We have no article for any specific kind of "Football". Just a general overview. When using British English the following syntax is to be used "Association Football|Football" which point to Football. When in doubts, can the following forms be used

• FA Football
• FIFA Football
• FIFA/FA Football

As the (English) FA made the modern rules for the sport (last FA-rule changes was the modern form of offside in 1927), from the first ever World Cup in 1930 has FIFA (outside the British Isles) and from approximately 1949 also there (with a few remaining differencies into the 1970's). The English FA has however always had a strong influence also later. For instance 3 points for a won game has its origin in England in the 1980's. Although that wasn't a rule of the game. But still. Also the red and yellow cards was invented by a FA-referee , who got the idea at a stop-light ! (FIFA adapted the card for the 1970 World Cup, players was sent off far earlier, but without the cards)

In clear North-American related articles can

• Soccer (or possibly)
• Soccer-football

be used.

Boeing720 (talk) 22:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It seems you make things over complicated, Boeing 720. As for me personally, I've never seen anybody using the term 'soccer-football' before. Isn't that a tautology? And FA football or FIFA football, no, you don't need those terms in an ongoing text. They might be used in some table for clarity if 'association football' as a term is found to be too long to fit in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.218.255.52 (talk) 07:00, 19 May 2017‎ (UTC)