Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Para-skiing classification/archive2

Para-skiing classification

Para-alpine skiing classification and Para-Nordic skiing classification use a common classification system for disability skiing sports. The classification system is designed to ensure fair competition between skiers with different types of disabilities. They are grouped into three general types: standing, blind and sitting. The first classification systems for skiing were developed in Scandinavia in the 1960s, with early systems designed for skiers with amputations. As special equipment was developed, it was extended to allow participation by skiers with spinal cord injuries. The goal of the early classification systems was functional but ended up being medical classification systems. In more recent times the classification system has evolved to become an evidence-based system as opposed to a performance-based system so as not to punish elite athletes whose performance makes them appear in a higher class alongside competitors who train less. The classifications for skiing are LW1, LW2, LW3, LW4, LW5/7, LW6/8, and LW9, where LW stands for Locomotor Winter. There are also three sit-ski classifications: LW10, LW11 and LW12, and three classifications for blind athletes: B1, B2 and B3. The International Paralympic Committee placed snowboarding under Alpine Skiing; the two share a common set of regulations, but for its debut at the 2014 Winter Paralympics, snowboarding used a different classification system.

Para-alpine skiing classification

Para-Nordic skiing classification

16 articles

LW1

LW2

LW3

LW4

LW5/7

LW6/8

LW9

LW10

LW11

LW12

B1

B2

B3

Snowboarding

Contributor(s): Hawkeye7 and User:LauraHale

A workshop session with the Australian Paralympic Committee before the 2012 London Games led to creation of a series of articles on Paralympic classification. I was sceptical about them, but it turns out that they were right and I was wrong; the classification articles proved more popular than the articles on sports or athletes, as people turned to the Wikipedia for explanation of what they were seeing during the Games. Articles on Winter Sports classification were created later in 2012, and now they form a new Good Topic. Because Para-alpine and Para-Nordic share classifications, this topic has an unusual (but far from unique) double-barrelled lead. -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Small note, a reference in LW12 is displaying a reference date error. ResMar 15:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really tricky topic to follow. I strongly suggest creating a short para to present/introduce the topic as per this. Nergaal (talk) 05:01, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have nowhere to put it until it becomes a good topic, but it would read something like this:
Para-alpine skiing classification and Para-Nordic skiing classification use a common classification system for disability skiing sports. The classification system is designed to ensure fair competition between skiers with different types of disabilities. They are grouped into three general types: standing, blind and sitting. The first classification systems for skiing were developed in Scandinavia in the 1960s, with early systems designed for skiers with amputations. As special equipment was developed, it was extended to allow participation by skiers with spinal cord injuries. The goal of the early classification systems was functional but ended up being medical classification systems. In more recent times the classification system has evolved to become an evidence-based system as opposed to a performance-based system so as not to punish elite athletes whose performance makes them appear in a higher class alongside competitors who train less. The classifications for skiing are LW1, LW2, LW3, LW4, LW5/7, LW6/8, and LW9, where LW stands for Locomotor Winter. There are also three sit-ski classifications: LW10, LW11 and LW12, and three classifications for blind athletes: B1, B2 and B3.

This does not explain how the 10+ categories are linked together. To non-experts the topic appears as a random collection of letters and numbers. Nergaal (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, but the meanings of the classifications are the subject of the articles. Usually, the non-expert sees the event at the Winter Paralympics on TV, and uses the Wikipedia to find out more about what the classifications mean. I've added a bit more to the text. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems to pass all GT criteria. Good work.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:35, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delegate Comment - There's been only been three separate commentators on this nomination with only one voting for a Support. There needs to be more discussion made for a consensus. GamerPro64 14:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support All the articles in the field are of Ga status. This seems like a Good Topic to me. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 02:06, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose inclusion of more than one sport. Right now you have nordic and alpine skiing, and snowboarding. For now I would suggest just do nordic skiing as a lead article, then just get an article titled "Winter Paralympic Games classifications" which would include the other two, PLUS the other four or so sports. The structure is getting messy by adding more than one sport. Also, the intro paragraph should kinda focus on how up to ~4 only legs are covered, 5-8 arms, and B are vision ones. Nergaal (talk) 22:27, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As explained in the snowboarding article, snowboarding is considered alpine skiing by the IOC and IPC. The double lead article is because Para-Alpine and Para-Nordic share the same classifications. The next article in the hierarchy is Disability sport classification, of which this is a subtopic. I don't see the need for an intro paragraph at all; none of my other Good Topics have one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you working with the reviewers. Nergaal (talk) 02:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support with single lead article- I'd rather see the lead article as Para-alpine skiing classification, with Para-nordic skiing classification as one of the child articles like snowboarding. I'd support either way, though. I've added your intro paragraph onto this page the way the nominations template now puts it when you make a new nomination; the closer will put it on the actual topic page when they promote. Could you add a bit about snowboarding being a subcat of alpine skiing, though? --Pres N 19:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I don't mind making Para-nordic one of the child articles like snowboarding. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. And might I add, long over due. Looking at what has been discussed, and looking specifically over Nergaal's oppose, as long as snowboarding is considered alpine skiing by the IOC and IPC, there's no reason why it shouldn't be in this topic. I am also going along with PresN's suggestion to have a single lead article, endorsed by the nominator, Hawkeye7.--十八 08:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]