Talk:2014 Winter Olympics medal table

When are the results final

There is a media story out right now (2014-02-25) that almost the entire Russian team used Xenon gas to increase EPO-production in their bodies to increase the red blood cells in their blood in order to increase their endurance. Especially the 3 medals in 50km men's cross-country skiing are highly suspect and may be revoked due to doping. There is also a protest pending in the women's figure skating event (Russian judges gave the trophy to the Russian figure skater - surprise!). So this is a provisional tally of medals. There should be a mention of these irregularities until they are cleared up.(93.196.254.72 (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC))

Comments

Can someone please add a section where all medals will be listed by days? (Day 1, Day 2, etc.). Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.218.186 (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Such a section doesn't seem to appear in previous medal tables.Psunshine87 (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

In the spirit of the game, the rank should be removed from the list. The IOC does not recognize rank, and the table can be sorted by total medals, and by number of gold, silver and gold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.169.191 (talk) 23:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

The OIC doesn't, but most websites do. Czolgolz (talk) 23:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Many websites use total medals, not the gold count. -- 70.24.244.161 (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Well...the OIC don't run these games ;) Islamic Games maybe..(Lihaas (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)).

The Sochi 2014 official website clearly ranks countries first by the number of golds won. http://www.sochi2014.com/en/medals 97rob (talk) 19:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Identical medal count tiebreaker?

If, at the end of the Olympics, two or more nations have the exact same totals in gold silver and bronze, why not use fourth place finishes as a tiebreaker? Instead of just listing them alphabetically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.139.47 (talk) 20:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

And what if neither of the teams had a fourth place finish? Let's stick with what we have. Czolgolz (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

On the Sochi 2014 Official website, they are listed by gold, silver then bronze, with any ties recorded as being joint (but ordered alphabetically).97rob (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Medal photos?

Can we get photos of the medals for this article (or the other article, the list of medallists) -- 70.24.244.161 (talk) 06:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Section for Medal Sweeps?

Should there be a section at the bottom showing which events were swept by one nation? There have been three so far.1906cubs (talk) 08:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

It could be relevant. There are definitely more than three by now. I think there are three in speed skating alone. HandsomeFella (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

There are actually three in men's speed skating alone, all of them Dutch. The Dutch women speed skaters have another one, and three Americans occupied the podium in the men's slopestyle. HandsomeFella (talk) 22:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The record number of medal sweeps at a Winter Olympics was five in Innsbruck, 1964, which we have currently equalled in Sochi. There seems to be no objections to this, so I will add this section? 97rob (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - please don't - as this article is not the right one to display single sports; i.e. single discipline results; see: 1964 Winter Olympics medal table, for example (or any other Winter Olympics medal table). --IIIraute (talk) 22:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I have currently included it in the article, as I had not seen this viewpoint, but more opinions on this would be useful? 97rob (talk) 23:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I would suggest following the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted until a consensus is reached on the talk page. --IIIraute (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I think that this information is an important section to be included somewhere on a Sochi 2014 Olympics page. At the moment, I think the best location is here, but it could possibly be added to 2014 Winter Olympics or (less likely) List of 2014 Winter Olympics medal winners. Any other suggestions on possible other/better locations would be good, as well as if we want to keep the section at all. 97rob (talk) 23:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

It should be located at the relevant discipline/sport - and already is. What other "sweeps" do you want to add - a sports sweep; i.e. a luge sweep, for example? --IIIraute (talk) 23:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I think that a podium sweep, which would probably be a better title, is more interesting than a country winning all the medals within a sport, especially as some sports contain only two events, e.g. curling. I think that this information does not need to be added to the relevant discipline/sport, as it can already be found, by examining the results. It could instead be located on National pages, but it is likely to already be mentioned, or can be seen by looking at results. I think it should be located on a more wide-ranging page, such as this one, where it can be seen that Netherlands have four sweeps, whilst comparing it to the overall medal table. 97rob (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Why - because you 'personally' think so? Are medals from 'sweeps' more valuable, that they deserve special recognition. Why not add a table of "in how many different sports did a nation win medals". Also very interesting - I think. That would be → Netherlands: 1 sport - right at the bottom of the table. Does that mean that medals from one sport or discipline are less valuable? Is a 500 metres speed skating medal worth the same than that of a whole Ice Hockey team/tournament - because they both count as one medal, you know. It is also impossible for a country to 'sweep' the Ice Hockey or Curling podium - so do we now favour certain sports? - or countries that have entered competition in certain sports? Let' s please keep it together. Your info is already included in the Speed skating at the 2014 Winter Olympics article. And why would a podium sweep be more interesting than a nation sweeping all gold medals of a whole sport?

P.S. IMHO, a "podium-sweep" section/table is somewhat patronizing, i.e. disrespectful towards the achievements of other competing athletes and nations and to a certain degree has a sensationalist character ... but then again, that's only my opinion. --IIIraute (talk) 23:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think we're going to come to a consensus between the two of us, input from others would be worthwhile. Considering the French have just swept the ski cross men's podium, making this the most at a Winter Olympics, does this make it more important now, should it instead be added to the records page? 97rob (talk) 12:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Medals per population

Is this section actually required? It hasn't been used at past Olympics (see 2010 Winter Olympics medal table), and seems to me that it just makes the page more cluttered. If it is to be included though, I think it should be moved below the main table, creating three main sections. 97rob (talk) 16:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

You can move the additional tables below the main table. --DancingPhilosopher (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not quite sure where I stand on this issue though I am leaning towards not including. If it is added however, it must be put in separate and lower sections. Krazytea(talk) 16:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure the two additional per capita and per GDP tables really add anything. There's no explanatory prose. I would not include them. Plus they're not sourced, it seems. Jmj713 (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose inclusion - do not include "per capita/GDP" tables. --IIIraute (talk) 16:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - They could be their own article, but not in this one. Czolgolz (talk) 16:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - That will give a biased view as a country is not allowed a number of entries proportional to population - The USA (pop around 320M is not allowed to enter 9 hockey teams for each Canadian team (pop around 35M) making this comparison nonsensical. Also for countries without medal you would have to include "infinite" which seems rather nonsensical, but leaving those countries out is biased as well. Arnoutf (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Zero divided by x million is zero, not infinity. </math> -- Y not? 19:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The proposed calculation that was deleted reported population per medal(ie population/#medals), not medals per inhabitant. Arnoutf (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Still not infitiny though :) -- Y not? 19:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

If denominator approaches zero (#medals), while numerator (population) is a finite number larger than zero, the outcome of the division approaches infinity. Or in normal language, the number of inhabitants needed to account for a single medal in a country with zero medals would approach infinity. But anyway, irrelevant ;-) Arnoutf (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The table was only showing, and would only need to show, the countries who had won a medal (and are on the main medal table),

anyway, so infinity does not become a problem. 97rob (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - not sourced, smacks of WP:OR. Hamish59 (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• FFS, this same crap gets brought up every Games like clockwork. It's original research, plain and simple, and that's why it gets shot down every 2 years. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I also think it's crap, but it's not OR. There's legitimate coverage of this, such as this for example. There's more. -- Y not? 19:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Crap/trivia. Does not belong here. HandsomeFella (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Utter balls. As useful as doing the same for Nobel Prize winners. All hail Iceland! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: So you say there's only one way to look at big and small countries' success. The way that is blind to the fact that most big countries' success is based on big countries' wealth, which was historically accumulated during centuries-long slave-trade (and exploitation) and profits made this way then invested in the 20th Century (financial) industries, the successes of which was backed up by popular culture's promotion of certain way of life (read: advertising certain products and their brands) to drooling customers, supported by promotion of the credit-based Way of Life. See you in next global warming-fueled storm. And, last but not least, thanks for giving me the idea, I will create per-Capita and per-GDP Nobel Prize winners list. --DancingPhilosopher (talk) 12:43, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Is that why mega-populated slave-trading Norway is at the top of the charts? Czolgolz (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

At least you have a sense of humor, but Norway makes a lot of money by just sitting on oil, figuratively speaking, or if you read first sentence about its resources, "export revenues from oil and gas have risen to almost 50% of total exports and constitute more than 20% of the GDP". --DancingPhilosopher (talk) 14:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The problem with any calculation is manifold as medals depend on some combination of wealth, influence (if your national sport is not there you miss a medal), size of population (ie talent pool), national prestige associated with winning a medal, maximum number of entries allowed into a race, political priority to invest in sports, etc etc. We simply cannot correct for all those, and choosing one would be somewhat arbitrary. Let's just leave it at counting. Arnoutf (talk) 17:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose: Nationalistic nonsense. In the spirit of the Olympics, the population of a country should have nothing to do with the individual achievements and hard work of athletes. --benlisquare_T•C•E 00:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: Wake up! The cost of taking care of snow tracks, taking care of equipment, of organization of training, all that requires team efforts and money and one has to be either naively idealistic, or something else, to base one's contributions to Wikipedia on "shoulds" and "spirit" (instead of "brute facts" and "flash").--DancingPhilosopher (talk) 13:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Good point we should also create medal tables corrected for home advantage, latitude and altitude of countries, as these will definitely influence success rated for the winter games. Arnoutf (talk) 18:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Related AfD discussion

There is currently discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Winter Olympics medals per capita and per GDP which is heavily linked with the discussion above. --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

World map

Call someone please clarify the two "black" nations in the world map (Western Sahara and South Sudan)? Thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 16:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

My guess is that these countries/territories do not have National Olympic Committees. Axl ¤ [Talk] 16:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Why is Greenland displayed as having won a gold medal when Denmark is green and no medals are listed for Greenland? I believe this to be an error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.230.221 (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done I've changed Greenland to green as well! 97rob (talk) 21:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

You have not addressed my comment. Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry! I believe you are correct in saying they do not have a NOCs. Neither are listed on the page for African NOCs. Also, I believe there is another black dot inside Italy, which is most likely Vatican City. 97rob (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Could you add this to the caption please? Axl ¤ [Talk] 00:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Typo in chart

Text mentions Slovenia won one gold medal, but chart says Slovakia (SVK) I think chart should say "Slovenia (SVN)" I don't know where/how to get image of flag.

The text is referencing Slovenia's first ever gold medal and not their total medal count. The table is correct saying Slovenia won 2 and Slovakia won 1. Ravendrop 01:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

European Medal Count

It is interesting that some 'editors' here don't like medal counts per population. Can anyone figure why? I imagine that the same editors won’t like this further point of comparative interest neither. Adding up the medals won by Europeans of the EU (also EU plus Norway and Switzerland). The differentials between them and everyone else are staggering in every category, including per head of population. If the EU was counted as single country there’d be 37 golds (54 golds with Norway and Switzerland), 48 Silvers (56 silvers with Norway and Switzerland), 50 bronzes ( 62 bronzes with Norway and Switzerland) and a total medal cache of 134 ( 171 with Norway and Switzerland). These numbers are particularly interesting when compared with the other large population competitors of Russia, China and USA.82.26.83.56 (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It's not really that surprising that the EU would have so many medals. In each event, there is a limit to the number of athletes which can compete from each NOC. Therefore, combining all of the European medals, with or without Norway and Switzerland), there is likely to be many more medals won. This makes this an unfair comparison as well as appearing to be original research. 97rob (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

In fact your (anon 82.26.83.56) argument is a strong argument against all these derived medal counts for much the reason that 97rob gave. Arnoutf (talk) 20:39, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Contested medals

• The information as it was originally placed by user Max Arosev was in the lede. This is not the appropriate place for the information. This is why I removed it.
• The information was eventually placed in a more appropriate location under the medal tables. This is why I did not remove it.
• The information provided gives 4 sources. 2 of those sources are of a dubious nature.
• One source is a news item which only speculates on actions being performed after future investigations.
• The only appropriate source given is a report which is 151 pages in length, and none of the notes given with it as a source specify the page number where the information is located, something that is of utmost importance when using sources of that size (for example, a journal article, where a page number or page range is required)
• The only change I would make to this article now would be a notation asking for the specific page numbers where the information is being cited. — Spintendo^Talk 00:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2014 Winter Olympics medal table. 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/20170807080756/https://greatest.info/media-reported-about-the-possible-deprivation-of-the-figure-skater-sotnikova-gold-sochi-2014/ to https://greatest.info/media-reported-about-the-possible-deprivation-of-the-figure-skater-sotnikova-gold-sochi-2014/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 06:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

2 more golds are lost

Two more Russian Sochi Winter Olympians stripped of golds - [1] and [2]. 217.76.1.22 (talk) 05:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

A change

1. Is this change enough 'official' to be shown in the table? Change: [3]. ParticipantOTE (talk) 11:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)