Talk:U.S. Figure Skating

Untitled

The USFSA's current television deal with ABC Sports amounts to $100 million over eight years and accounts for nearly 75% of its revenue. The contract will expire in 2007. Note: ISU went from $22 million to $5 million per year for ESPN when their contract expired. —Pelladon 21:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Good to know... did you want to include this information in the article somehow? Powers 23:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Not sure how to place it in the main article. I kinda like having in the discussion area first. Plus, more time for sourcing. —Pelladon 06:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, it just looked weird with a random fact placed here on the talk page. =) Powers 12:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

This organization no longer has "Association" in its name. Its correct current name is U.S. Figure Skating. USFSA is no longer its acronym either. See http://www.usfigureskating.org Aschiff 09:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This is incorrect. The association's current bylaws (available for download on their web site in PDF form here start out: "The name of this organization shall be “THE UNITED STATES FIGURE SKATING ASSOCIATION.” For all purposes this name may be abbreviated to read “USFSA.”" The "U.S. Figure Skating" name is simply a branding thing. Dr.frog 21:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Expansion of Article

I have been working over the last couple of days to correct, enhance, and expand this article. In the coming days (weeks?) I would like to expand the Governance Section and perhaps add two additional sections, History and the Memorial Fund.Jcflnj (talk) 11:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Done with History and Governance. Added a couple of pix. Testing section needs some work. Then Memorial Funds, with section on RISE.Jcflnj (talk) 14:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Testing kinda done. Would like to include section on Operations which would include the Budget. Still need Memorial Fund section.Jcflnj (talk) 11:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Testing enhanced and now more or less done. Operation section should included subsections on the Executive Director, Departments, and Budget. Still need Memorial Fund!Jcflnj (talk) 02:01, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Need to include a section on volunteers - Referees, judges, tech controller, tech specialist, data, replay, accountants, tech accountants, music, announcing, ice techs, etc.Jcflnj (talk) 00:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Officials section now more or less done. Jcflnj (talk) 19:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Improving Article's "Class"

How does one improve an article's "class"? After putting in much work, I was wondering if the article might be rated something higher than "Start".

Thank you for your feedfack. Jcflnj (talk) 18:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I see this falls within the scope of two WikiProjects, so you could ask them. For WikiProject Figure Skating, I see you have already posted on their talk page, and that is what I was going to suggest, though from the talk page history it does not seem that that project is very active; for WikiProject United States, add it to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/Assessment/Requests. Re-add the "helpme" if you need more. JohnCD (talk) 18:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Could also post at the talk page of the editor that rated the page - e.g. User talk:Fang Aili for the Skating.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks to John and Ron for taking the time to respond. I know it's considered bad form, but could I change the rating myself?

@John - I went to the United States Assessment Request and was a bit intimidated by the breadth and scope of all the reassessment requests. I really didn't know where to start.

@Ron - Are you saying "Fang Aili" is the original rater? (Sorry of the newbie question!)

Hello—

Any editor (including you!) is free to reassess articles at any time, so long as they do so in good faith. The main caveat is that newer editors are sometimes unaware of all the expectations for higher rated articles. Generally, though, if an article is well written, referenced, and "looks" like other high rated articles, there's no problem with increasing the rating.

Wikiprojects have no special authority, but are simply hubs for editors with similar interests to collaborate. The ratings A/B/C, stub, and start are usually assigned by a single editor anyway. "Featured" and "Good" class articles have to go through a formal process. And yes, Fang Aili is the original assessor—you can contact her at User talk:Fang Aili, although she hasn't edited for a while. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 12:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

/* Governance */ - Citation needed on formation into three sections

Would someone please provide a cite for this. Jcflnj (talk) 20:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I know I'm really only talking to myself! Jcflnj (talk) 20:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Moved the formation of three section to history, with citation. Jcflnj (talk) 19:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Well Balanced vs. Test Track

Does anyone think a mention of Well Balanced vs. Test Track is necessary or desirable? Jcflnj (talk) 15:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Improving an Article's Score

How does one improve an article's score?

Do you mean the class, anonymous? See the WikiProject banner at the top of this talk page. Edit the page, and you will see this at the top:
{{WikiProject (whatever it is, please change to correct project) |'''class= (insert class here)''' |importance= (insert importance here) }} I have bolded in the vital condition to change. Be sure to read the assessment page (which for time-saving measures, I can't publish) to see if the article is fit to move up a class. If it isn't, you can do what everyone else does and improve it.

Also, sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~) so we know who said what and when. Thank you.--The wikifyer's corner 18:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I forgot to add, please notify WikiProjects concerned.--The wikifyer's corner 18:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

History

Definitely need to expand this section beyond a discussion of just the name and logo! Jcflnj (talk) 16:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Expanded. I think that's sufficient. Jcflnj (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Improving an Article's Assessment Score?

{{help me}} Can anyone please tell me how I might be able to improve this article's score. It's current score is 647 and has been so before a significant edit/addition. This article has had major additions to its content, references, citations, tables, pictures, etc. Please see here:

https://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/bin/bin/list2.fcgi?run=yes&projecta=Figure_skating&importance=High-Class&quality=C-Class

Thanks in advance! Jcflnj (talk) 19:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

You may be better off asking the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. I'd never heard of this "score" metric before. At a quick glance, I'd say you should start by requesting a quality re-assessment from WikiProject Figure Skating and WikiProject United States; if you've made significant improvements, the "C-class" rating is probably no longer accurate. After that, you should make sure that the article is well linked from appropriate articles elsewhere in Wikipedia. Powers ^T 12:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea but if you ask User:CBM he will know he wrote the bot. I would be interested to know that myself actually. I have never really taken the time to figure that out. --Kumioko (talk) 13:19, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

A few things that may help

Per your request on my talk page here are a few things that might help.

• No need for references in the lede. Normally the lede should not have referencs because its meant to be a summery of the article and the information should already be in the article and sourced.
• I recommend shorteing the Table of Contents
• There are a few places missing citations.For example the sections Governing Council, Permanent Committees and several others are completely missing. Several sections are missing some.
• The images should have alt text but this isn't required until you get to A or FA levels.
• The references need to be cleaned up so they dont display the full url. The URL should be linked to the title so when the title is selected it takes you to the URL. There are a couple different ways to do this and I can show you if you need help.
• Several areas need expansion --Kumioko (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks to Kumioko! Jcflnj (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

As near as I can tell, making any of those changes won't directly affect this "score" you're so worried about. The score won't budge until one of the metrics I identified above changes; the article assessment, in particular, is a human-determined rating that will only change when someone re-assesses the article -- it doesn't change automatically when the article is improved. Powers ^T 19:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on U.S. Figure Skating. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20160126025018/http://www.rise1961.com/ to http://www.rise1961.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)