Jump to content

Talk:Olympic symbols

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gold in medals


I haven't made any changes, but the "Gold medal" page states that Olympic medals may contain as little as 6 grams of gold; this page states that they're "made of gold", which they aren't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]



The explanation of the origin of the rings appears to be incorrect. According to the official site for the Athens 2004 Summer Olympics, the rings were conceived by Pierre de Coubertin, and first used on the flag for the Antwerp 1920 games. (That same flag is passed from the mayor of the current host city to the mayor of the next host city during the closing ceremony). History page from Athens 2004 site. See also this page on the 1932 Los Angeles games - the logo incorporates the rings. -- Steve

In this web address - http://www.la84foundation.org/OlympicInformationCenter/OlympicReview/1992/ore301/ORE301p.pdf published in its official magazine the International Olympic Committee an American historian Robert Barney explains you the origin of the rings. I guess that in 1932 starts the tradition by the organization committees to use the rings in the games’ logos. Thanks for read it and good luck--Bicko2008 (talk) 04:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know why it is that I only seem to find images of the rings with their five colors after 1976. All the images that I have ever found, the rings are represented in plain white or black. It is not until 1976 that I first see the rings in the distinctive colors, and in fact, that plays a dominate theme in the symbol of the 1976 games. Does anyone know anything about this? Have I just missed something, or is it indeed true that the colors were not initially added in until the 1970s?--Gymirgatey-MDM (talk) 22:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the bit about the rings standing for faith, sportsmanship etc. There is no evidence for this. The official line from the IOC is that the rings represent the five continents. [1] PointOfPresence (talk) 08:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, do you not believe that a change in the Olympic Oath should be commanded to the IOC to change the word "sportsmanship" to "sportspersonship" to reflect the fact that there are also women competing in the Olympics? I say this because the main article, Olympic Games states, after an edition by me:"The Games in Paris did not have a stadium, but were notable for being the first time women took part in the Games." I made that change myself because: a) the punctuation was wrong (there was a semicolon instead of a comma after "stadium") and b) the auxiliary was wrong:"was" was used instead of "were" which is more appropiate since the reference is plural ("Olympic GameS", with an "S", not "Olyimpic Game"), see what I mean? --Fandelasketchup (talk) 12:04, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger needed


There appears to be a proliferation of pages about essentially the same thing: Olympic symbols (to which Olympic rings redirects), Olympic flag, Olympic Rings (capital 'R') - maybe more. I think these need to be merged, or at least reorganizing such that they do not duplicate information. Perhaps it is best to make everything redirect to Olympic symbols, since that can neatly cover the otherwise inevitable overlap between the rings and the flag. Opinions (and action!) welcome. - IMSoP 20:54, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I will work on this. The pi pirate 03:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I merged in Olympic flag, Olympic theme and fanfare, Kotinos, and Olympic mascots, adding appropriate redirects. The pi pirate 05:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to merge Summon the Heroes


I do not think we need to merge John William's Summon the Heroes with Olympic symbols, since it gives more information about the piece than it does about the first performance (1996 Olympic Games). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stimpy (talkcontribs)

I somewhat agree with you. The main reason that I had put the merge notice was that the Fanfare and Theme was merged with this article. I felt for consistency, The Olympic Sprit, Summon the Heroes, and Call of the Champions should either be merged here as well, or the Fanfare and Theme should get its own article (in addition to a mention on this, the symbols page). Nationalparks 09:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the stand-alone article for Summon the Heroes cannot be expanded to a reasonable non-stub length, then it would make sense to merge into one article all the content on John Williams' Olympic fanfares and themes. As it stands, the Summon the Heroes article is excessively brief to deserve preservation, but all four themes as a series by the same composer is a valid subject for an article. Darcyj 07:01, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this article mentions two recordings by Williams done for the Olympic Games, it would make sense that this article should at least mention the other two, “Summon the Heroes” and “Call of the Champions”. Even if they are articles in their own page, this section seems incomplete only mentioning two of the four Olympic themes that he did.--Gymirgatey-MDM (talk) 22:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Description


I removed the following because I could not tell which version it was describing. Perhaps that can be clarified and reinserted; I apologize for the brutal editing.

Mark Foskey (About the fanfare)

It is one minute long, consisting of about 45 seconds of upbeat and somewhat repetitious orchestrated music, which is heavy on the brass and percussion, followed by a very distinctive 15-second theme dominated by trumpets and horns. These portions, being reasonably short and having high recognition value, are quite frequently heard in association with television the largest broadcasts of the Olympic Games, usually as an introduction or transition.
The remainder of the work (which is four minutes and twenty-eight seconds long altogether) explores the theme further and is musically interesting but much less frequently heard and consequently less widely recognized.
That text is referring to "Olympic Fanfare and Theme" by John Williams, written for the 1984 Games in L.A. The playing time (according to the "Summon the Heroes" CD) is 4 minutes, 31 seconds, which can be assumed to be the theme which is being referred to here. However, given the purpose of the article, I don't believe that this text is necessary.--Gymirgatey-MDM (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

O Canada


I removed this line from the Fanfare and Theme section:

The first four notes of the theme closely resemble the first four notes of the Canadian national anthem, O Canada.

Musically, that is correct, but I am not sure it belongs in this article (many pieces must begin with a leap up of a minor third then down by a fifth). Feel free to disagree. Nationalparks 06:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Pentacle


In his book "The Da Vinci Code", Dan Brown claims that the Olympic Committee almost used a pentacle as the symbol for the flag, but later changed it to this as it better reflected the game’s idea of unity. I do not know if this fact is true or not, however, I can find no evidence to the contrary. As I am not a writer (I stink, to be honest), I wondered if someone could possibly include it. Scalene 10:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protectiveness of Olympic symbols


The article mentions an extreme protectiveness of the Olympic name and symbols. Does anyone know the Olympic committee's stance on Olympic Airlines, especially with its 90° rotated ring formation? I guess that they at least leave references to the mountain Mount Olympus in Greece and Olympus Mons on Mars alone, as well as Olympus, the camera/optics company. GSchjetne 15:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its grandfathered in — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billbambam (talkcontribs) 10:24, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]



It would be nice to know who designed the Olympic rings emblem, as that is one of the most recognized symbols in the world. --J@red [T]/[+] 15:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which 1914 world Congress


To which 1914 world congress does the Olympic Emblem section refer? It would be worthy to wikilink it, too. --euyyn 18:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mess with Nazis and Greece


Again, in the Olympic Emblem section:

The ceremony was celebrated but the stone was never removed. Later, two British authors Lynn and Gray Poole when visiting Delphi in the late 1950´s saw the stone and reported in their "History of the Ancient Games" that the Olympic rings design came from ancient Greece. This has become known as "Carl Diem's Stone". [3] [4]. This created a myth that the symbol had an ancient Greek origin. The rings would subsequently be featured prominently in Nazi images and theatrics in 1936 as part of an effort to glorify the Third Reich and claim a noble and ancient lineage.

I would have silently reordered the paragraph to avoid leaping forward and backward in history, but the bolded bit seems to imply that the "effort to claim a noble and ancient lineage" is based on the (1950's) myth... Which is evidently absurd, so... Why would the Olympic emblem, in 1936, be something of a symbol of an ancient and noble lineage for the aria? --euyyn 18:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emblem or symbol; & plural article title


The Olympic Charter [3] p. 18 calls the 5 rings the "Olympic symbol" but this article calls it the Olympic emblem. Is the use of "emblem" in the article deliberate or accidental? Likewise, is the use of a plural article title deliberate or accidental? Nurg 01:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The title of this page--plural--is deliberate because there are many symbols’ of the Olympics. However, since the Olympic Charter says that the official name of the rings is the Olympic symbol, then it should be thusly called on the page. Maybe you can fix it up. Good find! JARED(t)00:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re the title: many things number more than one - just wondering why this is an exception to the convention of preferring singular nouns for titles. Nurg 09:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think it is because there is not just one set symbol, or because each symbol is not alike. For example, there is music, and flags, and the rings, etc. The title "Olympic symbol" would imply either that there is only one symbol, or that Olympic symbols have a set definition or type, when they do not. It seems that the only way to combat this is to make separate pages for each "symbol." JARED(t)19:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre De Coubertin´s 1931 statement that "the six colors are those that appear on all the national flags of the world at the present time" is still true today, according to the German Wikipedia. Even though I cannot provide any other sources for this, a look at all existing national flags easily reveals that it is still true indeed.

5 Continents


It says that the five rings represent the five continents of the world. However, are not there seven continents in the world? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 16:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure the article used to address the Olympic continent scheme. The number of continents in the world, of course, depends on whom you ask. In the Olympic context, there are 5: the Americas are counted as a single continent, Europe and Asia are separate, Oceania includes Australia and the nearby island countries, and Africa is, as usual, Africa. Antarctica is not included since it has no nations. -- Jonel | Speak 16:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that only in U.S. the world is divided in 7 continents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
Nope. According to the Wiki article on continents: "The seven-continent model is usually taught in Western Europe, Northern Europe, Central Europe, Southeastern Europe, China and most English-speaking countries." JeffHCross (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At least for Germany, it is not correct that the seven continent models are taught. You will not find this model in e.g. German schoolbooks, and personally, I never even heard of it until I read the above just 2 minutes ago.
Not that it's important but: speak for yourself. It's not uncommon to speak of North and South America as different continents in Germany. --Mudd1 (talk) 10:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In this connection, I find this blog post interesting: The Mother on the Olympic Rings (The Mother). I am awaiting the next post about the significance of the colors. The content may not be suitable for inclusion in the page - I just wanted to share the information. --Bhadani (talk) 21:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article Says: "the only connection between the rings and the continents is that the number five refers to the number of continents. In this scheme, Europe and Asia are viewed as a single continent called Eurasia, and Antarctica is omitted" America + Eurasia + Africa + Oceania = four Continents... Five Continents could be America + Eurasia + Africa + Oceania + Antarctica or America + Europe + Asia + Africa + Oceania... I think it should be corrected... I am new in this I do not know how to edit this, sorry if i made it wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline Nazi importance here


I removed the text that the Nazis made the five rings famous etc. in 1936. This is not true: the symbol existed before 1920, and is on all the official posters since 1928, etc. The referenced New York Times article is mainly about the torch-relay. What is says about the emblem is not documenting the claim. That Riefenstahl filmed the rings - well, so does Coca Cola today. -DePiep 20:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic fanfare


I am not so sure that the following statement is accurate:

"The premiere recording, as performed by an orchestra comprised of Los Angeles-area musicians under the baton of the composer has not yet been publicly made available on any form of digital media."

The premiere recording is available on Youtube. Probably not released "officially", but that is definitely a recording of the opening ceremonies in 1984, aired by NBC. In addition, that is definitely John Williams conducting, and that is definitely an orchestra performing it. I would also say that youtube is definitely what I would call "digital media". Therefore, that statement is false as written. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traditionally, "digital media" would refer to purchasable media, such as CDs. JeffHCross (talk) 05:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would "I Believe" by Stephan Moccio and Alan Frew be appropriate for mention? Checking past CTV (which hammers on the "I Believe" theme as an anthem), NBC's video here: http://www.nbcolympics.com/video/assetid=edc02b6c-c0d9-48dd-84d4-1a8beda0e067.html?__source=rss&cid=?MVPDID=08010 uses "Olympic Fanfare and Theme." Some other NBC clips do not seem to bother with a theme. So what will be the deciding factor in "I Believe" being listed as an Olympic Anthem? Has anyone noticed its use on other networks beyond CTV? --Romaq 18:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romaq (talkcontribs)

At this date at the end of the XXI Olympic Winter Games, it seems "I Believe" really belongs to Canada and the national hopes of their people rather than a world Olympic Anthem with the same usage as "Bugler's Dream." I do not think this is an issue of the class of music, but of usage and perception. For example, should the US Hockey Team win the gold this afternoon, "I Believe" will not be the background theme. Should Canada win, you know it will. "I Believe" belongs to Canada, and so I have answered my own question about its usage as a world Olympic Anthem in the negative. Thank you all for allowing me to participate. Romaq 19:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romaq (talkcontribs)

IOC critics are not important enough to be mentioned in the introduction


I removed the following from the introduction but kept it in one of the sections.

"The IOC has been criticised [who?] for its aggressive protection of the symbols, such as the rings and the use of the word 'olympic.' "

It lacks references and it is not a characteristic fact of Olympic symbols.



KJNIKM, —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]



This article says: "Olympic Creed: "The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well.""

This links to Olympic Oath, which does not contain the word "creed" or the phrase "most important thing" at all. Are they the same thing? If so, why do they not appear to be at all similar? If not, why is it linked there?


They are not the same thing. A creed is a set of beliefs; an oath is a vow. Removed the link. Prince of Canada t | c 02:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great, but "Olympic Creed" redirects to "Olympic Oath", so it amounts to the same thing still. Shall we remove the redirect, too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That will teach me not to check after editing! Yes, we should. Prince of Canada t | c 21:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]



Hi everybody, I made some fixing in this and the related pages:

  • I fixed the symbols page with 'Main article' references and 'See also' references to all the symbols pages
  • I fixed the Olympic emblem page with emblems
  • I created a new page for the Olympic poster
  • I created a new page for the Olympic mascot, deleting the table from the symbols page
  • I put in all the pages:
    • 'See also' link to the symbols page
    • 'External link' to IOC and www.athensinfoguide.com
    • 'Category:Olympic symbols'
    • 'Interlink' to other languages pages

Please take a look at the changes to check if they are all OK. Ciao, Sinigagl (talk) 14:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"However, no continent is represented by any specific ring."


We were learnt in school which ring signified which, I just can't remember (I was coming here to remember...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Five rings stand for


It says in the article - "These five rings stand for passion, faith, victory, work, ethic and sportsmanship"

However, those are six things. What is wrong with this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be “passion”, “faith”, “victory”, “work ethic” and “sportsmanship”. I have removed the extra comma. Basement12 (T.C) 18:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC) by Lina kim[reply]
Basement12, do you not believe that in your comment "sportsmanship" should be changed to "sportspersonship" to make the world aware that women are also competing in the Olyimpics? --Fandelasketchup (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The image Image:John Williams Olympic Fanfare.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]



An IP proposed merging Olympic mascot into this article. Personally, I think it is a bad idea as that article goes far beyond the level of detail we would want here, but I am assuming it was a good faith suggestion so I will open it up for discussion. Basement12 (T.C) 16:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No action has been taken on this so I shall remove the merger templates. Basement12 (T.C) 13:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing explanation

Baron Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympic Games, originally designed this in 1912. These five rings stand for passion, faith, victory, work ethic, and sportsmanship. Upon its initial introduction, de Coubertin stated the following in the August 1912 edition of Revue Olympique:
‘’The emblem chosen to illustrate and represent the world Congress of 1914...: five intertwined rings in different colors - blue, yellow, and black, green, red - are placed on the white field of the paper. These five rings represent the five parts of the world which now are won over to Olympicism and willing to accept healthy competition.

The connection between the five rings standing for "passion, faith, victory, work ethic, and sportsmanship" and the quote, that refers to five parts of the world, is not clear.

According to De Coubertin, the ring colors stand for those colors that appeared on all the national flags of the world at that time.

Another conflicting explanation, this time about the symbolism of the colors. Perhaps De Coubertin did indeed give conflicting explanations of these things. If so, this needs to be specifically emphasized, and all the meanings need to be treated in one place. Now it just seems muddled, as if three different people have come along and written three different things without noticing what was written elsewhere.

Though colorful explanations about the symbolism of the colored rings exist...

This gives the impression that there is no genuine symbolism associated with the colors. Are the meanings attributed earlier to De Coubertin examples of these "colorful explanations", then? How can this be so if he was the one who devised it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic Anthems


There is another song that has become an anthem for the Olympics that I remember being used since 1984. It probably preceded these Olympics, but I was only 10 then, and being from LA, that was my first real Olympic experience.

The anthem I refer to is Aaron Copland's Fanfare for the Common Man.

Another thing that warrants mentioning is that since, I believe, 1996 Atlanta, it has become fashionable for the host city to attach its own song specific to its Olympics. For example, Atlanta's song was called "Reach" and was performed by Gloria Estefan in the Opening Ceremony (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why these colors?


The colors on the Olympic flag are these colors because nearly every countries flag has a couple of the colors .e.g. Australia-red and blue, Ireland-green. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Paris flag / Antwerp flag II


I am not exactly sure what the title should be for the subsection regarding the flag introduced in Paris in 1924. Brief summary: The original Antwerp flag that was suppose to be passed from each Olympic host city was stolen in 1920, so a new replacement was made for the 1924 games in Paris. The problem is that the official IOC references and sources that I can find still seem to refer the replacement as the "Antwerp flag" instead of the "Paris flag". Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For now, I think it would be better to remove just that sub header, since the IOC appears not to officially use that “Paris flag” term. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This refers to US diver Hal Prieste, who stole "an" Olympic flag in 1920, but certainly not the main one in the stadium, referred to as the Antwerp flag, which was only replaced after the 1988 Games by the Korean flag. ([User:billbambam) 0627, 14 July 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billbambam (talkcontribs) 10:27, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reproduction of the Olympic rings


Now that copyright of the rings logo has expired (in most territories), is there any basis for the article still saying that the rings may only be reproduced in various combinations of colors and backgrounds? Andy Farrell (talk) 09:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would be flabbergasted if the IOC allowed copyright to lapse. The Olympics are enough of a juggernaut (like Disney) that they can essentially edit reality. Do you have a citation for the copyright lapsing? I mean specifically applying to the Olympic rings, not general copyright law. → ROUX  18:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not copyright but registered trademarks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you can't even show the Olympic Rings in an encyclopedia? What stupid broken intellectual property law is the reason for that? It just makes no sense. None. --Mudd1 (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Statement without Context


The phrase, under "Olympic rings", "Despite misconceptions, artists are free to remain creative." appears without any explicit relevance to preceding statements. I am not knowledgeable enough to make a change, but it is likely to be unclear to many readers what this is attempting to convey. (talk) 02:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lithuanian fan accused of racist behavior (within section on Olympic salute)


The reference used to back up the section on the Olympic salute being mistake4n for a Nazi salute actually contradicts what has been written here and stateside that the Lithuanian fan admitted racist behavior and admitted making nazi salutes. This section should be researched in more detail and rewritten or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fanfares and hymns


It should be stated more accurately that there are (as I understand it) both an individual Olympic hymn and an individual Olympic fanfare for each games. I only know the history of the 1952 Summer Olympics: two contests were hold for composers, one for the fanfare (already in 1939) and one for the hymn (in 1951). The fanfare contest was won by Aarre Merikanto and the hymn contest by Jouko Linjama. Perhaps this kind of information could be collected as a list: hymn and fanfare composers from Olympics to Olympics? --Mlang.Finn (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of the motto


Hello all, The usual translation is "higher, faster, stronger" but the first meaning of the Latin FORTIUS is actually "braver" Latin dictionary , which is also in line with Coubertin's preference of struggle rather than achievement. It would be good to indicate this alternative translation along with the usual one, isn't it? --Napishtim (talk) 10:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


The History of Olympic logos https://readymag.com/shuffle/olympic-logos/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuliaGrehonina (talkcontribs) 11:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment


The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Olympic symbols/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The page refers to the introduction of the Olympic symbol at 'the VIIth Olympiad in Antwerp in 1920...'. The word Olympiad refers to the four-year interval between the Games, not to the Games themselves. Should this be changed to 'the Games of the VIIth Olympiad in twerp in 1902!!!!

Andrew (talk) 06:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 20:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 01:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Change to the article


I edited the "Motto" section because it stated "is the Olympic motto" twice, once before the actual words "Citius. Altius. Fortius" and once after them. Please don't undo this edition, as this would result in redundancy since we would have "is the Olympic motto" twice. Thank you.--Fandelasketchup (talk) 11:46, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where to put this as I am not much of a Wikipedian, but I write a lot about Olympic history. I have been contacted by the IOC, with whom I consult, and they want the rings logo to be changed, as follows, "I just got this request from our Brands Department who would like the logo of the rings to be changed in Wikipedia, as this is not correct but is the source for what many people use as it is also referenced on Google images." I think the colors are slightly different than what they should be. I don't know how to do this or who to contact. If somebody can help you can contact me at bill1729@gmail.com (Bill Mallon) billbambam 0631 14 July 2016 —Preceding undated comment added 10:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Colour of the Olympic Rings


Okay, so the Blue Ring represents Europe, the Red Ring represents the Americas, and the Green Ring represents Australia. They all make sense because blue is the main colour of Europe, green is the main colour of Australia, and red is one of the main colours of the Americas, but how come Asia is represented by the Black Ring and Africa by the Yellow Ring? I reckon they should be the other way around. Did the original flag designer make a mistake? Should we propose a swap of the Rings between Africa and Asia to the IOC? Bobbie73 (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Always love reading about flags and other symbols. I knew the symbolism of the colors of the rings, and the article states (perhaps several times) that the colors referenced every national flag at the time. Are there any current national flags who are not referenced by one of the colors on the Olympic flag? PurpleChez (talk) 17:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PurpleChez: Interesting question. I think it depends on how you define colors, especially whether you consider murray to be different from red (Qatar, Latvia), gold from yellow (Bhutan) and whether you consider white to be one of the colors (background). There may be more edge cases like that. effeietsanders 07:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which official handbook?


The article states: "Prior to 1951, the official handbook stated that each colour corresponded to a particular continent: blue for Europe, yellow for Asia, black for Africa, green for Australia and Oceania, and red for the Americas". Well one (and the most recent) "official handbook" prior to 1951 ought to have been a handbook for London 1948 - so I searched and found XIV Olympiad of London - Official Handbook of Information. The problem is that although it describes medical care, laundry service and such essentials (in English, French and Spanish) it says absolutely nothing about the rings or their colours. Nothing! So, which "official handbook" does the article talk about?

The reference given to the statement ("Decision adopted by the Executive Committee" (PDF). Bulletin du Comité International Olympique (Olympic Review) (25). Lausanne: IOC: 32. January 1951.) leads to a page thay says (at least since yesterday) "If you’ve been redirected here, please re-enter your search in the SEARCH box (upper right)." so I entered "Decision adopted by the Executive Committee" in the SEARCH box (upper right), and got nothing but a blue label saying "Loading..." and after a while a pink label saying nothing. I tried to press the button "browse", I tried advanced search, I tried the link to "Olympic Review Collection", I tried everything I could imagine, but all I got was the blue label saying "Loading..." and then the pink label saying nothing.

The statement, or rewritings of it, can be found on a multitude of pages on the net, but I have not found any page that gives any supporting reference better than the pink label saying nothing. Episcophagus (talk) 09:48, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Episcophagus: — it's regrettable that nobody responded earlier to your concerns. Regarding how to deal with URLs that no longer work, see Wikipedia:Link rot. The appropriate action in this case would have been to add {{deadlink}} to the reference rather than to delete both reference and content; the reference was to a document originally physically published on paper in 1951 and thus still valid even if the URL no longer works. In any case, I have updated the URL and reworded the text more clearly. I have no further information about the nature of the "Green Booklet", but it was clearly an official IOC publication. jnestorius(talk) 13:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found the booklet on the IOC website Olympic World Library > Olympic Charter. The 1949 (French) and 1950 (English) editions have the assertion; the previous (1933, English) edition did not. jnestorius(talk) 15:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre de Coubertin's quote


In my opinion there is a considerable chance that the quote was actually written in 1913 and therefore the date might be a result of a typo in the source (https://web.archive.org/web/20080828204340/http://en.beijing2008.cn/spirit/symbols/flag/index.shtml). Moreover, the following quote from the aforementioned website might support my claim: "One year later, in 1913, the five rings appeared at the top of a letter written by Pierre de Coubertin. He drew the rings and coloured them in by hand. He then described this symbol in the Olympic Review of August 1913." Most importantly, the Olympic Studies Centre itself corroborates my conjecture, which can be found in the following PDF file: https://library.olympic.org/default/basicfilesdownload.ashx?itemId=83252. KarolloraK555 (talk) 18:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic Salute - Roman Salute


The article claims: " The Olympic salute is a variant of the Roman salute, with the right arm and hand stretched and pointing upward, the palm outward and downward, with the fingers touching. However, unlike the Roman Salute, the arm is raised higher and at an angle to the right from the shoulder." This is indeed what I learned in school as well. However, the sources that were linked do not support this at all (one is a poster from the 1924 Olympics, not making any mention of the Roman Empire, and the other is a description of the 1936 games). It was reported in Dutch media today, that the Dutch Olympic stadium (of the 1928 Olympics, the second Olympiad where this greeting would have been used after introduction in 1924) finalized a historic review, and arrived at the conclusion that there is no evidence that this is how the Romans greeted each other, and that the Olympic greeting was instead based on fascist traditions.

I am no expert in this field, but I'd argue that it warrants a more thorough review of this claim. effeietsanders 06:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

People who carry the Olympic Flag


It is surprising that there's no Wikipedia article stating the carriers of the Olympic Flag. Even though it is not explicitly specified in the Olympic Charter, carrying the Olympic flag is considered a way to honor prominent sportspeople and citizens according to the values stated by the Organizing Committee: in fact, compiling that list I have seen many people of merit in sports and society. I am currently planning a table with that information, in order to put it in this page. Do you think it is a good idea?

Tropicalia115 (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC) tropicalia115[reply]

Dimensions and Colors


Is there any information about the definition of the symbol/emblem: ratio of thickness of the rings and its diameters, distance between the centers, angles "between centers", and color codes?

Olympic rings

The Olympic flag

For the five Olympic rings, the Blue Ring represents Europe, the Green Ring represents Australia, and the Red Ring represents the Americas all make sense, but the Yellow Ring represents Africa and the Black Ring represents Asia do not make sense. Shouldn't they be the other way around? Did Coubertin make a mistake when he design the Olympic rings? I reckon we should urge the IOC to swap the positions of the Yellow Ring and the Black Ring to make it a better representation of the five inhabited continents. (talk) 04:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The black ring actually represents Africa and the yellow ring represents Asia. You were right about their geographical locations being inverted though. Vic Park (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I recently discovered that the French page Drapeau Olympique does not exist in English. By the same time, I saw that the page Olympic Flag is a redirecting to this page section Olympic symbols#Flag.
So I would like to know if there is a possibility to substitute the redirection by a complete traduction?
DesPsyCHo (talk) 08:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]