Talk:Nellie Kim

Nellie Kim is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 7, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
May 3, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
February 18, 2009	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as High-importance).

Gymnastics High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gymnastics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gymnastics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GymnasticsWikipedia:WikiProject GymnasticsTemplate:WikiProject GymnasticsGymnastics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Olympics Mid‑importance

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Sports & games High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the sports and games in Russia task force.

Soviet Union High‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's sport: Gymnastics High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Women's gymnastics task force.

Tidying

I was tidying up the English on this page (found on a Random-Page voyage), and noticed that her forename was spelt in two ways. When I checked the two external links in order to discover the correct spelling (they didn't solve my problem, incidentally), I found that the current Wikipepedia article was lifted pretty well word for word from it; the minor omissions and alterations don't help, I think. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:24, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it was the copyvio by the creator of the article. By the way it was I that added a link which you followed and did a conclusion, that it was copyvio :-) I compiled an article using various public domain sources to replace copyvio under Nelli Kim/Temp, you are welcome to look through it. Cmapm 03:42, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sorry not to have noticed what you'd done. I've just copy-edited the text (tidied the English a little), but it looks fine. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:41, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Byelorussian SSR vs Belarusian SSR

Before 1991 at least in all UNO documents it was translated as "Byelorussian SSR", see [1], [2], [3] therefore, I changed "Belarusian SSR" (recent edit by somebody) to "Byelorussian SSR". Cmapm 18:06, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

POV issues introduced recently

I removed some of them, some other reworded. Among the removed ones was, I believe, a very strong POV:

"Comaneci came out on top, cementing her reputation as the most famous and exciting gymnast in the world."

What about, e.g., Larisa Latynina? Who and in accordance with which criterias decides, which athlete is "the most famous and exciting gymnast in the world"? Cmapm 03:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The edit war goes on, although another part doesn't provide any explanations and reasons for changes on the talk page. The last introduced new sentences, which were reworded or deleted by me are as follows (my explanations for my actions are in brackets):

"basically Kim was a prime example of a power gymnast and Comaneci a technician" (deleted.why and for whom the "primary examples" were just Kim and Comaneci? what about other strong gymnasts, for example, Soviet, East German and Romanian?).

(***ok love, I said prime not primary. They are prime examples for many reasons. a) power gymnasts typically excel at vault and floor- power events. So anyone who takes an Olympic double on these events can legitimately be described as a prime example, especially since there aren't many in this category! Elena Zamolodchikova is another prime example.

b) Great technicians typically excel at compulsories. Nadia certainly did: here she scored her first perfect 10. For those who don't know, there have been many more 10s awarded for optional exercises than compulsories. The fact that Nadia scored her first here illustrates how good she was at them. Daniela Silivas might be another good one to include in this category- also very high scoring compulsories, also not as strong a tumbler or vaulter as some of her rivals, also an Olympic double on bars and beam.

I haven't seen any definitions of "the great technician" anywhere.210.229.150.130

c) They both had very long and successful careers, with golds at 2 Olympics. They are the first and second gymnasts respectively to score a perfect 10 in a major championship. Makes them more prime than someone who was equally, say, a technician but less successful, such as Li Li.

If you want to add more prime examples, go for it. Hope you now understand better. I shall add my description back in soon, unless I see better reasons than those you gave. Unless you want to argue that actually Nadia was the power gymnast and Nelli the technician!

This is not an article about "prime examples", if you can find a strict definition of the "technician" and "power gymnast" and prove that Comaneci was the former and Kim was the latter, then go for it. encyclopedian articles present an information, not its personal interpretation.210.229.150.130

miss zara*******)

"Incidentally, Nelli was also judging in the 1996 Olympics when Kerri Strug performed her famous vault to win gold for the USA." (deleted.Why and for whom was this incidental? Why it should be pointed out, that Nellie Kim was judging there?)
To this sentence: "those lending their names to the 'save the 10' campaign included such notables as Lilia Podkopayeva, Vitaly Scherbo, Svetlana Boguinskaya, and Shannon Miller." the new name, Svetlana Khorkina, was added, while my request for citation was removed - I temporarily removed Khorkina's name and added request for citation once again.
"At this stage, it remains to be seen whether the new code will indeed be a panacea for all gymnastics ills, and whether it will be detrimental to the popularity of a sport which tends to attract most interest once every four years from people whose knowledge of the sport does not extend far beyond the perfect 10 scoring system." (deleted.who said, that this will be panacea? who believes, that it could be "detrimental" and who pointed out the "tendention"? isn't it obvious that the time will either approve or disprove the advantage of new Code?)
"it was felt by Kim and her ally Bruno Grandi that the best way to prevent such scandal in the" (reworded, possibly needs more rewording who said, that they feel so? I believe, not just these two persons make decisions in FIG)
"It is little known that Kim actually won one more gold than Comaneci in those Olympics, as her team placed first and Comaneci's second." (reworded.why is this little known? is this indeed little known?)
"It is of course Nadia who is most remembered from those Olympics and who won the most prestigious event, but Kim's achievements also deserve to be remembered." (deleted.is it obvious? who believes so? it is already mentioned above who won which events)

Cmapm 13:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:3o

I only see one person involved in this apparent dispute. Is there another side to this? Either way, I've given the article an edit to remove some POV language and edit for grammar and style. It still needs a few sources for the facts cited. Fagstein 19:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone Basically, I felt that whoever kept putting in the pro-Nelli stuff was rather biased (and also the English wasn't perfect- is that you Nelli?!)

I'm not Nellie Kim. From your bias I suggest, that you are L. Podkopayeva.210.229.150.130

so I did what I could to clean it up. Things like giving a detailed description of Nelli beating Nadia on vault in Montreal but glossing over the all around, where Nadia won, seems like whoever did this wants to present one side only. Really the all-around is the blue ribbon event in women's gymnastics, or certainly was then, and the apparatus events less important. So it was an odd emphasis.

The article is about Nellie Kim, not Nadia Comaneci. Nellie Kim wasn't even mentioned in the article about Comaneci prior to yesterday, when Cmapm did this.210.229.150.130

I actually like both of them as gymnasts and would like to see the reality represented: that is, that Comeneci was the superior technician (hence better compulsories) and won the big title that really mattered (Olympic all-around) but that Nelli was a better 'power gymnast' (ie more difficult tumbling and vault) and was also very successful despite being somewhat overshadowed by Nadia. This being gymnastics, a sport that is pretty subjective, its harder to do all the citation stuff than it might be for other topics. I'm not wanting an edit war here so any help is gratefully accepted. The less pedantic the better please! miss zara

The media attention doesn't mean the superiority. 210.229.150.130

If you can't provide a citation for such a serious statement by 4 or 5 world-class gymnasts, then it should be removed, I shall do it.210.229.150.130

ps- whoever keeps editing out the bit about Kim having been judging when Kerri vaulted, why? Its not remotely controversial, is an interesting little titbit, and illustrates her prominence as a judge because she was there at one of the most talked about moments in recent gymnastics history. As a judge myself, I like to recognise these things!

The judging stuff seems to be irrelevant here unless it's covered event-by-event and judge-by-judge.210.229.150.130

Miss zara's points

Some points:

a) I'm not Lilia, English is actually my first language.

b) the judging stuff 'seems' to be irrelevant- im your opinion perhaps. Personally I think its an illustration of Nelli's prominence as a judge. If someone can give me a better reason than that for not having it in there, I'll stop adding it. Until then, nah.

c) Why must the citation about power/ precision gymnasts be from gymnasts themselves? Why not coaches, or judges? There is more to the sport than merely the performers.

d) I don't really understand the objection to the prime examples either, its rather weak. As such, it too will go back in til I see a better argument against it.

e) Complaints about Nadia- it is usual, in wiki articles about gymnasts, to mention their competitors and teammates (particularly prominent examples of this incude Rozalia Galiyeva and Tatiana Gutsu, whose articles heavily feature each other). I note there is no complaint made about mentioning other contemporaries of Kim's. It seems illogical to mention the battle for AA gold in which she was involved in 1976 without mentioning who the battle was with.

f) Why remove mention of the Beth Tweddle judging? Obviously Nelli has made other decisions that have been out of line with the rest of the panel- Lysenko in the Barcelona all around, for example, but the 2004 world cup one wasn't in favour of a gymnast from the USSR as the Silivas score was. As such, it illustrates that not all of the more debated scores she has posted have favoured gymnasts from her country. Hence I added it as a second example, because the article speculates on nationalistic judging motives, which don't seem evident in the Tweddle/ Memmel incident.

miss zara

Hello, thank you for joining the discussion, although it's a pity, that you did this (intentionally?) just after I decided to leave Wikipedia. I take care of articles about Soviet gymnasts and try to make edits related to them in as neutral POV as I can, presenting a sourced information only.

I generally agree with reverts of your edits by 210.229.150.130, although I see, that a reason for this wasn't emphasized enough on the Talk Page. So, I'm back here and replying to you.

b) I don't think, that judging stuff is "irrelevant" here, but I see, that it's underlined in an improper way in your additions. I.e. you show just controversial cases, judged by her (compaint by Silivas, a win by injured Kerry). Furthermore, media accusations should not be held as a law, BTW, in figure skating judging was made anonymous to prevent attacks on judges from the media. Should we introduce such attacks here in Wikipedia? However, I think a Silivas case should be here, as it is more or less well covered from both involved parts. But I don't find her judging in Kerry's case more "interesting", than judging of other judges in this case and Kim's judging in other cases.

c)This is not the case. The case is that as I remember you stated, they were reknown as a "technician" and "power gymnast" respectively. So, citations of this should be added first. Until you don't provide them, it's just your personal opinion, not more.

d) Once again, the fact, that they were "prime examples" should be approved by citations first, it should not be your personal opinion.

e) I see nothing bad in mentioning Comaneci here, but the article is not a place of extended observation of Comaneci's weak and strong sides, it's about Nellie Kim! BTW, it's not an encyclopedic style to say "Nadia" and "Nellie" we should use "Nadia Comaneci"/"Nellie Kim" or "Comaneci"/"Kim".

f) See my notes on judging above.

Cmapm 03:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And please, provide a citation for the sentence "Those lending their names to the 'save the 10' campaign included such notables as Lilia Podkopayeva, Vitaly Scherbo, Svetlana Boguinskaya, and Shannon Miller ‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› ^{[citation needed]}". You say "its harder to do all the citation stuff", but why should we mention the stuff with no references? I remove it temporarily from the article (feel free to put it back when you find a citation). Cmapm 04:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Basically, I felt that whoever kept putting in the pro-Nelli stuff was rather biased (and also the English wasn't perfect- is that you Nelli?!)" First of all, I'm male. You are right, my English is not perfect, but I "put" only factual sourced information. Citing sources is one of the basic principles of Wikipedia. Another one is NPOV. If, for example, you are able to find the official FIG's decision on the Silivas performance's judging case, apart from just claims of abstract "Silivas supporters", then it would be OK to include it into the article.

If you wonder, why do I take care of this article, the answer is simple. It isn't only because I like her photo :) This article was my first real deal in Wikipedia and the photo was the first image uploaded by me. I stumbled on it, because there was a copyright violation here and I rewrote the article and uploaded a photo. Cmapm 23:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

books

are they available somewhere? a link to the online store at her website is broken

anti-Comaneci POV points

There seems to be a chip on the shoulder vis a vis Comaneci's accomplishments. Mentioning who else was in the running for any particular competition is certainly appropriate, especially as Kim and Comaneci were considered to be something of rivals, but little digs at Comaneci are amateurish--this isn't a fan site. Example:

She also cited a comment by Canadian newspapers about Kim's performance, as compared to Comaneci's one: "There are moments, when a natural smile is more worth, than triumph".

--Who cares? Why is one columnist's dig at Comaneci worthy of inclusion? Furthermore it is sexist to implicitly criticize Comaneci for not smiling--smiling as she's competing? Who cares? It's not a pageant, it's an athletic competition of the most elite gymnasts in the world.

...while Comaneci managed to win only the remaining one on bars.

"Managed" to win? "Only"? Winning *any* gold medal is an accomplishment to be proud of. Clear POV.

On the vault [Comaneci] performed only a simple Tsukahara.

This, after the previous sentence touting Kim's technical prowess, comes off as a indictment of Comaneci's abilities. "Only"? "Simple"? Clear POV.

64.132.218.4 (talk) 16:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Nellie Kim. 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:

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} 08:07, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nellie Kim. 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/20060511001322/http://gymnast.ru:80/persons/k.html to http://www.gymnast.ru/persons/k.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:44, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nellie Kim. 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nellie Kim. 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/20170330184438/http://sportpanorama.by/content/gymnastics/16778/ to http://sportpanorama.by/content/gymnastics/16778/

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]