Talk:Sport/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

The reference to Parkour

The reference to Parkour under "arts" is completely incorrect. Obviously someone who did not read the article or understand the subtle but imperative difference between Parkour and Free running wrote this in. They did not read the rest of "Arts" which reminds us that

"This is similar to a common view of aesthetic value, which is seen as something over and above the strictly functional value coming from an object's normal use. So an aesthetically pleasing car is one which doesn't just get from A to B, but which impresses us with its grace, poise, and charisma."

That is the exact opposite of the Parkour mindset. Free running does mean to go from A to B with street stunts. Parkour, on the other hand, means the most efficient, speedy way to get from A to B, ignoring the aesthetics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heero Kirashami (talk • contribs) 23:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Beland (talk) 00:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Usefulness

Perhaps that the usefulness of sports can be discussed (in seperate page or added in other page)

According to Mabel Polonsky  : The cult of fitness. All those hours spent in gyms and sports clubs he sees as a complete waste of time; they will not make your life any better or longer. In fact, sport causes injuries and heart attacks and is therefore likely to shorten your life.

Sport and fitness are mainly about making money. Money is very important in the sport world, because that is why most people play sports to go to the next level to make the big bucks. Dekkers reproaches the government for conspiring with health insurers and sports commercialism in deceiving us by promoting fitness and sport. The government is in fact trying to distract attention from its own failed policies on public health, which would be better served by less sport and more culture.

http://www.nlpvf.nl/book/book2.php?Book=497 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.66.58.166 (talk) 08:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Sport definition

There is a footnote at List of dog sports about the definition of sports. Maybe it would be something useful for this page also. --Kslotte (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Moved here. Good catch. -- Beland (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Does any sport fit the Sport Accord definition given the number of injuries in sports? Heck, in horse racing horses frequently die. Also, American football games always involve a coin toss, which would seem to be a deliberate element of luck, yet that is a sport. The order in which athletes race in some sports is determined by lot as are post positions in horse racing and these can be major factors in the outcome of an event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.126.178 (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Chess

Why is chess considered a sport? Chess should not be consider a sport because you are not sweating, chess does not involve physical actively. It does not fulfill the definition in the article, at least not more so than any other board game. 130.226.217.201 (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

As the article says, it's recognized by the International Olympic Committee. -- Beland (talk) 00:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Archery?

Don't some consider archery to be a possible candidate for one of the most ancient sports? I know it can be a gray area because its linked with hunting and eventually martial activities but was wondering if anyone had sources that expanded on this more. Thank.Geog1 (talk) 20:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge Proposal

I wonder if this article should be merged with Athletics (overview). Many of the same ideas are echoed between the two; but I believe the term "sport" is more limiting i.e, the questions here about why chess is a sport. It seems that "sport" connotes athleticism and physical skill, and yet there is some grey area. Perhaps both articles need to exist, but maybe with some oversight, WP only needs one of them; and some courageous soul needs to combine the two. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tommy. While I agree that a broader treatment of the topic can be done under the scope of the ideas found at Athletics (overview) (perhaps athletic culture is another title to consider?), I think it would not be a popular merge by any means. The great majority of people would expect to find an article specifically about sports instead of an article about athletics. There is a reason why Google has nearly three billion results for the word sports, yet comparatively fewer (90 million) for athletics. A merger would also not be a helpful activity for covering overtly less athletic based activities which are widely regarded as sports (dressage, yachting, F1 etc). Still, I support the idea of having separate articles for both of the highly related concepts. SFB 17:19, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

History of sport

There's a big error under the History of Sport section. A cursory glance through the cited material for the claim that sports existed in China since 4000BC will reveal that sports existed in China 4000 YEARS AGO, not quite the same as 4000 years Before Christ. Someone please fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.119.42 (talk) 09:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for pointing out this obvious error! I'm sorry that no one responded to your comment sooner! SFB 17:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Questionable modalities

I had a discussion one time with a colleague about what is a sport and what is not.
He argued that chess is a sport because it has a federation, the persons playing it are sweating and the heart beat increases very much; and he defended that table soccer (or baby foot or table football) is not a sport.
I had the exactly opposite point of view: table-soccer is a sport, ans chess is not.Because, in table-soccer, you have to achieve goals through physical actions; and in chess the physical actions are negligible (maybe it is even currently possible to order the motion of a piece through voice, using modern technology).
So, I would like to see this question answered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.102.157.163 (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

rotate image

The photo at Sport #History is on its left side. Would someone be able to rotate the image, so that the depicted athlete is instead standing up, at an angle, ready to throw the discus. Eagle4000 (talk) 20:58, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 January 2012

Sport Physical Art

Snowboard halfpipe and park, as well as mogul skiing and ski aerials are judged in-part by form Diving actually too now that I think of it :) this is fun... Jebbco. (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Mato (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 January 2012

{{edit semi-protected}} It states that Hundreds of sports exist. In fact in one form or another there are 1,000s' as in many countries certain villages and regions have their own sport. According to the World Sports Encyclopedia - Wojciech Liponski 2003 - lists more than 3,000 -

24.65.73.112 (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure which part you are talking about; can't see anything about "hundreds of sports exist". Yes, there's thousands. Which part would you like changed? Please quote the exact text, and replacement, thanks.  Chzz  ►  02:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

You are not currently logged in. If you save any edits, your IP address will be recorded publicly in this page's edit history. If you create an account, you can conceal your IP address and be provided with many other benefits. Messages sent to your IP can be viewed on your talk page.

Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you need any help getting started with editing, see the New contributors' help page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.228.10.37 (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 March 2012

NOT GYMNASTICS

Whitneysux (talk) 15:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

What is your request? --Six words (talk) 15:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Commercialization of sports

Hi, I would just like to comment, it seems that there is no sub-article pointing to the commercialization of sports. In my own opinion, a sub-article pointing to that subject would be a good addition in the article since we saw that sports together with modern mass media is now a multibillion dollar industry. A good example of that is the Manchester United Football Club, one of the world's richest and best-known sports brands. Tobesexy (talk) 19:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 March 2012

In the first paragraph the word organised is misspelled it is in quotes Sport is all forms of competitive physical activity which, through casual or "organised" participation, 66.32.183.166 (talk) 22:14, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 Not done This article is written in British English; see American and British English spelling differences and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. As the topic is not centric to only one country, the article remains as started, with organised, recognised, motorised, etc. Dru of Id (talk) 02:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

YOU NEED A BALL (or a puck)

Let's face it. If there is no ball, it is an ACTIVITY. Not a sport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.70.80 (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Which is strange, given that far more recognised sports don't use a ball than do. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 08:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 April 2012

Keeping Active.
Obesity is increasing in this world and the future of it does indeed look bleak, with over half the population in the western world being obese it is no surprise that if we project forward 10 to 20 years or so we will see a significant increase in weight related health problems such as heart attacks, strokes, depression etc. all of which will place a heavy and rather unnecessary burden on the health systems. Many Governments of course are aware of this and embark on campaigns to let people know of the risk involved with obesity and how overlooked these can be. These ads are necessary and play the vital part of telling the general public WHAT the problem is. There are several factors which contribute to obesity in middle aged people. The level of physical activity is reduced significantly since an indivudal graduates from thier secondry or tertiary education.

And ther is no obligation to continue playing sport, and many people develop the attitude of "Why Bother?" Yet one of the benefits is to boost creativity.

A large number of individuals give up playing sport due to work and study commitments. Other reasons such as injuries, and out of play mates can also contribute to the decreasing number. A Poll in early 2012 also indicated that there was also a growing number of indivudals who prefer to be disaociated with sport due to the increasing level of corruption and monitariy interception such as gambling, tipping and this was throuout the mid to high levels of sport.

Since 2005 there has been a system in development which aims to provide a platform to engage in HPE Health and physical education for life. Sportkin encompasses all sports and allows for self-management by individuals, groups, educational, corporational institutes, sports clubs. The system utilises an all in one type matrix called USP Universal sporting process, the process is designed to operate sport at a federation level all the way through to individuals within the one system.

The process is proving to be very difficult in order to rollout, and it still may be some time before sport becomes unified.

Electrolad (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

That reads like poorly written spam to me. It refers to a website that is so anonymous I could not possibly trust it to give it any of my personal details by registering, as it suggests. If you want to keep pushing this content, how about some words of explanation here? HiLo48 (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Also, please provide reliable sources. Thanks!   — Jess· Δ♥ 23:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Sport or sports

"Sport (or, in the United States, sports)" - there are more countries than just the good ol' U.S. of A who call it that. Maybe it should just read: "Sport (or sports)..." 76.64.152.147 (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

etymology of the word sport

Persian language has a lot of common words with english; but on those english words that starts with a S; the letter S got dropped. In persian the equal word for "sport" is "bord" that usually it is translated as "winning" Amir —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.163.19.99 (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC) I have to question the relation of the French word (latin based) "desport" to the Persian word "bord". The Romantic languages share a common literal meaning in their words for sport; that is to divert, or take away, from reality or real life. This doesn't seem to relate very well to the "winning" meaning of "bord". — Preceding unsigned comment added by MFWbob (talk • contribs) 05:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

The first sentence of the article states that a sport is any "competitive physical activity", and cites SportAccord's definition of sport. However, the definition on that page states repeatedly that sport includes mind games and the like. I also disagree with its use as a source as a definition in this case, since it states categorically that its intention is not to be a "general, scientifically sound definition". Perhaps a second citation should be added? Regardless of the citation issue, I request that the phrasing of the first sentence of the article be changed to reflect the inclusion of mental sports, since the term "physical activity" is exclusive of this. 82.23.20.185 (talk) 19:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

If you would be so good as to read the second paragraph of the lead, this is explained in some detail. Also, there is already a second reference from the council of europe for that opening sentence. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 05:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Be that as it may, I don't see how that deals with the question of whether sport has to be competitive. Not only is there sport that is not competitive, but some people, who believe sports should not need to involve competition, work to create non-competitive sports. Would we say these are not sports, just because they are not competitive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.72.186 (talk) 02:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

We don't say they are not sports. The reliable sources say they are not sports. Wikipedia only reports rather than editorialises. SportAccord is the closest thing to canon in worldwide sport, as it represents most of the major sports. Other reputable sources including Council of Europe support their stance that sport is only competitive. In order to put anything else in to the article we need reliable sources of a similar weight (changing the definition here based on a minority view in niche publication would be WP:UNDUE). I assume that this isn't the answer you're after, but i hope you understand that Wikipedia doesn't have a view either way, but does report reputable majority opinion. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 20:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

X factor

Is The X Factor a sport? It fits all of Sport Accord's rather poorly thought out list of criteria. How about the Turner prize? Is that a sport? Py0alb (talk) 12:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

E-sports and Definition of a Sport

The definition of a sport contradicts 3 sports that I know of and I'm sure many more. "Sport (or, primarily in North America, sports) is all forms of competitive physical activity" says Wikipedia, but I disagree. Golf, chess, and now e-sports all contradict the section that says physical activity. I was disappointed when I saw this as I was trying to convince my friend that video games can be sports. I hope this will be revised because while it is true to the majority of sports, not all of them follow this definition. Feverbrew (talk) 01:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Golf and video games fit the definition of competitive physical activities, do they not? The status of "mind-sports" such as chess is discussed in the 2nd paragraph.

Unfortunately sport is a notoriously difficult thing to define, we have decided to get around the subjectivity by using the official Sport Accord definition, but unfortunately that itself is clearly unfit for purpose. Py0alb (talk) 12:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

be in no way harmful to any living creature

So SportAccord don't believe boxing is a sport? The whole objective of boxing is to cause harm to living creatures. 81.153.0.101 (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

In what way is this a contribution towards improving the article? HiLo48 (talk) 10:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

It is rather unfortunate that the external definition that this article uses is so obviously nonsensical. Py0alb (talk) 13:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

SportAccord itself admits: "The SportAccord Council has developed a definition of “sport” to help them determine whether an applicant federation qualifies as an international sports federation. The aim is NOT to have a general, scientifically sound or static definition".

Given this admission, why do we present it as a general definition on this page? Py0alb (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi everyone, Firstly, if one takes the effort to look at the SportAccord article, one will see that the International Boxing Association is a member of SportAccord. Therefore, the view stated in the original post is not entirely correct. Secondly, I think the matter of a definition of Sport is adequately covered within the article, i.e. opening sentence in "Definition" (i.e. "'The precise definition of what separates a sport from other leisure activities varies between sources, with no universally agreed definition."). Cowdy001 (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the article is vastly improved with more detail in the lead: well done Owain. The sport accord "definition" is really just a set of criteria by which they themselves accept or reject sports they wish to represent, its as much politically motivated as anything. We'd probably be better off getting rid of it entirely Py0alb (talk) 08:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Getting rid of SportAccord would be editorialising on the basis of preference. Their definition is not perfect, but they DO represent the vast majority of sports governing bodies, so are about the only credible source. This is strengthend by the fact that they are recognised by the other major bodies (Olympics etc.). OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:51, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

on the contrary, it would be done entirely on the basis of accuracy. SportAccord point out quite specifically that their particular set of criteria is not intended to provide a general, scientifically sound definition, so as such it should not be listed under the heading "Definition". If it is to be mentioned at all it should be "SportAccord's Admission Criteria" or similar. Py0alb (talk) 10:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Which is basically what the article says. Their definition only appears after signifcant qualification about there being no single agreed view. Creating these type of subheadings makes articles difficult to read, and splits up vital information. Some people are looking for the definition, and this explains that there isn't just one, but does give the definition used by the most credible body possible. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 11:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Current definition

I used entertainment and enjoyment as most relevant for spectators and participants respectively, seemed more appropriate terms for two aspects and therefore not tautological. But happy to leave as it is if others are satisfied. TonyClarke (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I believe that entertainment and enjoyment are near synonyms, so not sure what having the two adds? Also, spectators are not a requirement of sport. They are very much optional. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 09:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Blood Sports

While they are distasteful to many, and illegal in some places, this article should mention Blood sports, since they are sports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.167.115 (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Possibly, although they don't meet the de facto definitions of sport shown in the article. Any references? OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 20:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The definition given in the article is "Sport (or sports) is all forms of usually competitive physical activity which,[1] through casual or organised participation, aim to use, maintain or improve physical ability and skills while providing entertainment to participants, and in some cases, spectators". As we discussed above, the sport accord are extremely explicit that their membership criterion is NOT intended to be a general definition of "sport" and should not be misrepresented as such. Py0alb (talk) 10:20, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your point, but blood sports are not usually competitive, and may or may not have human physical input or skills. This is a tricky topic to work with, not least of all in regard to 'mind sports' etc. for similar reasons, but wikipedia is based on reputable third party sources - the ones we've found all point to those similar criteria, and the SportAccord one is as close to a de facto definition as there is (but it would be great to have some other reputable sources making the case - either way). In either case, inclusion should be based on reputable third party sources - so what are the references to say that blood sports are in fact 'sports'? OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 13:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Broken link

The first reference should be changed to http://www.sportaccord.com/en/members/definition-of-sport/. The present one seems to be broken. --211.91.231.71 (talk) 11:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2013

180.243.100.58 (talk) 12:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: empty request. Please re-submit your request in the form of "change X to Y" for any edits to be made, remembering to provide reliable sources. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 17:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Sports team?

I apologize if this is not the appropriate forum for this. I realize this should probably be talk about the article and not talk about the subject of sports generally. I run a free culture licensed podcast with some free culture licensed blog posts as well. I think my audience might be interested in helping out with Wikipedia sports articles that need some love. I thought also that people that work on sports articles here might be interested in our show or writing about sports news in an environment that appreciates free culture. I'm not linking to the site right now, because I don't want this to be perceived as spam. I'm really interested in some sort of collaboration and just need to be pointed to the appropriate forum to do so. Thanks! quitter.se/daw (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2014

180.215.231.82 (talk) 16:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2015

please update your data in this page. Ramanand Barapatre (talk) 17:02, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: that is not a Semi-protected edit request.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 17:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2015

ZachMitchell12 (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 22:13, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Ideas for section improvements

All of these are possible ideas, I don't know how in-depth we want to go with them. I can find lots of sources for these things as required, and apologise in advance if I miss any sports out (I'm thinking mainly about sports I know).

Technology

• Motorsport technology e.g. F1 technology, hybrid engines, Drag reduction system.
• Off-field decision-making using technology e.g. Challenge (NFL), Umpire Decision Review System (cricket), Hawk-Eye (challenge system in tennis), Goal-line technology (football).
• General things like increased training, specialist clothing etc.

Politics

• Not sure the 1936 Olympics bit is quite right, it seems to make a direct link between the Olympics and increased anti-Semitism.
• Political protests, maybe including 1980 & 84 Olympic boycotts, apartheid/SA banned from sport, Zimbabwe banned from Test cricket/black armand controversy at 2003 Cricket World Cup (I'm planning to write a dedicated article about that event at some point), British public booing politicians at London 2012 (maybe?).

Gender participation

• UK sources: [1], [2] (the second one also mentions disability participation).
• Possibly also mention wage gap in sport- e.g. football, not many sports where it's equal (tennis is one where it is). Joseph2302 (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Category

• I don't know how Wikipedia got to be this old with organized sports still being a red link but we should at least have some discussion to point it towards, since professional sport isn't really the same thing. Organized sport just points here, but this page is about both organized and casual sports and there's no particular treatment of its organized aspect. — LlywelynII 04:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • To me, it seems just about entirely about organized activity. Ought there be a section for the unorganized? Or am I, as often happens, erroneously judging the current emphasis of the article? Jim.henderson (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

English

• This page was established as American English by this edit and the unjustified/unjustifiable {{British English}} tag at the top of this talk page was only added in June 2015, 14 years later. There has never been any discussion had or consensus formed about changing that to the minority usage, where "sport" is treated as the general field of all sports and "organized" is spelt with an s. Personally, I'm not very invested in this article but there doesn't seem any strong national tie to justify having changed to the form of English used ⅓ to ⅕ as much by our readers. — LlywelynII 04:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

It seems to have been in BrE for some time, and also seems to have been organic, without strong obvious ties before, and you could argue that the naming of the article was strongly BrE, before the edit you identify was made, so that was the 'wrong' one to use. There is no value to changing it for the sake of change at this point. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Grammar error

Second para currently reads "limits the amount of mind games which can be admitted as sports". Should read "limits the number of mind games which can be admitted as sports".

Eattheword (talk) 15:25, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Done -- thanks for pointing it out. Antandrus (talk) 15:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2015

Seeing as there is no separate policy for handling trivial changes in semi-protected articles, I posted this edit request. In section "Issues and considerations", subsection "Amateur and professional", first paragraph, second sentence there is a typo: the verb "called" is written as "calld". 62.84.235.67 (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2015 (UTC)  Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2017

Dear registered editors,

I would kindly suggest adding the text I prepared (see below) to the article "Sport" below the section "Participation". I cannot add it because I am not a registered user. Please let me know if you think I should make any changes to the text. Zpedisic (talk) 12:36, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Health benefits of sports

Participation in sports is one of the main contributors to overall moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity of populations. There is a plethora of evidence showing the major beneficial effects of regular participation in moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity on a number of health outcomes, including: 1) reduced risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality; 2) reduced risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, hyperlipidaemia, type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes; 3) reduced risk of pancreatic, colon, ovarian, lung, bladder, breast, prostate, gastroesophageal, endometrial, and renal cancer; 4) reduced risk of osteoporosis, hip fractures, asthma, and preeclampsia; 5) improved health-related physical fitness, self-esteem, body image, and sleep quality; and 6) reduced risk of depression, anxiety, dementia, cognitive decline, and Parkinson’s disease. In 2013, Samitz and colleagues reviewed 80 epidemiological studies and found that, compared to other types of physical activity, participation in “vigorous exercise and sports” is associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality. The review has found 34% lower risk of premature death among adults who are engaged in a high level of sports and exercise, compared to those who never or rarely participate in such activities. A systematic review conducted by Oja and colleagues in 2015 found evidence on health benefits of 26 sports. The review found conditional to moderately strong evidence of positive effects of both running and football on weight status, aerobic capacity, heart function, balance, and metabolism. Football was additionally found to be associated with improved muscular performance. In a subsequent prospective cohort study including 80,306 British adults, Oja and colleagues found 47%, 28%, 27%, and 15% reduced risk of premature death for those who participated in racquet sports, swimming, aerobics, and cycling, respectively. In another study, a significant reduction in the risk of premature death was also found for adults who play golf.

Sports injuries and other health risks

Main article: Sports injury

Participation in sports may lead to injuries or other negative health outcomes, such as sudden cardiac death. In Germany, for example, annually on average 5.6% of recreational athletes experience a sport-related injury. However, there is a significant variability in types, severity, and incidence of injuries across different sports disciplines. Sudden cardiac deaths of athletes are relatively rare. For example, a study among 10-75 years old French has found the annual incidence of sports-related sudden deaths was 4.6 cases per million individuals. Although a possibility of negative health outcomes of sports participation can never be ruled out, potential health benefits seem to far outweigh the health risks.

Comment - one of the authors of Sports Club for Health (SCforH) – updated guidelines for health-enhancing sports activities in a club setting, is Pedisic, Zeljko which User:Zpedisic is asking to be added.
IMHO the first two sections appear reasonable, but the third, "Sports Club for Health (SCforH), initiative" appears to be a minor initiative, with just 588 google-matches, ignoring the attempted self-promotion. - Arjayay (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Comment - Thanks Arjayay for pointing out that my contribution would be considered as potential Conflict of Interest (COI) according to Wikipedia policies. I was not familiar with the Wikipedia COI policies before. As you can see, to be transparent and fair, as my wiki username I used the first letter of my name and my full surname. If I had any intention to conceal my involvement in the initiative, I could have been sneaky and used a non-identifiable username, as many other users do. I now deleted the proposed section about the SCforH initiative to avoid potential COI.

In another section of my proposed text I cite two research papers I co-authored. Would that be considered a potential COI according to Wikipedia policies? I could not find any clear Wikipedia policies on this. If that would be interpreted as COI according to Wikipedia policies, I would rather retract my contribution in whole.

The Sports Club for Health (SCforH) initiative is the largest European initiative for health promotion through sports clubs, and one of the largest, if not the largest, initiatives of that kind worldwide. The initiative has been supported by European umbrella sports organisations, such as TAFISA, ISCA, ENGSO, and EFCS, by the European network for the promotion of health-enhancing physical activity - HEPA Europe, and by the European Commission. The Council of the European Union listed the implementation of SCforH guidelines as one of the 23 indicators for evaluation of national physical activity policies in EU member states. The current SCforH project is led by the Finnish Olympic Committee. As Arjayay mentioned the google search for SCforH initiative results in only 588 matches. However, that in no way disputes the continuous recognition of the importance of the SCforH initiative by key sport associations, key public health stakeholders, and the highest-level political structures in Europe. Is there another way I can suggest information about the SCforH initiative to be added on Wikipedia (without that being considered a conflict of interest)? Zpedisic (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 01:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

References

Sport and health

I would kindly suggest adding the text I prepared (see below) to the article "Sport" below the section "Participation". In the text, among the other references I cited two peer-reviewed academic articles that I co-authored, so I am not sure if I add the text myself whether or not that would present a conflict of interest. Although self-citations are allowed in academic literature, if they are necesarry and presented in an objective manner, the Wikipedia policies I could find are not clear about self-citations. Therefore, I kindly ask my text to be peer reviewed by other editors before publishing. Thank you! Zpedisic (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not against inclusion of this text at all. Anyone else agree? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

We should ask WP:MED about it and see if they have an opinion. --Izno (talk) 22:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

The only references that would comply with WP:MEDRS are #s 4 and 5, and #5 is weakened by not representing a series of randomized controlled intervention trials that give high-quality evidence of anti-disease activity; see WP:MEDASSESS. The "beneficial effects" list is too extensive and not adequately supported by multiple MEDRS-quality sources to make such conclusions. Reference 4 is 6 years old (5 is typically the limit for medicine) and not since replicated, according to a PubMed search. Consequently, most of the proposed text and sources are not appropriate, in my opinion. --Zefr (talk) 15:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

After reading Zefr's thoughts, I'll mark this request as declined. The age of 4, the weakened state of 5, and the other sources not complying with the WikiProject make me feel that this would not be an improvement to the article as a whole. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Health benefits of sports

Participation in sports is one of the main contributors to overall moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity of populations. There is a plethora of evidence showing the major beneficial effects of regular participation in moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity on a number of health outcomes, including: 1) reduced risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality; 2) reduced risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, hyperlipidaemia, type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes; 3) reduced risk of pancreatic, colon, ovarian, lung, bladder, breast, prostate, gastroesophageal, endometrial, and renal cancer; 4) reduced risk of osteoporosis, hip fractures, asthma, and preeclampsia; 5) improved health-related physical fitness, self-esteem, body image, and sleep quality; and 6) reduced risk of depression, anxiety, dementia, cognitive decline, and Parkinson’s disease. In 2013, Samitz and colleagues reviewed 80 epidemiological studies and found that, compared to other types of physical activity, participation in “vigorous exercise and sports” is associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality. The review has found 34% lower risk of premature death among adults who are engaged in a high level of sports and exercise, compared to those who never or rarely participate in such activities. A systematic review conducted by Oja and colleagues in 2015 found evidence on health benefits of 26 sports. The review found conditional to moderately strong evidence of positive effects of both running and football on weight status, aerobic capacity, heart function, balance, and metabolism. Football was additionally found to be associated with improved muscular performance. A subsequent prospective cohort study including 80,306 British adults, found 47%, 28%, 27%, and 15% reduced risk of premature death for those who participated in racquet sports, swimming, aerobics, and cycling, respectively. In another study, a significant reduction in the risk of premature death was also found for adults who play golf.

Sports injuries and other health risks

Main article: Sports injury

Participation in sports may lead to injuries or other negative health outcomes, such as sudden cardiac death. In Germany, for example, annually on average 5.6% of recreational athletes experience a sport-related injury. However, there is a significant variability in types, severity, and incidence of injuries across different sports disciplines. Sudden cardiac deaths of athletes are relatively rare. For example, a study among 10-75 years old French has found the annual incidence of sports-related sudden deaths was 4.6 cases per million individuals. Although a possibility of negative health outcomes of sports participation can never be ruled out, potential health benefits seem to far outweigh the health risks.

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sport. 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/20061029232515/http://www.ioa.leeds.ac.uk/1980s/84085.htm to http://www.ioa.leeds.ac.uk/1980s/84085.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070326081959/http://www.kuwait-info.com/newsnew/NewsDetails1.asp?id=78319&dt=10%2F13%2F2006&ntype=World to http://www.kuwait-info.com/newsnew/NewsDetails1.asp?id=78319&dt=10%2F13%2F2006&ntype=World

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) 03:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Expansion

• Disabled particpation

I feel as if it would be beneficial to expand on the idea of "disabled participation". Perhaps, mentioning the Special Olympics, as well as the Invictus Games. Those are both events that make those who participate almost equal with those who are not. Maybe a list of sports that are featured in these as well. The section does a good job of describing adaptive sports. --Marakaflaka (talk) 20:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

• Dead link

The further reading link for the Journal of the Philosophy of Sport does not seem to be active any more. When you click to go there it comes up as error on the homepage. --Marakaflaka (talk) 20:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Definition of sport

OK, I have started to rework this article to reflect a definition of sports. This has been a bit of a battleground on this page, with some people saying that sport can only be physical, and others pushing the view that any skill activity can be a sport. And that is before we've talked about whether it has to be competitive!

I have taken the view that the only way to resolve this is to follow WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:CITE. For this reason, i've been following the major international organisations take on the definition, specifically the Olympics and SportAccord, who represent pretty much all the major sport governing bodies. This meets the verifability and citation elements.

I have also presented some of the other views, as this meets Neutral Point of View criteria. BUT i haven't yet covered all views, as they need to be cited. If you have some citations showing both extremes (e.g. groups campaigning to make video games 'official' sports, or negative media reaction to the admission of games like chess to 'official' status) that would be brilliant.

Any comments are welcome, but hopefully following this outline will prevent the back-and-forth changes. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 19:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Related to the above, the "Definition of sport" section sugggests that SportAccord represents the de facto international view on the definition, but does not mention the Olympics as potentially another (conflicting) de facto international consensus view. The introductory section of the article mentions both organizations yet they appear to differ in their definitions. If both are to be considered, as described above, "major internaional organizations," then one should not be automatically favored over the other. This is entirely separate from the issue of conflict over definitions that exist outside of "major sport governing bodies." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.76.17 (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I would further add in the lede of the article that sports provide entertainment to spectators as well as participants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.144.86 (talk) 03:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Question: Wouldnt Professional Wrestling NOT be considered a sport, considering there is no real competition and the outcomes are predetermined? We don't consider acting to be a sport do we? (Unsigned comment added in the wrong spot by 98.195.139.65, then moved here by HiLo48)

The article Professional wrestling makes no attempt to describe it as a sport. Rather, it says it "is a mode of spectacle, combining athletics and theatrical performance.[1] It takes the form of events, held by touring companies, which mimic a title match combat sport." So no, it's theatre, not a sport. HiLo48 (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Does any sport fit the Sport Accord definition given the number of injuries in sports? Heck, in horse racing horses frequently die. Also, American football games always involve a coin toss, which would seem to be a deliberate element of luck, yet that is a sport. The order in which athletes race in some sports is determined by lot as are post positions in horse racing and these can be major factors in the outcome of an event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.126.178 (talk) 15:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I think you are misrepresenting their definitions, especially the luck bit. The rule they set out is about luck in gameplay, whereas your examples simply answer necessary variables in the sport (because not all competitors can start from the same position on the track), and do not give a definitive advantage to any participant (people win from outside lanes, teams win away from home, and there are valid strategies and tactics for the coin toss, whichever way it goes for you). The horse racing one is slightly more valid, and in fact Sport Accord doesn't have horse racing as a member (the FEI doesn't cover racing), but i suspect that any sensible person would qualify the statement as causing no deliberate harm in the course of competition. Accidents happen to both people and animal competitors, but it is not the nature of, say, rugby, to kill or injure players, but it does happen - the important bit is that it is not designed in to the sport. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 10:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The current definition of sport is highly unsatisfactory and not even remotely NPOV, particularly the bit about "aim to use, maintain or improve physical fitness". This excludes probably more widely-recognised sports (including numerous citable examples, such as archery, darts, snooker, pool, shooting, boules, curling) than it includes. Unless there are any problems, I'm going to change the word "fitness" to the wider encompassing and more accurate "ability". Py0alb (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't say fitness. It says physical activity, and goes on to define a nubmer of facets, including co-ordination sports like the ones mentioned. Can you point out exactly which article phrase you are contesting? OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 08:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I've changed "fitness" to "ability" as I think its probably more accurate. The idea that to qualify as a sport an activity had to improve physical fitness is not necessarily true of a huge range of sports. See the last diff if you can't see which exact text I was referring to. Its a small change, but I hope you agree its better now. Py0alb (talk) 09:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The current definition is pretty bad! It pretty much claims that if I run/swim etc. in the park/pool I am not doing sport simply because I am not competing with anyone which is simply untrue... There should be a competitive sport section in the article and not just claiming that sport means competitive sport... Leonardo Da Vinci (talk) 19:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

ajax-stun-cristiano-ronaldos-juventus-to-reach-champions-league-semis

https://rivershout.com/ajax-stun-cristiano-ronaldos-juventus-to-reach-champions-league-semis/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Animish85 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2019

Rugby is played in Western Europe, North America, South America and Japan not just commonwealth countries e.g. Ireland,Italy,France,Argentina. 80.111.30.239 (talk) 15:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: as you will see at the top of the table, the locations are under 'sphere' suggesting that these locations are where the sport is well established/has prominence. Rugby isn't very prominent in these areas (but still does exist) just as baseball is played and supported in Europe but is not included in baseball's sphere. If there was a column saying where each sport was played, they would (pretty much) all state 'global' as I'm sure most sports exist across the world. I hope that helps, Willbb234 (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2019

Hi the definition of sport attributed to the European sport charter is incorrect. It should read "Sport means all forms of physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and mental well-being, forming social relationships or obtaining results in competition at all levels." 78.155.231.199 (talk) 15:00, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. The only difference in what you've given is that you've left out the embedded quotes on "Sport" at the beginning, which should be kept. Otherwise, it's not clear what the problem is. What's in the article is otherwise identical to the source. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:13, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2020

Needs more in the ethics section. UniShuffl (talk) 16:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

​You can request specific changes here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y", citing reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)