How to publish World Records


Comments about this discussion:

Started

The current format for publishing the world records is simply a webpage on unicycling.org containing a list of current world records.

Some of the records have a * to them because they were set before the current WR Guidelines (2011) were in effect. If we have new WR Guidelines (2020?), there is another 'watershed' between pre- and post-2020-WRG. I think we should somehow indicate the version of WRG with each record, without declaring any old record invalid for not conforming to the latest WRG.
Some other records are at the bottom in an "additional records" list. We have already decided to integrate these (and a few more) in passed proposals 13 and 14.
For none of the records, a history is given: all previous records in the same discipline including name and nationality of the rider, date and location. I think we must somehow make this available.
Some of the record data are incomplete, such as exact dates missing. We should make an effort to add those, although their absence may already indicate that this information cannot be found.
Not all of the formatting is uniform. Not a big issue but it would be neater to have all records in the same format. Examples include brackets around a country as opposed to commas, or a date with a . after it.
Especially including historical data will increase the amount of information to display. Maybe we can think of a better format than a static list. I'm thinking something like a queriable (is that a word?) database, but I have zero experience in this. Such a database, and a suitable interface to it, would be a valuable resource to unicyclists, media and the general public worldwide - and could be advertised as such.

Any comments? More thought about our publication approach?

Comment

I'm not sure if we should indicate the version of WRG with each record - it is "just" an additional information - not sure if people are really interested in that.

We could try to find the missing data, however then first a list would have to be made by someone what exactly is missing.

Formatting: I don't know who is responsible for the website but we could delegate it to this person. I think records should be as easy as possible to find online, I personally quite like the list now how it is.

What do you want to do ?
New mailCopy

Comment

If we don't indicate the governing version of the WRG for each record, we also loose what we now have the the records list, that is the statement with some records that they were done to 'loose' criteria before the first WRG. For the trushworthiness of records it is perhaps better if we do that. Or at least, we must keep all versions of the WRG publicly available, so that anyone can check from the date of a particular records what the requirements were at the time.

I think we also agreed that we want make the history of each record available in some way. This is not done in the current list. Older records have simply disappeared.
Maybe we can keep the current format but include a link next to each record where the history of that particular record can be found.

Comment

I think the history of past records is worth mentioning, but probably on a different page than the current list of IUF WR.
On the list of IUF WR, we should only put a link to the page where we would find the history.

We should take advantage of this historical work to create wikipedia pages (I don't realize how much work it is, but I think it would be worth it). Maybe it could even be a support that would facilitate a collaborative work.
For example, we could have one page for all the time trial WR, one page for the track and field WR, etc.

 

Comment

I started a page in French about TT records.
I did some research but there are some improvements to do (insert pictures, add more details...).
I'm looking forward to hear from the WR committee. If you are ok, I would like to translate this page in English and create a page on road race records. However, I am unable to find the sources for track and field WR (and I think it deserves a dedicated page as well).

You can have a look at the page I created (in French) :
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_de_monocycle_en_contre-la-montre

Comment

I like the format with the good overviews of historical developments. I'm not sure though if Wikipedia is the right place for it. Can't anyone edit those? I think it would be better if the information were hosted on the IUF website. As another advantage, that would in my opinion lend more credibility to the information and its accuracy.

Getting back to the original topic: if such historical info would be on the IUF website and linked from the main records page, that might make it more logical to list only the World Records set to current standards on the main records page.

Comment

Of course someone can change them, that's the principle of wikipedia. Everybody can contribute. 

I think it would be nice if there was a similar page on the IUF site, but I think it's also very good on wikipedia, it's complementary. On the IUF site, we could stay on the essential with the WR validated by the IUF...  The advantage of wikipeda is that the wikipedia pages are very well referenced in search engines, which certainly brings more visibility.

On the wikipedia page, it's only me who really contributed. The other contributors added some links... But I can't wait to translate it into English and start a discussion to collect missing elements (I'm sure I'll find participants on unicyclist.com, and it's always easier to review and correct than to start from a blank sheet). And I would have liked to make another page for the road race WR. And it would be coherent to make a page about track WR, but I don't have the knowledge to do it...

I don't realize, if you, Klaas, as the president of the IUF WR committee, have all the knowledge to make such pages.

Comment

In my opinion, not only the current World Records under the latest rules, but also historical World Records that were once published by IUF, should continue to be published under the responsibility and control of the IUF. They are the "owner" of the information, and should be the primary source of it. A wikipedia page could mirror that information (if only for enhanced visibility). Also, I have no problem if the wikipedia page provides more background information than IUF, and for such non-official information, I'm fine if anyone contributes.

Answering your question: I myself wouldn't have all the knowledge to create such pages. I've been involved in (and chairman of) the WR Committee for about four years now. Some members have a much longer history.

Comment

We agree. We can conduct the creation of an IUF and wikipedia page separately and with different objectives.

My point is that I think it is easier to start with the wikipedia pages, because we can publish incomplete pages, we can involve more people (beyond the WR committee members) and it can be an interesting base for the IUF page. For the French page on TT WR, I did a lot of research on unicyclist.com and on google, making sure to publish a maximum of sources on the wikipedia page.

Comment

I wanted to be transparent on the subject with the IUF. I expected at least a positive feedback to continue this work. I put on my to do list the translation of this wikipedia page and the construction of a page about the road race records.

Comment

I can fully agree with Klaas statement: Not only the current world records in accordance with the latest rules, but also historical world records once published by the IUF should be kept published under the responsibility and control of the IUF. Btw. I really like the way it is done by WA: https://worldathletics.org/records/by-category/world-records.
However, I am very happy if there is also a Wikipedia page that reflects this information and thus contributes to the better visibility of unicycling as a competitive sport.


Copyright ©

International Unicycling Federation