Talk:2005 Supercheap Auto 1000

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Chuqqling in topic Vandalism
edit

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dead link deleted. GTHO (talk) 03:05, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

"It was the 49th race that traces its lineage back to the 1960 Armstrong 500 held at Phillip Island"

edit

Re the above entry, can we say that a race can trace its own lineage? I believe this should read "It was the 49th race for which the lineage can be traced back to the 1960 Armstrong 500 held at Phillip Island" or something along those lines GTHO (talk) 03:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Further to the above, if we say that the 2005 Supercheap Auto 1000 was "the 49th race that traces its lineage back to the 1960 Armstrong 500" it would seem that we are implying that the 1960 Armstrong 500 was "the first race that traces its lineage back to the 1960 Armstrong 500". I propose to change the entry to "It was the 49th in a sequence of races commencing with the 1960 Armstrong 500 held at Phillip Island. GTHO (talk) 23:57, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Proposed change implemented. GTHO (talk) 03:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism

edit

I encountered a series of edits by IPv6 addresses at Grand Prix articles, which removed information and rewrote sentences using the wrong tense. At this article, the IP had also been active, in amongst a series of suspicious edits, which I therefore undid entirely. User:MSportWiki reinstated all the suspicious edits, claiming that "Literally none of this was vandalism".

These were the edits I undid:

  • [1] - removed information without explanation
  • [2] - introduced incorrect information.
  • [3] - made same incorrect change as previous
  • [4] - undid the previous edit
  • [5] - undid the one before that
  • [6] - removed information without explanation, introduced grammatical error
  • [7] - replaced a word with an unidiomatic phrase, without explanation
  • [8] - changed a lot of team and driver links, with an edit summary that did not correspond to the changes made.

Does the user stand by their claim that "literally none" of that was vandalism? Chuqqling (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply