User talk:Jonel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nomination of Philippe Bourret for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippe Bourret until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Nomination of Gyula Kakas for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyula Kakas until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Nomination of List of state leaders in 1801 for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of state leaders in 1801 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Deletion discussion about Phoutlamphay Thiamphasone
Hello Jonel, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Phoutlamphay Thiamphasone, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoutlamphay Thiamphasone (2nd nomination).
Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Z. Patterson}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Z. Patterson (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
1928 Olympics Men's Rings article
Jonel, I am STUNNED at the discovery you made in regards to the Gymnastics at the 1928 Summer Olympics – Men's rings article. If you were to look far back enough on my User Contributions page (also, I had a previous account by the name of “Miloluvr” which I have mostly retired, here is its page – ), you will see that I have been making not only Bios and footers and such, but also new or improved results tables for various Olympics and World Championships back to 2018 (the edits, not the actual games – for the games, I go all the way back to before World War I). I use Excel as an intermediary step in-between taking the data from the original sources and writing the code to load here into Wikipedia, so I guess it was “only inevitable” (although by HOW LONG A TIME FRAME?) that I could have potentially made the same discovery independently, albeit too late for my own liking.
I actually had discovered numerous errors with respect to the gymnastics results in the 1924 Olympics official results and I had even emailed the IOC about them back in 2019 and did get a response. They thanked me for my detailed and clear explanations and they admitted that they knew that there were errors. They said that if I wanted to work further in finding them, I could, however they couldn’t make any guarantees that they would be interested or respond further. So, I let it go at that. I thought that there would probably be more errors, but surely like all the ones I already found in the 1924 report, they would be for low-ranking individuals, nowhere close to affecting any actual medals, and would be trivial in terms of implications and interest of any sort.
However, not so with the example you pointed out regarding Romeo Neri and Emanuel Löffler. You are right in that the error was in the tabulation into the Rings results, as the team results and all-around results are all consistent with each other, and that it is Löffler’s figures that have the internal consistencies, and not Neri’s. By most of the existing math, Neri should have had that Rings bronze. This is kind of a big deal, too, as they were both highly decorated gymnasts during this era – a real tug of war.
I wanted to let you know that in addition to finding that error, I found 3 others, for a total of 4 (some of them are collective errors). Here they are, as I found them. Again, these are preliminary findings, although with numerous layers of double-checking.
1) NOT TRIVIAL!!! Biggest Problem – Löffler/Neri on Rings.
2) SEMI-TRIVIAL! Also, 19th - 23rd places in the all-around are all jumbled out of order, except for 20th place. The AA results tabulations are NOT in-line with what is listed in the team results for these 5 consecutive placements.
3) SEMI-TRIVIAL! Finnish Team total off on 3 apparatuses – Pommel Horse, Rings, Horizontal Bar (differences should have been 9 higher , 3 higher, and 10 points lower WHOLE, respectively – should have been 2 points higher, overall, total), but would not have made a difference with their team standing in the competition.
4) VERY TRIVIAL: Birger Stenman (66th place) off by .375 – would not have affected individual rankings in the competition.
I didn’t discover these data composition errors, really – Excel did! But it was my work and attention to detail and checking and double checking and triple checking that helped confirm, along with the work that you did over 5 years ago on the 1928 Rings article.
I was in the process of getting a bunch of things together to write the code for this and upload it to the men’s team results article for the 1928 Olympics, because it is horribly barebones in its development. But honestly, all of the footnotes I would have to make and inserted symbols and specially colored cells, in addition to the regular formatting, would make the coding an enormous undertaking. It would probably take me 2 or 3 solid days to write all the code and make sure it was absolutely perfect before loading it (can’t afford to make any mistakes on something like this). I would want it to be uber-perfect to lay really solid groundwork to highlighting your discovery (and adding mine), and seeing what direction this should take.
Looking forward to hear from you.QuakerIlK (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
- Made a few modifications to my previous statements. I am working more on the data.QuakerIlK (talk) 03:41, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
- I wanted to go back and correct a couple of errors in my original statement to you, so I just did. Also, yesterday evening I finally got the whole edit up and the main article for the team competition has been vastly overhauled. See it here, if you like: 1928 Men's Team Competition QuakerIlK (talk) 19:31, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
1896 Summer Olympics at FAR
I have nominated 1896 Summer Olympics for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). Z1720 (talk) 04:22, 1 March 2026 (UTC)