 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Infobox
editWhy has one user, administrator or not, been splitting the above contrary to normal usage? The Breeders' Cup is no more or less important than any other Group 1 race. Please don't revert without discussing here first Billsmith60 (talk) 19:20, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Also, the May Hill Stakes is Group 2, important but not "major" as the heading says Billsmith60 (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- A subheading "North American Wins" might be acceptable in the Infobox, but definitely not "Breeders' Cup": that meeting is by no means the only one in that continent Billsmith60 (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Major wins according to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing project is any Group or Graded (US) event - That includes G2, G3. Also North American Breeders' Cup and Triple Crown Events are acknowledged separately with their own heading. I will open a discussion on the project Talk page about your deletions.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 04:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- That's a good idea. I'll look out for that and make any points needed there. The racehorse infobox is not for US horses only. Regards Billsmith60 (talk) 10:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's always been customary to include any Group race wins in an infobox, and usually Listed race wins as well.--Bcp67 (talk) 21:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- That's fine, thanks. My main point was what I believe is an unwarranted highlighting of the Breeders' Cup Billsmith60 (talk) 10:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Billsmith60:, I'm in agreement with you there - I think for a European-trained horse, at least, there is no need to highlight Breeders' Cup wins separately. We don't even highlight our own Classic wins in the infobox, they just get listed with the rest of the wins! For North American-trained horses I'd personally leave it to the people who edit those articles to have their own standards. Bcp67 (talk) 10:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- That sounds like a plan! Billsmith60 (talk) 14:41, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Billsmith60:, I'm in agreement with you there - I think for a European-trained horse, at least, there is no need to highlight Breeders' Cup wins separately. We don't even highlight our own Classic wins in the infobox, they just get listed with the rest of the wins! For North American-trained horses I'd personally leave it to the people who edit those articles to have their own standards. Bcp67 (talk) 10:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- That's fine, thanks. My main point was what I believe is an unwarranted highlighting of the Breeders' Cup Billsmith60 (talk) 10:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's always been customary to include any Group race wins in an infobox, and usually Listed race wins as well.--Bcp67 (talk) 21:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- That's a good idea. I'll look out for that and make any points needed there. The racehorse infobox is not for US horses only. Regards Billsmith60 (talk) 10:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Major wins according to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing project is any Group or Graded (US) event - That includes G2, G3. Also North American Breeders' Cup and Triple Crown Events are acknowledged separately with their own heading. I will open a discussion on the project Talk page about your deletions.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 04:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- A subheading "North American Wins" might be acceptable in the Infobox, but definitely not "Breeders' Cup": that meeting is by no means the only one in that continent Billsmith60 (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Billsmith60:, @Bcp67: I don't think that this is the location which such a plan should be formalized. We as a project should be looking for consistency across the whole project and not differentiate between US, British, Australian or any other country. The Breeders' Cup is a pinnacle for the Northern Hemisphere racing season. If it wasn't, why would so many European connections venture across the Atlantic to get a piece of the pie, and not just the stakes offered but the recognition of getting a victory? I think there is absolutely no harm for an Breeders' Cup winner to have that in their infobox.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, "sounds like a plan" is vernacular for "good idea", so there is no plan. Also, both myself and another contributor feel that differentiating between European G1 wins and the BC is unjustified. Who says that the BC is the pinnacle? It is the 'World Championship' of racing in its own mind: Timeform's review of last week's meeting would suggest that it needs to look to its laurels, and if (unlike the American Triple Crown horses) European horses didn't support it, the meeting would be even poorer. European horses are sent there to complete their season and avail of the excellent prize money and kudos that a G1 race brings – but no more. BC wins *must be mentioned in the Infobox but not under a separate heading. Regards Billsmith60 (talk) 12:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- What kind of a Major wins is Timeform that you have the spark to place it in the same noticeable area of the infobox and not Breeders' Cup wins? I disagree that your premise that the Breeders' Cup is just excellent money and no more. You seem to have little regard for the breeding aspect of the sport and the ramifications of post Timeform careers. If BC is *NOT* the pinnacle in this sport, then what is?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- There is no pinnacle nor world championship in horseracing. The BC is indeed very valuable, just like the top European races, but let's not make it something it isn't. What evidence can you present for the BC being better or more important than the G1s in Europe? Please put the Timeform rating in a more appropriate place in the Infobox and I'll adhere to that in future and for articles I keep an eye on Billsmith60 (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- And while consistency across the project is definitely desirable, we do have regional differences between articles - for example, North American race articles have their winners lists sorted with the most recent at the top while European ones have the oldest at the top. Neither is better or worse, just different. I don't see it as a problem for different regions to do things slightly differently while conforming to a basic overall structure. Bcp67 (talk) 21:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Then we are in agreement, I think, along the lines suggested above by @Bcp67: Billsmith60 (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- And while consistency across the project is definitely desirable, we do have regional differences between articles - for example, North American race articles have their winners lists sorted with the most recent at the top while European ones have the oldest at the top. Neither is better or worse, just different. I don't see it as a problem for different regions to do things slightly differently while conforming to a basic overall structure. Bcp67 (talk) 21:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- There is no pinnacle nor world championship in horseracing. The BC is indeed very valuable, just like the top European races, but let's not make it something it isn't. What evidence can you present for the BC being better or more important than the G1s in Europe? Please put the Timeform rating in a more appropriate place in the Infobox and I'll adhere to that in future and for articles I keep an eye on Billsmith60 (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- What kind of a Major wins is Timeform that you have the spark to place it in the same noticeable area of the infobox and not Breeders' Cup wins? I disagree that your premise that the Breeders' Cup is just excellent money and no more. You seem to have little regard for the breeding aspect of the sport and the ramifications of post Timeform careers. If BC is *NOT* the pinnacle in this sport, then what is?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, "sounds like a plan" is vernacular for "good idea", so there is no plan. Also, both myself and another contributor feel that differentiating between European G1 wins and the BC is unjustified. Who says that the BC is the pinnacle? It is the 'World Championship' of racing in its own mind: Timeform's review of last week's meeting would suggest that it needs to look to its laurels, and if (unlike the American Triple Crown horses) European horses didn't support it, the meeting would be even poorer. European horses are sent there to complete their season and avail of the excellent prize money and kudos that a G1 race brings – but no more. BC wins *must be mentioned in the Infobox but not under a separate heading. Regards Billsmith60 (talk) 12:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Billsmith60:, @Bcp67: I don't think that this is the location which such a plan should be formalized. We as a project should be looking for consistency across the whole project and not differentiate between US, British, Australian or any other country. The Breeders' Cup is a pinnacle for the Northern Hemisphere racing season. If it wasn't, why would so many European connections venture across the Atlantic to get a piece of the pie, and not just the stakes offered but the recognition of getting a victory? I think there is absolutely no harm for an Breeders' Cup winner to have that in their infobox.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2023 (UTC)