Talk:2011 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series

Please edit

The flagicons in the team chart should be removed per MOS:ICON. --Nascar1996 ^{Contributions / Guestbook} 17:44, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Change something and add something

Nascar1996, why are we using a 24 hour clock when in the U.S. NASCAR goes by a 12 hour clock? Do you know how complicated it is to figure out a 24 hour clock by just having to look at the start time of the Daytona 500? And second, don't you remember the 1:00 3:00 7:00 start times all year long promise NASCAR made? Do you honestly think they would just get rid of it after one season?--Nascar king 17:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

:I am using the 24-hour clocks so it will be easier for viewers to understand internationally. I watch every race, the 1,3,7 rule is still going to be used, but for mostly the pre-race; it also is not for every race. Please view the reference, and note that the sponosors of of this year not in 2011, that is the reason I did not add them. Before you comment next time, why not read the reference first? --Nascar1996 17:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I am using the 1,3, 7 rule for the Daytona 500, but the Bud Shootout and the Duels do not go by that, it is only for points races. Nascar1996 17:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done Nascar1996 18:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

96, I am also obsessed with NASCAR to the point it is pretty much my life. But with all do respect you seem to have the 1,3,7 promise a little misinterpreted. 1:00, 3:00, and 7:00 races start an hour after the pre race show except in the case of races covered by TNT which start 90 minutes after I think.You think we can go ahead and put the starting time for the Coca Cola 600? It always starts 45 minutes after the hour.--Nascar king 19:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I have heard some time changes for some of the races, so I will not add the time for the Coca-Cola 600. Also thats the reason I striked it out. :) That is when the national anthem is, the race doesn't really start until 19 minutes after. --Nascar1996 20:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Well when the green flag is dropped varies but prerace coverage ends when the prerace ceremony starts. Haven't you noticed they usually end the prerace coverage just before they send it down trackside for the ceremony?--Nascar king 20:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but the same people broadcast both. What does this have to do with anything? Nascar1996 20:59, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Now that I think about it I don't know. But a side note, shouldn't it be TBA for Jeff Gordon's sponsor for the 2011 season. Because his sponsor that's been with him for his entire career Dupont ends this season and they haven't been able to renegotiate a new deal. I saw an article on NASCAR.com about Walmart possibly being 24 sponsor next season.--Nascar king 21:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

If Walmart becomes his sponor it will be his primary which hasn't been listed yet. The reason is it is not official, only official things from the reference is allowed. Which some is not because it has a ? beside of it. Nascar1996 21:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Here's what I'm talking about --Nascar king 22:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Did you read it? It says "Walmart's potential move into NASCAR", which means they may if they can come to a decision, which they haven't yet. So I dont wan to add it because it is not offial. Nascar1996 22:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I don't think they can until Dupont says they aren't coming back next season with Jeff Gordon.--Nascar king 22:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Both can come back, but only one will be his primary sponsor. Nascar1996 22:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Well if Dupont signs back with 24 I doubt he'll seek another sponsor since he's already got Pepsi and Nicorette sponsoring him.--Nascar king 23:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

More sponsors the better. Nascar1996 23:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Yea but those sponsors aren't primary sponsors. Gordon usually only races with Pepsi on races sponsored by Pepsi and I don't remember the last time he raced with Nicorett.--Nascar king 23:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, we have gone of subject to the article. I say lets end this conservation. Nascar1996 00:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Yea that was exactly what I was gonna say.--Nascar king 00:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

References

AARP replacing DuPont?

Part of the article explained that AARP is replacing DuPont, but it's false. DuPont's sponsorship will continue with Jeff Gordon, AARP's just starting out with their Drive to End Hunger campaign. Dupont IS returning for 13 races on the schedule, AARP with 22. Can anybody fix this? --Impala99 (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

They replace DuPont as the primary sponsor of the car. DuPont is now a associative sponsor. Nascar1996 21:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Who decided to make that change? WAYNESLAM 01:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean? Who made the change on the article, or who made that change in real life. I added the information, and they will. AARP will run 11 or so races while Dupont will run less. It says so in the reference. Why make a change? AARP, who will run more races, will replace them as the primary sponsor. Nascar1996 02:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Pre-season testing

Just curious, why does pre-season testing have such a large section? Surely the 36 races are what is really important about the season? Will coverage of each of the 36 races be that detailed, or will we see at seasons ennd that the testing got more coverage than the races? --Falcadore (talk) 01:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm planning to have two other tables, like last season, and I plan to have a report on the season similar to how the Formula One project is doing to their project. Nascar1996 02:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I hope so. If I can find the references it will be all very detailed. Nascar1996 02:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Forgive me for saying this, but tables are not a substitution for description, and testing is just practice. Do NFL articles give coverage for example of how many goals are scored by punters in training, by way of comparison? Just something to bear in mind, a growing trend two years ago in European racing articles is that because little racing was occurring this time of year, bored edittors were writing disproportionally large amounts about pre-season testing. --Falcadore (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

You don't understand what I'm planning to do. I plan to include a report on the season, and have the two tables that say who won, took the pole, and other things. The article will also have a table showing everyones results, with the most recent points standings combined in one table. Do you help contribute to the Formula One season articles? --Nascar1996 03:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

This isn't my point. Such a large section on testing fails notability. --Falcadore (talk) 04:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Why isn't it notable? I think it is, and I haven't had anyone else say its not. Also, you can't compare NFL seasons with Motorsports seasons, it is completely different. Wouldn't testing be broad in coverage? Nascar1996 04:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a subject discussed at length in other motorsport projects. Testing in motor racing is the equivalent of a training run. No other sport in Wikipedia covers any form of training statistics or considers it notable. --Falcadore (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Explain [[2010 Formula One season, 2011 Formula One season then. Nascar1996 22:19, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The 2010 F1 was DRASTICALLY reduced from the huge size it had once been cut down by at least three-quarters in size. 2011 F1 is starting to get large again and will need another trim shortly. You do understand the concept of training against competition and the relative notability? --Falcadore (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Mostly yes, and I will see if I can shorten the section down, but there were several test sessions. It will also be the only NASCAR sanctend track that will have testing, except at Kentucky where they are planning to have a test a day before they would normally start practicing. I thougt it was notable because its very rare now for NASCAR to have testing at the tracks used by the three major series. You may consider bringing this up somewhere else to see what the people think. If its not needed I will remove it, if people agree to resize the paragraph I will. If they say keep the same I it stay the same. That is after all the only testing during preseason so its not going to get much larger. Nascar1996 01:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I don't see anything about seasons in the notability standards shown here. So I have no specific reason to reword it. Nascar1996 00:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Just for clarification of your last, are you saying you need a Wikipedia guideline to tell you specifically that training exercises is not actually notable? If so what other aspects of motorsport minutiae to need clarified for notability purposes? --Falcadore (talk) 01:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, if it isn;t in there, the ACTUAL rules of this encyclopedia, I'm not concerned about it. Its very similar to how a practice session is important to a race. Testing is much different in this sport, than other sports. It is also more notable, and as I said above, unless several people say it needs to go by a current conversation at a WikiProject page, I'm not going to reword it or remove it. Also I'm pretty clear on the standards for NASCAR, which is different from Formula One. Nascar1996 01:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

No testing is not different in motor racing at all. The difference that lap times are reported because it something able to be reported. If someone sat down and counted the number of hits A-Rod made in Spring Training then a newspaper would report it, but that wouldn't make it notable. What you are suggesting is that the next time Usain Bolt goes on a training run at his local stadium and someone puts a stopwatch on him it should be added to the 100m at the 2012 London Olympics article. That is the nearest to an exact comparison of notability. Stating that motorsport is different is not a justiftifcation, it is just you saying you think motorsport is different. You have also just said you feel you have the right to add any old trivia you like unless it is expressly mentioned in WP:Notability, which is... unco-operative at best.

I am working on finding previous discussions. This is a subject sorted months, even years ago, so it's difficult to find in the archives. --Falcadore (talk) 02:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Another user and myself believe this section should stay in WikiProject NASCAR. So, I believe now END of conversation. By the way, I removed some of it that didn't belong. Nascar1996 02:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Also found teh discussion. Nascar1996 03:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, from that discussion, tables are not notable. Okay in the article there are no tables, all it says is the fastest driver and time for each of the five testing sessions. Umm, as small as it can be. Then removing it would not be broad in coverage. I am trying to get this article to GA-status, and I don't need help from F1 users. Nascar1996 03:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The problem emerged from a statistic obsessive adding data from every single testing session, and then not participating in contributing anything towards race reporting and creating WP:UNDUE problems. The problem later spread into many other motorsport articles well outside F1 and it was that discussion I was attempting to find (thus removing the perception that it is purely an F1 issue - see the note at the end of the discussion we found referring to Formula BMW) Just trying to head off the same issue spreading across other articles. The problem in many ways is created by a few editors having little to write about during the off-season so the unimportant gets out-of-proportion attention.

I truly admire your goal of getting a motorsport season article to GA status. Be prepared for many knockbacks when it comes to peer review, many things taken for granted within WP:Motor are squarely against some wikipedia policies, you'll have a tough time with regards to WP:MOSFLAGS certainly. I'm not sure if a motorsport season article has achieved GA status before from any category. If you can do it, it will be a achievement worthy of praise. --Falcadore (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

If the flags are a problem they are easily removable. As you said, its not just F1, but its not stock car racing, where testing really matters in this decade. NASCAR completely controlled the test, and some of the cars are going to be Daytona 500 cars, or Budweiser Shootout cars. I understand the flag rule, mostly the one for drivers. Where they should not show birth or death place. I will do anything to make this a Good Article, no matter what. I'm going to expand all races this season, and I am going to add a summary for the entire season here. --Nascar1996 11:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Another tip if this is not considered too obvious, you'll also find that the GA status would not be assessed until after the 2011 season is complete. Might be easier to start with the already complete 2010 season? --Falcadore (talk) 01:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't have enough time. Soon I (February 12) will start expanding the races again. Until then, I'm working on copy-editing some of NASCAR articles. Also I planned to nominate it (if I think it can be one) for GA probably in November or December, depending on how the article is. This article I will update it after each race. Thanks for the tips. Nascar1996 11:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Font Issue

When I'm viewing the table chart for the season points, Carl Edwards' and Dale Jr.'s names aren't emboldened. I've compared it to the N'Wide Series table chart, and the pole winners are emboldened. Is there something wrong with the font, the size or something?Gaeaman787 (talk) 06:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks bold to me. The sheer size of this table has meant a smaller point is used, and that reduces the effect of the bolding. What browser do you use? --Falcadore (talk) 09:39, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone knocked the font size down to 80%, presumably for ideal use on smaller monitors. Although this has had a knock-on effect of making everything slightly harder to read. The bolding of the pole winners is still noticeable (Chrome 9.0.597.107, default font size, Windows 7), it is barely there though, the bolding probably only increasing the numbers' size by 2 pixels or so, which on a 1080p monitor, makes it hard to stand out. I suggest we revert it to 85%, as the table was always too big for smaller monitors anyway due to the sheer number of races held by NASCAR.

It also makes me wonder why that editor only changed Sprint Cup and not Nationwide, seeing as Nationwide have 34 races per season, just two short of the Sprint Cup's 36, so surely N'wide also had a size issue? TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 14:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I can tell its bolded on my screen. As well as my smaller screen, but it is hard to see. We might consider changing the size back to the old format. --Nascar1996 14:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

New points

An announcement came on January 26, 2011, when Brian France announced that the winner of the race, excluding bonus points will receive 43 points & For bonus points, if the driver leads a lap they receive one, if they lead the most laps they receive one more, and if they win the race they receive three more points.
Isn't that safe to say that the winner gets 46 (43+3) points? That's how I understand the "if they win the race they receive three more points" part. If not, what is the guaranteed minimum points winner will get? It must be more than 43. 85.217.20.33 (talk) 07:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Guaranteed minimum will be 46. Maximum 48. -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 11:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I just realized that if a driver wins a race, then he must have lead at least one lap. So, actually winner gets either 48 points (when led the most laps, 43+1+1+3) or 47 points (when not led most laps, 43+1+3).

But I don't get why the winning points is divided to "normal" and "bonus" points. Though it is not relevant for the article, it just won't make sense. 85.217.20.33 (talk) 08:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

All points contribute towards standings at the end of the regular season (26 races) and to qualification for the Chase. However, only the three bonus points for a win are carried forward to the Chase itself.Jpfowler27 (talk) 04:10, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on 2011 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120317071552/http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-clint-bowyer-has-fastest-daytona-nascar-test-session-speed/ to http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-clint-bowyer-has-fastest-daytona-nascar-test-session-speed/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120317071628/http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-joey-logano-denny-hamlin-cross-197-barrier-at-daytona/ to http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-joey-logano-denny-hamlin-cross-197-barrier-at-daytona/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724060209/http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-harvick-wins-at-cms/ to http://nascar.speedtv.com/article/cup-harvick-wins-at-cms/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111101190615/http://racingnewsdigest.com/2011/05/kevin-harvick-wins-coke-cola-600-longest-nascar-race-ever-crazy-finish to http://racingnewsdigest.com/2011/05/kevin-harvick-wins-coke-cola-600-longest-nascar-race-ever-crazy-finish/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://msn.foxsports.com/nascar/story/NASCAR-on-FOX-ready-for-new-NASCAR-Sprint-Cup-season%2C-schedule-changes-081910
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927143446/http://www.speedwaymedia.com/articles/Story.php?S=4461016101833 to http://www.speedwaymedia.com/articles/Story.php?S=4461016101833

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) 09:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)