m1963 wrote:Many of the links in the Wikipedia post are broken, or do not work as may have been intended. Perhaps those who know what, is what, here, can update them.
It's probably worth clarifying that if you're referring to the red links, they're not "broken" per se (a "broken" or "stale" link is normally one to a page which no longer exists), simply that the article has not yet been created. The red link is a
placeholder.
Someone has looked at the list and added the name of the relevant organisation so that readers can see it exists, but they haven't had the time or inclination to start a full-fledged article for it. As someone who has contributed and indeed written a few articles from scratch, it's quite an undertaking to get together even a basic stub worth reading that's reasonably structured with decent citations and a sensible infobox.
What is also important is to remember that there may in fact be a Wikipedia article for an organisation, but in a non-English Wiki. You're only seeing articles there in en.wikipedia.org. There could be (and probably are) more comprehensive articles about the German or French Associations (for instance) in de.wikipedia.org or fr.wikipedia.org.
Nice, not come across kumo.io before. Going to have to have a play with that. My initial reaction to your tree there is that it's potentially a little misleading if we're talking about "stakeholders", because (for instance), the European organisations are clustered around a Europe node but AFAIK, groups like British Shooting deal
directly with the ISSF - they don't go
via the ESC for instance. There's that balance between making the tree usable (it wouldn't be helpful if every single national governing body had a link to the ISSF), but also preserving the actual relationships between bodies and chains of hierarchy.
However, as a way of
finding organisations, it's excellent and breaking out geographically like that is much more hierarchical.
The other problem with all those hierarchical representations of course is that there's no single global body. The ISSF for instance want nothing to do with Fullbore Rifle outside of their 300m discipline, so the ICFRA would be at the top of their own tree, as would the IPSC and WFTF. Former Olympic Disciplines like Running Deer are also out in the cold in favour of the ISSF's overly-sanitised "Running Target". But that is more a reflection on the politics and fragmentation of the sport itself rather than anyone's data visualisation skills!
TenMetrePeter wrote:Well the NSRA link has been updated this morning. Thanks whoever did that.
That would be me. Probably should have mentioned I went in and furtled a couple of bits after posting here.