Talk:CrossFit Games

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mgattoni. Peer reviewers: Bking22, Tbartlett16, Cassie909.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Question about the 20xx CrossFit Games Pages

I added a bunch of summaries to the 2008 CrossFit Games and 2009 CrossFit Games pages. Then I wondered if these pages are really necessary. They are interesting for the history of the competition but take out event descriptions and they will just be stubs that would probably all fit better in one page (such as this one) with a paragraph describing the changes made from year. 192.81.119.137 (talk) 22:17, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the current total amount of content would be better contained in a single page. My idea, after seeing the extensive 2014 CrossFit Games page, was that if there were stubs for each year, people might expand them with event descriptions, etc. The only years still lacking any event descriptions are '10, '11, '12, and '13. I suggest leaving them as separate pages for a while, and seeing if anyone fleshes them out. I might do some more along that line myself. Rracecarr (talk) 23:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

inappropriate external links

The info box at the top of the page indicates that there are inappropriate external links. I removed two "citations" associated with games winners that were merely links to press coverage of their winning. Are there other inappropriate external links or can that mention in the info box be removed? Arbalest Mike (talk) 01:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Other article status (info box notes)

I have no connection (or interest) in the subject other than as a WP article and I an trying to understand the box at the top of the page. Although a bit fluffy I don't see what exactly the issues are that resulted in the following notes. Are these things still an issue with the article?

• promotional content
• inappropriate external links (already handled by my edit?)
• neutral point of view

Is the listing of winners, prize money and number of participants not encyclopedic? Arbalest Mike (talk) 02:08, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Arbalest Mike:, I believe it is listed as an advert because all but two sources are from the subject's own website (possibly viewed as promotional). The two you removed were probably added to show that the games do also get third party press coverage and is therefore notable outside of the CrossFit community. I am no expert on how to sort it but it does currently look promotional without adding some third party coverage (such as ESPN or Sports Illustrated).

Thanks. Do you mean that the links I removed might be appropriate after all? I guess I won't challenge a rollback but wonder if I should do the rollback myself. Arbalest Mike (talk) 02:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

The ones you removed are OK, but weak (which is typical for local coverage of local athletes or teams in any sport). Mainstream articles are stronger and would be a better argument to remove the advert label. I took the inappropriate links as seconding the use of primary (listed as promotional) sources. Yosemiter (talk) 03:08, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review #1

The Lead Section I think is a great introduction, however there needs to be more citations. Much of the content has a lack of citation making it not as credible as the rest of the page. I think it sets up the rest of the page very well. The next section " History" I think could be organized better. It should incorporate the complete history of the games, meaning how the games started and even how Crossfit started/who started it. I think you have a lot of important facts in it but maybe not enough true history. I think the sections are organized well have a good balance of information. All of the references are appropriate. There a great neutral and informational tone to this article. I think the popularity section is really good because it shows the growth of the sport, but I think it could definitely be added on with more information on where it started to the most recent games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cassie909 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Name change Suggestion

Their Facebook Page is named The CrossFit Games (https://www.facebook.com/CrossFitGames/). Perhaps we should rename this article The CrossFit Games--Wyn.junior (talk) 19:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Strong Oppose WP:COMMONNAME applies here over any sort of WP:OFFICIALNAME. In typical usage, most sources do not say things like "Rich Froning, a The CrossFit Games athlete..." "CrossFit Games" gets 50,000+ G-News hits, of which only about 8,700 use "the CrossFit Games" (most without a capital "T" and none on the first page). It would also force piping links pretty much every time it used on Wikipedia. Yosemiter (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Strong oppose Not even the Crossfit Games uses the CrossFit Games as their name. See [1] where "the" is written in all lower case, which shows that they don't consider it part of their proper name. Sjö (talk) 05:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Unexplained abbreviation

What is SCMP?Kdammers (talk) 05:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)