Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Compulsory figures/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 29 March 2019 [1].

---

Compulsory figures

Nominator(s): Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:15, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

This article is about compulsory figures in figure skating, the now-defunct discipline from which the sport gets its name. I submitted it for FAC back in November 2018, but it stalled because it didn't get enough reviews. It was suggested that I wait until after the holidays to resubmit, which I've done, so it's my hope that It doesn't stall again. It has been through an image and source review. Thanks for any and all input. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:15, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Hawkeye7

I have read through this article, and I think it is of the required standard. I'm not sure why it failed to attract sufficient reviewers. My only problem with the article is the "Demise" section, lacks a bit of coherency. I needed to read Loosemore to understand it.

• I suggest moving the bit in the previous paragraph starting with "After 1968, figures began to be progressively devalued." into the "Demise" section as its first paragraph.

Done.

• The bit about "lack of public accountability" had me puzzled until I read Loosemore's article. All sports where the judging is subjective have problems with "dirty judging". (I presume figure skating has taken measures to mitigate this, like discarding the highest and lowest judges' scores.) The point is though that lack of public accountability stems from it not being televised, so the public could not judge. This should be added so the reader can follow the logic.

I believe that I've clarified the logic, as per your suggestion. Actually, figure skating attempted to do just as you state with the old 6.0 system, but it didn't work, as the judging scandal at the 2002 Olympics demonstrated. That's why they changed it to the new International Judging System, and there are still problems with bad judging.

There's an article on that. Who knew? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Yup, it was a turning point in the sport. I'd like to someday tackle it, since it was so important historically. My overarching goal is to tackle 6.0 system and ISU Judging System before the 2022 Olympics, so that people have a reliable place to learn about it, since the new system is so complicated and potentially confusing. I have a slew of other articles to tackle first, mostly to better acquaint myself, like articles about the different elements and individual competitions and figure skaters. It depends, of course, on my life and my level of RL busyness, but I'me having fun in the meantime.

Having fun is more important than anything else. From the statistics we've gathered on the Paralympic articles since 2012, it seems highly likely that 6.0 system and ISU Judging System will attract high numbers of page views - much higher than any athlete article - when Beijing rolls around. Partly because they will have an international readership, but mostly because people will turn to the Wikipedia when they don't understand what they're watching. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I think three years is a good target. Also on my target is some athletes' bios, first Tara Lipinski and Johnny Weir, since their articles are pathetic and as commentators, they're the faces of the sport these days. And Alysa Liu, whose article I created at the request of her friend, a fellow skater and WP editor. This last Olympics in Peongchang was the first time I watched the Paralympics, due to an involuntary period of unemployment. I loved it, especially the gold medal sled hockey game. I'm not a hockey fan at all, but it was one of the most exciting competitions I've ever seen. I admire those athletes so much, and I admire you for the work you've done for the articles. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• The specific examples that Loosemore gives would be well worth including.

I've struggled with this issue as I've worked on this article and other figure skating articles. Other writers cite other examples of the discrepancies between skaters doing well in the free skate and not well in figures and losing competitions due to the weight of figures in scores. I've found that the examples vary with the date of the articles written about them. For example, Loosemore and Kestnbaum cite Janet Lynn, but the L.A. Times article cites Debi Thomas. I'm sure older sources, which we don't have access to, cites other examples and other skaters. Remember, WP articles are a summary of the sources. For these reasons, I've hesitated using specific examples.

• "countries with an affluent middle class or government-supported training for athletes having more of a competitive advantage over less affluent and smaller countries with fewer ice rinks and resources". Well, yes, but...
  1. I'm willing to hazard a guess that the third world countries are not well-represented among the 31 voting NOCs.
  2. The implication is that the US dominated the sport, but I'm not seeing the evidence of that.
  3. The high (and rising) cost of training, equipment and competition is an endemic problem across many sports. I raised this issue with the IPC myself. (Part of the problem is that manufacturers of the equipment are frequently important sponsors.) All winter sports fall into the really expensive (and rarely played in most countries) category. But more importantly...
  4. I don't see how this helps. How do you practice figure skating without rinks?

     I'm not sure what you're asking from me, but I'll respond to your list items, anyway.

  5. Yes, third world countries aren't a strong voting block in the ISU, but it was the smaller countries that got figures removed. It took decades for them to band together and get the vote through.
  6. Loosemore states that North America dominated figure skating (the U.S. and Canada); Kestnbaum also includes Russia and Soviet-bloc countries. This article isn't about how individual skaters and countries did in compulsories; it's more of a general article about the topic.
  7. The IPC?

     Sorry, the International Paralympic Committee. The deployment of expensive equipment escalates the cost of competition, sometimes to the point of excluding poorer countries. It isn't the only obstacle though. Facilities like skating rinks, velodromes and swimming pools cost money to build and maintain. The Europeans like to peg qualification in sports to performance over a series of tournaments. Easy for them with so many countries nearby; prohibitively expensive for much of the rest of the world. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

     True-dat. Some skaters' solution is to move to another country to train. For example, most of the top ice dancers now live and train in Toronto, as do the skaters that Brian Orser trains. Heck, Nathan Chen facetimes with his coach while studying at Yale. But even that's expensive. Scott Hamilton was so poor, he had to depend on the support of philanthropists to fund his career, and Rudy Galindo's family sacrificed being able to buy a house to fund his career.

  8. The answer is you can't. Smaller and poorer countries have fewer rinks, so there are fewer opportunities to practice skills that take longer to master. Again, I'm not sure what you're asking me to clarify.
• I would include her point that once figures were dropped from the Olympic program, rinks cut back on the time they allocated to them. Which in turn would have made them difficult for athletes to practice.

Yes, right. Added a line to clarify.

• And the irony that the US, which decided that figure were too boring to televise, voted to retain them. Do you know the reason for this?

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Kestnbaum quotes Scott Hamilton, who said that the demise of figures could "kill the sport" (p. 87) because of the economic ramifications for coaches and for rinks. I suppose I could include it, and I will if you tell me to do so. However, I didn't include it because no other source states it in that way. And Hamilton was wrong, of course. (Personally, I think that the modern emphasis on multi-rotational jumps have replaced figures in the economics of figure skating. Learning complex jumps requires both coaching and rink time, which puts poorer athletes and countries at a disadvantage. But that's just the opinion of one well-informed non-skating fan.)

Hawkeye, thanks for the review and let me know what else you'd like me to do/change. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:59, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Support I am happy with these minor changes. I think this is great work. I note that source and image reviews were undertaken during the previous nomination. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again. Yes, the reviews were done before. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Image review - pass

All images are appropriately licences and have suitable captions and alt-captions. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Source review - pass

Going through the source reviewer's comments from last time I see no problems. Little has changed since they gave a pass. In particular, I agree with them re providing the page numbers for books in-text and, emphatically, how multiple refs are ordered. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Done as requested. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:45, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Laser brain

Reading through now, and will leave comments soon. --Laser brain (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Comments:

• "The circle was the basis of all figures, and increased in difficulty." I didn't follow the meaning here. Did you mean something like, "The circle was the basis of all figures, which increased in difficulty."? I'm also struggling with the use of past tense here. Even though they aren't used in competition, they still exist as a discipline, correct? So, "The circle is"?

I've struggled, as a non-skater, with explaining, describing, and summarizing the sources and concepts about figure skating in general. I think what "increased in difficulty" means is that variations of the shape of the circle becomes progressively more difficult. The lead, up to now, was the only place in this article that described circles and other shapes in that way; instead, the first section describes the increase in difficulty. I think the easiest way to deal with that, in the lead, is to remove the phrase, which I've done. I also changed some of the tenses as per your suggestion.

• "Compulsory figures are also called 'patch', which refers a reference to the patch of ice allocated to each skater to practice figures."

Changed.

• "demonstrating their mastery of control, balance, flow, and edge" Are you confident that readers will understand jargon like "edge" without definition or link?

No, so it's a good idea to provide a link; done. ;) The other items in that list are self-explanatory, I think, but please point out any other jargon that I've missed.

• "Each figure consisted of two or three circles, all tangent other than a brief interruption due to the change of feet, in their continuous tracing." I had trouble parsing this sentence. I'm unclear about the meaning of "in their continuous tracing".

Again, more non-skater difficulty. I also think that the source itself is unclear. I think the solution is to remove everything after tangent, which meant that I had to change the wording to: ""Each figure consisted of two or three tangent circles", since I think that the other information is elsewhere in the article.

• "Turns needed to be skated with a single clean edge up to and after the turn, but with no double tracings, no skids or scrapes, or any illegal edge change either before, during, or after a turn." Needs revision for parallel structure

Done.

This is an excellent history and worthy of Featured status, pending a bit of polish and clarity for the uninitiated. I made a few minor edits while reading. I look forward to supporting soon. --Laser brain (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Laser brain:, for the review, comments, and ce. They were very helpful and much appreciated. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Support - Looks great! --Laser brain (talk) 02:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Support from Aoba47

• Does the caption for the lead image require a period/full-stop since it is complete sentence/thought?

Fixed.

• For this sentence (were formerly a segment of the sport of figure skating, from which the sport derives its name), is the “of the sport” part necessary. I am just curious as I would imagine that most people know that figure skating is a sport and there is somewhat a repetition of “sport” in this part. Could it be cut down to just “were formerly a segment of figure skating,…)? Apologies in advance if this is obvious.

No, it's a valid point. There are actually people who doubt that figure skating is a sport, or at least the ice dance part. Those people are fools, for which I have two words to say in response: Nathan Chen! ;) I changed it as per your recommendation, except where it talks about figure skating as a sport, since like other sports, it can also be recreational.

• I have a rather nitpicky question about how numbers greater than ten are represented. Sometimes they are shown in numerals (i.e. for approximately the first fifty years of the existence of figure skating as a sport) while other cases use numbers instead (i.e. compulsory figures made up 60 percent of the total score at most competitions around the world). I have always been told in the past to keep this consistent with one particular pattern. I have noticed that the numbers are used primarily for percentages.

  The relevant guideline is MOS:NUMERAL. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

  Thank you. I am already aware of the guideline. I posted the above comment as it was something that I had been told about in past GANs and FACs. I do not personally care either way, but I just wanted to leave a note about it. Aoba47 (talk) 02:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Changed as per your recommendation. The only times it happened was when talking about the "first 50 years" of figure skating.

Wonderful work with the article. Once my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. Apologies for any silly questions or comments. I am extremely unfamiliar with figure skating, but living in Florida for a majority of life did not allow me to come in contact with it that often lol. Aoba47 (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Ah, thanks, I appreciate it. I eagerly anticipate your support. No, Florida is definitely not a hub of figure skating in the U.S., although I'm certain there are indoor ice rinks there. Myself, I grew up in Calif., which surprisingly, is where many skaters train. I just grew up watching it on TV, especially during the Olympics. Now, I watch it throughout the season and have even attended three U.S. Nationals, all of which were life-changing, seminal experiences for me. The World Championships start this week; you should check it out, especially when the above Nathan Chen skates. I love figure skating and I'm lovin' writing about it on WP. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:39, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for your comments and clarification. I greatly enjoyed reading through the article. I should definitely look up some indoor ice rinks. I used to know a girl in high school that practiced pretty seriously in a rink about an hour or two from my hometown. Ice skating was always my favorite part of the Olympics tbh. Surya Bonaly and Michelle Kwan are some of my personal favorites; I will definitely check out Nathan Chen in the future. I support this for promotion. If you have the time or interest, I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my current FAC. Do not feel pressured though; I always feel like a jerk for asking lol. Either way, I hope you are having a great week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 04:50, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Coord notes

FAC coordinators: Is there anything that I'm missing, or something I need to do that I've missed? Getting worried that this article will fail again... Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC) @FAC coordinators: Gog the Mild (talk) 11:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't think there's too much danger of that -- should be able to go through it this week. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 20:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Ian, and for your service to WP and FAC. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Very kind -- we try! Look I think we're about there but perhaps we could paraphrase a couple of quotes, and attribute one or two inline:

• "that would prove fundamental to the development of school figures" -- could we paraphrase to that contributed to the evolution of school figures or some such?

Done.

• each of "progressively greater difficulty" -- perhaps each of increasing difficultly or something like that?

Done.

• "intimately familiar with how subtle shifts in the body's balance over the blade affected the tracings left on the ice" -- cited to Kestnbaum but is it her opinion or is she quoting someone else?

Yes, it seems to be her opinion, without reference to someone else.

Tks, I tweaked a bit further based on that. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:10, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Cheers. Ian Rose (talk) 13:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:32, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

No prob -- just FTR, as this brief discussion and my tweaks to the article seem to have proven quite uncontroversial I see no need to recuse from coord duties, so will be promoting shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:10, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 22:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.