Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a24497c408f74b67

Jump to content

Talk:Amy Williams

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 5 months ago by TarnishedPath in topic Did you know nomination
Good articleAmy Williams has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 17, 2025Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 24, 2010, and February 15, 2026.
The text of the entries was:
  • February 24, 2010: Did you know ... that Amy Williams, gold medal winner in skeleton at the 2010 Winter Olympics, was accused of getting an unfair advantage from ridges in her helmet?
  • February 15, 2026: Did you know ... that Amy Williams won Great Britain's only medal at the 2010 Winter Olympics?

Query

[edit]

In an interview with Claire Balding on the BBC website Balding says it was Williams' first win. Is this right? Her first win, ever, is Olympic gold? Also, is it worth mentioning in the Wikipedia article that she had never trained on ice before going to Vancouver? 82.32.238.139 (talk) 11:28, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

She won silver at Lake Placid last year. How does that stack with a statement that she had not trained on ice before Vancouver? Leaky Caldron 11:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
Trained being the operative word. She had competed on it, but had never trained in the UK on it, according to news reports. 82.32.238.139 (talk) 12:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
That she "had never trained in the UK on it" is hardly surprising due to the shortage of ice tracks worldwide, there isn't an ice track in the UK. I assume she would, like many athletes in other sports, travel abroad to train. Adambro (talk) 12:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Amy Williams. 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 12:17, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amy Williams. 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) 17:07, 9 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Amy Williams/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Canary757 (talk · contribs) 14:15, 11 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Gommeh (talk · contribs) 14:55, 15 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

GA criteria commentary

[edit]
  • Article has the same form and section order as other similar articles.
  • Images are all released under the appropriate licenses.
  • Seems compliant with MOS.
  • Earwig says there's a 20% violation likelihood, and although there are a lot of quotes in the article they are all attributed so this is not a problem.
  • Article is pretty stable.

Article commentary

[edit]
  • Information about her siblings should be in the personal life section I think. Done
  • Is there any information about why she decided to get involved in sports? Yes I have added some addirional information from her childhood explaining this.  Done
  • She started competing in skeleton in 2002 after trying out at a push-start track at the University of Bath. She was inspired by watching the 2002 Winter Olympics on television, and described her first experience on a skeleton track as a combination of exhilaration and terror.[...] She then personally funded a trip to Groningen to compete in the World Push Championships where a coach advised her to try the sport on ice. I thought that skeleton was always on ice? I didn't know there was a land variant too. Maybe clarify this? I have added some information clarifying that the track at Bath is ice-free so it should make better sense now to say that she was then advised to try the sport on ice  Done
  • She had been studying for a degree in coach education and sports development, but after a year, she left her studies, moved back in with her parents and took a full-time job to help fund her skeleton aspirations. These should not be capitalized. Done
  • discussing this period of her life, she has stated:[...] The quote itself is fine, but the wording before it could be improved. It may be best to mention when and where she said this, and to whom.I've completely changed the wording around this quote to give better context about it as well as stating when she said it.  Done
  • the USA team wording seems off. As an American I'm a little tempted to call it Team USA, but to sound more neutral you could also call it "the United States". Done
  • After her success, Williams said: "It's out of this world. Never in a million years did I think I'd come here and win gold." Why do you think this quote is necessary? Can it be paraphrased? I've removed the first part as it is trivial and have merged the rest of the quote with the subsequent fact for better context. It's there to illustrate the win was a little surprising (even to her) as she had no career wins beforehand. Done
  • In 2010, Williams was an Ambassador for Team GB at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Did this happen in 2010 or 2014? 2014 Done Also, what is an ambassador in this case and what do they do? Additionally, I'm not too sure if this sentence connects well to the rest of the paragraph. In general, I think it may be best to rearrange this paragraph and the one before it chronologically. To me it doesn't make much sense to jump from something that takes place in 2017 to 2010 and then back to 2019. I have put the entire Post-retirement section in chronological order. Regarding Ambassadorial roles - There is limited information on these, but I have added some context for them to hopefully paint a better picture.

Thanks for your time to carry out a review on this page. Some really helpful suggestions to work through.

@Canary757: let me know when you've finished doing everything and I'll get to a source spot check. Gommeh 📖   🎮 21:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Gommeh - I have tried my best to address all of your concerns. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. Canary757 (talk) 06:45, 17 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Source spot check

  • source 7 looks good.
  • Source 10 does not necessarily check out; nowhere in it does it say the track is ice-free directly. It does however say that the facility was designed to replicate the run for the 2002 Winter Olympics. Source 9 does back this up however, so I'll just move the citation.
  • Source 17 looks good.
  • Source 18 looks good. I would also cite it at the end of Williams became the first British competitor... at the start of the next paragraph, but this is minor and I won't require it.
  • Source 24 looks good.
  • Source 29 looks good.
  • Source 43 looks good.
  • Source 61 looks good.

Overall it's just the one source, so I'm happy to pass this after making my slight change. Gommeh 📖   🎮 12:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

DYK

[edit]

Courtesy ping to @Launchballer per request regarding a potential DYK nomination. A couple of options available. Canary757 (talk) 13:29, 17 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by TarnishedPath (talk) 09:45, 12 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Amy Williams
Amy Williams
Amy Williams
Amy Williams
Improved to Good Article status by Canary757 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 357 past nominations.

Launchballer 03:27, 19 December 2025 (UTC).Reply

I added it as an ALT.--Launchballer 17:52, 19 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Article is long enough and new enough. It passed GA 3 days ago and thus is eligible. The hooks are sourced within the article and I cannot see any issues. Earwig shows no copyright violations and QPQ has been done. Hence it is good to go. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. I added the cropped version.--Launchballer 22:24, 20 December 2025 (UTC)Reply