Talk:Chronological summary of the 2008 Summer Olympics

248: 1091:

could have Korea women's archery medal on top, followed by cycling, diving, fencing, judo, swimming and weightlifting medals. Also, we need to set a clear policy regarding team sports and events involving more than one competitor. I suggest that events involving one or two competitors are listed the way they are, while events involving 3 or more (including team sports such as handball, football, relays and so forth) should have all members of the team listes in smaller font size, with 3 or 4 competitors per line. Just to make things tidy.

343: 322: 238: 217: 2747:, how does a "major" upset is different from a "minor" upset? Who determines which upsets are major, which are minor and which just aren't upsets at all? What set of criteria are used? How can we, as Knowledge (XXG) editors, try and be more objective and separate a news report's point of view from a set of basic facts? Does it even matter if the upset was major or minor or even an upset at all; is it encyclopedically relevant? Can't we just 887:. An argument could be made that any event being picked up by more than a couple sources could be considered a highlight. An editor, or editors going back and cherry picking the news items they like the most seems like a big problem to me. It seems that this type of page would be better left to wikinews and not wikipedia. Individual medal winners, notable stories, etc will already be covered on the respective nations/athletes/medal pages.-- 353: 2602:. As for Collegebookworm's guidelines I think they are all perfectly good kinds of things to include here but I would shy away from actually solidifying a ruleset, just yet at least. We already have editorial policies coming out of our ears and I don't think that creating a list of "acceptable" items will solve any of the fights here - it will just move them to fights about policy rather than fights about 133: 112: 906:(e.g. Journalism, and especially Non-encyclopedic cross-categorization). The exception given there is if "the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon." - which the Olympics might be, but 'highlights from..' is not. - If I had created this page or a similar one I would just be sitting and waiting for someone to list it on AfD. But hey 81: 143: 49: 21: 2280:

OK, this has been brought up a few times, both around the ITN pages and during the recent AfD adventure, but since we are discussing this page, here is probably the best place. "Highlights" is probably not the best title, as regardless of the content of the page, it brings up problems of OR and NPOV.

1973:

Ehm, what will happen is that no-one'll care about this page so much. The moment the Olympics stop, the traffic to this page will drop from millions a day to almost nothing, over night. At that point it's not such a big deal what's done with it, though I think by then it will have proven its right to

709:

I feel that spectacular injuries (though I'm not sure about the Samoan), drugs disqualifications, "Eric the Eel" performances etc, all lie within the scope of this page, as long as they get significant coverage in the press. Once the Games are over, we can then go back and see which are important in

2754:

Looking at that information, two reasonable people with all the facts could disagree on how upsetting that was. Why can it not just remain "Belgium's Tia Hellebaut wins the women's high jump event, defeating the favourite and world champion Blanka Vlasic of Croatia and ending Vlasic's run of 38 wins

2561:

I don't think that the page should be deleted after the games. However, I do think that it should be massively reorganised, and the information split into 2-3 separate pages (my choice would be a summary page of the games with a paragraph per sport, a list of gold-medal winners, and a list of world

2181:

If we were to list all medals won under extreme pressure or unexpectedly as highlights, the list would easily get very long. As for the quarter-final qualifiers in women's football (or any other tournament), I for one don't think we should keep that kind of information. I do realize that there might

1823:

Do people feel that Olympic Records are enough of a highlight to be included in the bullet-points here? My own opinions is that the Olympics are only held every 4 years, so it's almost a certainty that the Olympic Record will be broken in nearly every event. World records, on the other hand, are a

1143:

Here's the table of medal awarding events for Day 03, August 11. It's alphabetically ordered by sport and event and is ready to be used for the upcoming day. Simply a matter of filling in the blanks with names and references. It should save some time to everyone editing this article, so feel free to

1090:

I think we should list gold medal winners for every Olympic day alphabetically according to the sport involved. It would make the day tables easier to go through. It seems a bit chaotic this way, with entries put in chronological order by the times they were won. So for instance, the table for Day 2

928:

there are brighter spots and dimmer spots, but when viewed at a further distance it can be seen that some portions which appeared a highlight when viewed from a narrow perspective are lesser highlights than those which can be seen from a better vantage. An arbitrary decision will necessarily be made

783:

It is called soccer only in American English. Since the rest of the world outside USA still prefers British English, the sport in question is and will continue to be called football, just as the track lengths in athletic and swimming events as well as distances in shooting or archery are measured in

604:

Is this page going to contain only results from the games or other features of the games eg. drugs scandals, injuries to notable athletes or protests etc? Do they count as 'highlights'? The winter olympics one linked has pretty much only results and the opening/closing ceremonies but does have some

2312:

As I just argued on the '2006 Winter Olympics highlights' page, the word 'highlights' should probably be avoided in these articles - it misleads people as to what they actually are (a summary of all the major events from the Olympics, not just arbitrarily-chosen highlights). I would support any of

1502:

On second thought, we could simply wait for the official website to publish a list of all medallists in a particular sport and then make it the sole reference for all the medallists competing in the particular sport. Or something like that. But such lists will become available only after the games

2546:

It's a nice proposition, but since the page is probably going to get deleted when the Olympics are over (in 10 days or so) it just seems like too much hassle. Then again, since idiots like Becky are bent on endlessly citing the murky nature of the very term "highlights", let's up the criteria and

2597:

OK, my 2cents: I'm not so sure if this article should be separated out as Bluap suggests but it is a possibility. I also don't agree with Timbouctou that this article will necessarily get deleted. As I've pointed out before this is the only place where the olypmics information is being presented

2327:

I agree with you three. This would mean that for consistency's sake we should change the title of the other "highlight" articles for the other olympics but this shouldn't be a problem. I think the fuss was largely (but not solely) based around the use of the word highlight and moving the article

1487:

I don't think such numbers can be avoided. The Olympics comprise 302 events, which means the article will have a minimum of 302 footnotes for referencing gold medallists alone. And since the highlights page is expected to offer additional info, such as notable records set and other interesting

2170:

Hi Jao. I noticed you removed the gymnastics bit from August 12. I added it especially because the US not at all expected to medal, and the Chinese were under extreme pressure to win. Also, if this is not worthy of inclusion in the article, why do we list stuff like, "Norway qualifies for the

1488:

occurances, and since I assume an average number of such notes could be around 5 per day at minimum, we will get another 80 references just for these entries. I have no idea how we could cut down the number of total references to under 350-400 without compromising the purpose of the article.

2340:

OK, I am going to wait until at least a few days after the end of the olympics, then I will move both these pages. Out of the suggestion here and on the AfD page, the one that seems to best describe the article is Bluap's suggestion "Chronological summary of the 2008 Summer Olympics".

1106:

I agree, except for the final issue about forcing the number of competitors per line. I think that we should let the user's browser determine the best way of splitting the list of competitors, depending on the available width. (We should definitely shrink the font for these, though)

1569:

I think that it's worth including every gold medal winner. Otherwise, we would just be prejudiced towards whichever sports are popular in the countries where the editors happen to be. Perhaps, once it starts to get much larger, we could split it into two pages - one for each week.

1471:

After a little over two days this page is 27k with over 40 footnotes. Multiplied by 8 - for 16 days - that will be over 200k and over 300 footnotes. This is far excessive of what is recommended for WP articles, any suggestions for how to make it more acceptable in the long run?

878:

Some of the comments here have me concerned. The problem with "highlights" is who is deciding they are a highlight? One editor has already commented about going back after it is over and removing ones which weren't important. This seems to be like it is dancing dangerously with

2367:

since the start was Aug 6, I've added days -2 and -1, as the first day of competition is a notable highlight, I've indicated it. As the first day of competition outside of the China Olympic NOC zone is also notable, I've listed it at Day 0 with Hong Kong's start of events.

1665:

I meant in terms of making the article look neat and concise and be easy to read and sort. However, would it remove code from this article to move them to templates and place the templates in the appropriate spots? see my userpage and the way I coded it for an example.

950:

stance at this point, regarding this article's content -- within reason and excepting specifically vanity and promotional text... which should be strangled at birth with its own umbilicus. (perhaps, to continue the analogy I should say 'snuffed with its own snuffer')

1911:

It's a given that this'll be targeted for AFD so I'd suggest the editors here also add something to the portal above. The thing is the references are not on footnote style but inline style. And the page has no size restrictions since technically it's not an article.

2122:

I believe that their first medal should be mentioned on this page as the same was done for Togo today. I am new and therefore am not comfortable making this edit myself. I am sorry if this is a misuse of the talk page but I think this issue should be resolved.

2769:

I think that this page has been a spectacular success, and would like to thank everyone who has kept it up-to-date. Now that the games are over, we need to start thinking about the long-term position. I would therefore like to suggest renaming this page to

754:

If it were the coach himself, it would be worth pointing out. However, it's the father-in-law of the coach, which is sufficiently far removed that, while it might be of local interest (so perhaps worth a mention on the US page), it isn't globally notable.

31: 2182:

be a rationale in the football and basketball tournaments (and some others) getting a lot of medial attention, even at an early stage, but I still think qualifying for the quarter-finals can hardly be considered an Olympics-wide highlight. --

1839:

In the context of the gold medalists tables, I think they're worth mentioning as "OR" in the appropriate box. In bullets, I think it should be mentioned, provided that the event is notable enough for a bullet-point without that information.

640:

Being featured prominently on Knowledge (XXG)'s Main page, and not coming about as a result of an unexpected event, I thought this page looked quite flimsy. I was rather expecting an entire portal dedicated to the Beijing Olympics.

1351: 2055:

Nothing much happens in the world of sport that gets posted in the current events sports portal during the Olympics save for cricket, and F1 won't be back until September so using the main portal won't be a bad idea. Majority of

1217: 2562:

records broken during the games). Unfortunately, I suspect that the page is destined to be listed on AFD within an hour of the end of the games, so we probably won't get much time to contemplate its long-term destiny.

1333: 2247:

The link has been restored after discussion of the numerous Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines invoked. You just caught the main page in that 5-hour window in which serious battles were going on between the

2740:"In a major upset, Belgium's Tia Hellebaut wins the women's high jump event, defeating the favourite and world champion Blanka Vlasic of Croatia and ending Vlasic's run of 38 wins in international competition." 1387: 1369: 2281:

Results, is not the best title either really, regardless of my own comments before on other pages. Perhaps something like "Chronological coverage of the 2008 Summer Olympics" or "2008 Summer Olympics by day".

2209:

I had considered the inclusion of preliminary round info, when they don't include broken world record or other "firsts", to be rather questionable as well. I have removed the pre-Opening Ceremony sections. -

2253: 66: 1295: 1441:--I went on ahead and wrote up day 4's gold medal events as such and posted them on the article. If anyone decides it's too early please post the code here before you get all deletionist on me. - 1024: 1758:

talk about the amount of readable prose. Using the quick calculation of readable prose, the article is actually 10KB long, as opposed the the 30KB figure that appears when you edit the page.

1031:

FIFA under 20 World Cup champions as the reigning World Cup champions for the purposes. That means that Argentina NOT Italy should be listed. As Argentina won the FIFA U-20 World Cup in 2007,

1425: 992:

I would say that we should use local (ie Chinese) time when determining the dates. In particular, the morning swimming finals will air in the US in the day _before_ they actually happen...

3861: 1694:

Another way to reduce size is to just say "United States 4x400 swimming team" instead of listing everyone's name. Imagine football (soccer), there are like 18 names to be added there. --

1407: 514: 1865:

But is "merely" having beating the Olympic record in a qualifying round sufficient to warrant a mention in the bullet-point list? I'm growing more and more convinced that it isn't.

2695: 2875: 1313: 460: 1237: 1613:

I agree with what bluap stated previously. Perhaps if we're worried about length, could we could find a way to "hide" the tables such as the medal boxes on athlete pages?

3496: 3308: 3178: 3038: 2900: 2606:. There is a lot to be said for leaving the rules in flux, at least during the games, to see what turns up. We can always make it "neater" and conform better later on - 1275: 1197: 1121:

Yeah, of course, shrinking to 90% font included :-) Also, it would be nice to sort the highlights by sports, too. I took the liberty of doing that for day 2 highlights.

3774: 3770: 3756: 3434: 3430: 3416: 3246: 3242: 3228: 3118: 3114: 3100: 2978: 2974: 2960: 2480:

Because it seems like the highlights on this page are completely arbitrary, I thought it might be better if we at least tried to set up standards for mention. From my

1061:

But the Olympics is an under-23 event, with 3 overaged players so it's not right to cite either Argentina or Italy as "World Cup" champions. Maybe with a qualifier? --

2751:? If so and so was a favourite to win, and someone else beat them, why can't we leave it up to the reader to decide if there was an upset and, if so, to what degree? 568: 1257: 2755:

in international competition"? Any reader can decide for themselves how they feel, they don't need Knowledge (XXG) to tell them how big of an upset it was. Cheers,

2018:

If anything, during the duration of the Games, we should put the current day at the top, then every previous day in the reverse order, kind of like Recent Deaths.

375: 3856: 576: 294: 2743:

While I agree that that could certainly be important enough to include on this page, why do we have to refer to it as a "major upset?" To repeat what I wrote on

784:

metres, not feets. Also, observe the BE spelling in official material issued by the Olympic committees, or any international sports federation for that matter.

464: 452: 1691:

I dunno, if the article is still big with all of the hidden things + templates if it reaches a certain size it won't load especially for very slow connections.

1521:, articles over 100k "Almost certainly should be divided". It's not a problem yet, but maybe in time we should think of splitting it up into two (long) weeks? 409: 3702: 2856:

Four years on, the article is still in the present tense. These are not newspaper headlines, and the present historical does not sit well with formal tone.

3352: 3342: 2249: 199: 1537:

Most of the KB total is for the formatting of the tables, and for references. The meaningful number is the amount of readable prose, which is much less.

3876: 3841: 3622: 3602: 3362: 1848: 1674: 1621: 1449: 728:

Now that you've said it, it seems that incident wasn't widely covered and there several more knockouts (though none needed stretchers) on the second day.

399: 189: 3692: 3682: 3672: 3662: 3652: 3632: 3612: 2938: 3742: 3732: 3712: 3642: 3592: 3552: 3542: 3512: 3372: 3066: 1402: 3582: 3532: 304: 3722: 3382: 2547:

report only events that could be supported by at least 12 different references, in at least three world languages from at least four continents :-)

3881: 3851: 3572: 527: 3846: 572: 531: 3562: 165: 2067: 1995: 1957: 1919: 1736: 1701: 1649: 1596: 1068: 847: 826: 805: 738: 692: 2434: 1328: 1290: 489: 2634:

Can someone please put in a table for the 85 kilogram men's weightlifting results--for the winners of the gold, silver and bronze in this

769:

Is this topic being presented in English or what? It's soccer in English, not football. Football is not an Olympic sport. Sadly enough.

2834:

True, that was a mistake. (I copy-pasted from the above section into the "new-title" field of the move page from.) I will move it again.

1950:

Sez who? Solved for now. Basically those who said keep said to wait after the Olympics are over. Who knows what will happen after that. –

3871: 3866: 2458: 2394: 2387:

WTF? How could anyone be confused by calling it football? Even Americans (and I am one) realize that everybody else calls it football.

2261: 1889: 1232: 1192: 506: 493: 270: 3836: 2577: 1212: 1050: 366: 327: 3752:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2369: 2132: 156: 117: 3522: 1252: 2928: 2038: 1551:

Yes, you're right. You could also ask if it's really necessary with individual references for every single gold medal, when the

656: 621: 92: 2171:

quarterfinals of the women's football tournament with a 1–0 win over New Zealand" or other seemingly routine scores? Thanks,

1853: 1679: 1626: 1454: 261: 222: 3703:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824154247/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/modernpentathlon/n214575539.shtml

2408:

More Americans use wikipedia by far than the brits so we should use the terms that is more widely reconized , i.e. soccer.

1023:

The IOC only allows under 21 teams to participate and used FIFA and regional under 20 tournaments as qualifiers, see here:

668:

Now – two years later – no information will be accepted without thorough, reliable sourcing. I'd say that's development...

2635: 3353:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080811050752/http://en.beijing2008.cn:80/news/sports/headlines/cyclingroad/n214525916.shtml

3343:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080812033226/http://en.beijing2008.cn:80/news/sports/headlines/cyclingroad/n214522311.shtml

269:

related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3817: 3477: 3289: 2481: 1905: 2257: 55: 27: 3822: 3623:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090429033529/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/tabletennis/n214560191.shtml

3603:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090429033524/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/tabletennis/n214556186.shtml

3482: 3363:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080814052631/http://en.beijing2008.cn:80/news/sports/headlines/shooting/n214528114.shtml

3294: 3164: 3024: 2886: 2865: 2845: 2829: 2811: 2790: 2759: 2727: 2707: 2688: 2653: 2617: 2585: 2571: 2556: 2539: 2466: 2442: 2421: 2402: 2377: 2352: 2335: 2322: 2307: 2292: 2269: 2241: 2217: 2204: 2191: 2175: 2149: 2109: 2078: 2050: 2027: 2006: 1983: 1968: 1945: 1930: 1897: 1874: 1860: 1833: 1813: 1767: 1740: 1712: 1686: 1660: 1633: 1607: 1579: 1564: 1546: 1530: 1512: 1497: 1481: 1461: 1153: 1130: 1116: 1100: 1079: 1054: 1010: 1001: 986: 960: 919: 896: 858: 834: 816: 793: 778: 764: 749: 719: 703: 677: 650: 633: 614: 3693:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824145812/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/cyclingbmx/n214573613.shtml

655:

I have to say this page bears witness to the development that WP has gone through in just the last two years. In the

3683:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080901183149/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214575494.shtml

3673:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080823195359/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214575727.shtml

3663:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080822101247/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214572365.shtml

3653:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080822112337/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/wrestling/n214567314.shtml

3633:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080823195131/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214568694.shtml

3613:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080925154254/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214560057.shtml

2939:

https://web.archive.org/20120217035205/http://www.pr-inside.com/darfur-runner-wins-sudan-s-first-olympic-r770771.htm

2669: 3743:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090203200530/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/handball/n214578351.shtml

3733:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824143246/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/football/n214577861.shtml

3713:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824153232/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/baseball/n214579764.shtml

3706: 3643:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824045124/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/swimming/n214566011.shtml

3593:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080817074512/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/swimming/n214548409.shtml

3553:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080811031302/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/swimming/n214524246.shtml

3543:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080813032122/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/shooting/n214524276.shtml

3513:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080812143334/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/football/n214504690.shtml

3373:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080901183533/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/shooting/n214537211.shtml

3067:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080824200739/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/athletics/n214561088.shtml

374:-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to 3583:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080815170959/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/archery/n214545949.shtml

3533:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080812063333/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/archery/n214522492.shtml

3723:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824154358/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/diving/n214579862.shtml

3383:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080824143158/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/boxing/n214581464.shtml

2533: 2072: 2034: 2000: 1962: 1924: 1843: 1732: 1706: 1669: 1654: 1616: 1601: 1444: 1073: 980: 852: 830: 810: 743: 697: 3773:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3433:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3245:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3117:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2977:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2942: 1518: 3573:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080815112531/http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/judo/n214542537.shtml

2438: 1936:

The AfD problem has been solved, and the sports portal comes nowhere near fulfilling the purpose of this page.

1032: 3626: 3606: 3356: 3346: 2412:

The IOC calls it football, it appears in the list of events as football, hence we should call it football. --

98: 3696: 2462: 2265: 1893: 3808: 3686: 3676: 3666: 3656: 3636: 3616: 3504: 3468: 3316: 3280: 3186: 3070: 2581: 2398: 2023: 3746: 3736: 3716: 3646: 3596: 3563:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080818010219/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gUarMSaXM7pAWFup6LFnnrPO-VkQ

3556: 3546: 3516: 3376: 3366: 2454: 2430: 2390: 1885: 1724: 1038: 924:

For now, this is a good repository of facts (and references) from which Encyclopedia Entries can be made.

3586: 3536: 3500: 2882: 2237: 2214: 2146: 1046: 685:

Is the event where one Samoan boxer had to be carried off a stretcher in boxing good enough to be here? --

3726: 3386: 2718:

when was the last time the same man held both the 100 and 200 WRs? This should be added to Bolt's entry.

3792:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3780: 3452:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3440: 3264:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3252: 3156: 3136:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3124: 3016: 2996:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2984: 2373: 2318: 2089: 2057: 164:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3576: 3503:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 3315:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 3194: 3185:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2748: 2576:

I agree. I think this is a great article and should be improved after the Games like Bluap suggested.

938:

I don't have any problem with there being changes, additions and excisions to this material. Once it

3407: 3336: 3330: 3324: 3219: 3091: 2614: 2607: 2552: 2528: 2332: 2211: 2143: 2128: 2124: 2062: 1990: 1952: 1914: 1728: 1696: 1644: 1591: 1517:

In any case, articles of excessive length have certain technical and reader issues, and according to

1508: 1493: 1149: 1126: 1096: 1063: 975: 842: 800: 789: 733: 687: 148: 3566: 2523: 80: 48: 20: 2861: 2314: 1552: 1028: 915: 2876:

There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited!

2506:

Death or serious injury of an athlete, coach, official, or spectator due to dangers of competition

1786: 1781:

get into the sextuplet digits, here are some of the suggestions that have been made to reduce it:

770: 2840: 2806: 2774:. Granted, there needs to be some clean-up, but I think that we are well on the way to a having 2756: 2703: 2684: 2676: 2649: 2347: 2287: 2019: 610: 3777: