Talk:The Boat Race

New logo

The logo in this article is out of date - new logo on http://theboatraces.org/ has word "RACES" instead of "RACE". If anyone out there is a graphics geek, could they fix this? It seems non-trivial as right-clicking on the logo on the website doesn't offer any "save image" options, so it's apparently not a separate image file. PamD 15:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 13 March 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 12:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The Boat Race → The Boat Races – This year the women's boat race is also happening on the tideway and the event has been re-branded as The Boat Races. However, the BNY Mellon Boat Race and the Newton Women's Boat race remain as brand names for the specific races. It is also the case that all the information about the women's boat races preceding 2015 is contained in the article about the Henley Boat Race. Given the complexity of this issue I thought it should be discussed before any move. Should this page be moved to The Boat Races? Alternatively should a seperate page be made for The Boat Races, and perhaps even one for the Women's Boat Race separate from the Henley Boat Races article? Bosstopher (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

• Comment for info: Women's Boat Race was created today, replacing a redirect. PamD 19:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose There have always been multiple races as the reserve crews race first on the same day. The event is traditionally known as the Boat Race (singular) and we should stick with this per WP:COMMONNAME, unless and until we see that this new addition sticks. The organisers have also been using the sponsor's name for the event before but I don't get the impression that that has much currency. Andrew D. (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

*Support I am open to the idea of having one article for both events as The Boat Races which would certainly avoid the WP:SYSTEMATICBIAS of having the different classes of title. Otherwise I suggest keeping the title The Boat Race for the history of related Boat Race events, and then have two sub and stub articles: Results of The Boat Race, men's event and Results of The Boat Race, women's event. In any case, since 1965, there have been two events in "The Boat Race", the main race and the reserve race.

In both contents: Template:Cambridge University Rowing Clubs and Template:Oxford University Rowing Clubs, the "event" is called The Boat Race. As far as I remember, and I have watched "it" most years, "The Boat Race" has always referred to the whole event. If the event, associated with Oxford and Cambridge geniuses, is finally being titled with correct grammar, then good luck to them. GregKaye 01:23, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose although I think that it would be a positive development if a navigation page were created at The Boat Races. Both names, The Boat Race and The Women's Boat Race are presented at http://theboatraces.org. GregKaye 01:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment: I drafted a disambiguation page for The Boat Races in my sandbox. Some sources are included as hidden text. Welcome any comments. Whizz40 (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Support creation of a disambig page Seems like the best solution.Bosstopher (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose The term "the Boat Race" is very well established in Britain for this specific race, although there may be a case for moving it to something more specific in an international encyclopedia. However "the Boat Races" would not be meaningful to most British people, far from obvious that this covers both the men and women's events, some might assume it referred to the men's races over the years. PatGallacher (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and arguments above. But support creation of a navigation page as suggested. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. The common name is still the singular. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Based on the comments above, I'll create the navigation page The Boat Races. Whizz40 (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Media coverage: self-serving?

While Boat Race is clearly an (upper) class event, it has been reasonably easy for the ruling elite to con-vince people that it is some kind of a working class event - were the lower orders can watch for free. So, in relation to the Boat Race, should not Wikipedia re-consider the term "British national institution"? .

Link 34 broken

References http://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/The-University-Year/The-Boat-Race

This link is broken unsure how to take it out or fix it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbos2hm (talk • contribs) 16:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Startling course image error!!

Dear Wikipedians, Why is the image representing the course West to East, i.e. a negative of the actuality? The course goes up river westwards, so why show the start on the right when it should be on the left? Unfortunately, I do not possess the skills to alter it, but I am sure someone else can. In hope, --Po Kadzieli (talk) 11:52, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I think that is quite clearly because when you look at a map of the Thames you expect the West to be on the left, and East to be on the right (otherwise your map would be upside down). The image is quite clear where the start and end are located. Aloneinthewild (talk) 11:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Cambridge lead in cumulative wins date

The lead states that "Cambridge has led Oxford in cumulative wins since 1928" - this isn't supported by the table on List of The Boat Race results#Main_race which shows Oxford still leading by 40-39 after the 1928 race. It looks like Cambridge levelled the score in 1929 and finally went ahead with a win in 1930. I don't want to change this article myself as I'm not really sure of the history and whether maybe some races are discounted as part of the overall score but it looks like something isn't correct somewhere. --Bcp67 (talk) 07:33, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks, I've cross-checked with the list of results as you noted and I have adjusted the lead to say since 1930, not since 1928. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:14, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Great, thanks - I've now fixed the lead of that list itself to read 1930 as well. There is a cite after that year there to a website of results but I can't see anything specific on that site referring to Cambridge taking the overall lead so I've left the cite alone. Thanks for picking that fix up, all the best. --Bcp67 (talk) 11:21, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Request move to "The Boat Races"

Requested move 3 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 23:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

---

The Boat Race → The Boat Races – "The Boat Race" apparently has changed to "The Boat Races" to include the women's race too. The logo has now changed too, where it hadn't in 2015 (above). SethWhales ^talk 20:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose it's known by its common name, The Boat Race. Maybe in ten years time... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose This was discussed and rejected in 2015, see above. PatGallacher (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, but it is 2 years later...the World doesn't stand still. SethWhales ^talk 08:35, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose there is a separate article for the Women's Boat Race which covers its separate history. The annual events have been combined and are covered in combined articles since 2015, eg The Boat Races 2017, but it still consists of two separate events. The current series of articles properly reflects this. Whizz40 (talk) 08:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose this article is about the male race and not the now combined event. Maybe we should make this more clear in the lead or a hatnote? Aloneinthewild (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree with Aloneinthewild that as the Woman's Boat Race has a seperate article. Wetter88 (talk) 12:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Made some changes to the lead, hopefully these help clarify the scope of this article and the relationship to 'the boat races'. Whizz40 (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above, this article is for the men's race, for which The Boat Race is the common name. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Following on the discussion, I'll add the relevant move requests to move Category:The Boat Race and Template: The Boat Race to the plural since they both already cover both races. Whizz40 (talk) 19:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

The Race of 1839

What happened in 1839, did Oxford sink or run aground? --95.222.186.244 (talk) 16:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

No. The race is described at The Boat Race 1839. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:44, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Boat Race. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theboatrace.org/article/newsandmedia/20102011news/xchangings
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140924062736/http://theboatrace.org/men/results to http://theboatrace.org/men/results

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) 06:13, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Boat Race. 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/20141007064520/http://theboatrace.org/men/statistics to http://theboatrace.org/men/statistics
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141007064520/http://theboatrace.org/men/statistics to http://theboatrace.org/men/statistics

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) 19:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

The Boat Race and Women's Boat Race articles

Currently, we have this article, which covers the men's race, and also the women's race in less detail (with separate infoboxes for both); and Women's Boat Race, which covers only the women's race.

I'd suggest we either need to (a) make this article more clearly about the men's race - explicitly specify this in the lead, remove the women's race infobox, remove "Men's Race" subheadings, move any women's race-specific content into the Women's Boat race article and mention the women's race only in passing or as relevant to the men's race; or (b) merge the two articles.

For what it's worth, the current official website uses "The Boat Race" to mean the entire event, and "The Men's Boat Race" and "The Women's Boat Race" for the separate races. I suspect, though, that in common parlance "The Boat Race" often means the men's event. TSP (talk) 09:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The history of the men's Boat Race was completely separate from the Women's Boat Race for 189 years until 2015. The history of the women's race is covered separately in a Good Article. This article is closer to C-Level. Unless an editor who knows the topic well is willing to improve this article and there is a consensus to combine them, then I suggest we keep the two articles separate. However, as you note the current races are run as a single event so readers would now expect this article to reflect that. Hence my proposal for the current compromise as the most stable alternative that is easily navigable for readers. That is, this article covers the combined event and the Men's race and its history in detail, with references to the Women's Boat Race article in WP:Summary Style. Whizz40 (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

That gets my vote. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. Though worrying about the editing history and relative quality of the articles seems a bit editor-centric rather than reader-centric?

I think the biggest problem may be the headnotes. This article has "For the Women's Boat Race, see Women's Boat Race"; that article has "For the Men's Boat Race, see The Boat Race." That strongly suggests this article is only about the men's race, which is not the case.

Perhaps "For the separate history of the Women's race, see Women's Boat Race"; and "for the Men's race and the current combined event, see The Boat Race"? It's a bit long, but I think the current situation is pretty confusing. TSP (talk) 14:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Makes sense, however that information may belong in the article itself per WP:LEGITHAT. In which case, we should remove those hatnotes from this article and the Women's Boat Race article. Whizz40 (talk) 15:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Good point - I think that's best; on reflection neither of the hatnotes is actually helpful.

I think "For the 1895 film, see The Oxford and Cambridge University Boat Race (film)." can go too - it's a film about this event, already mentioned in the Media Coverage section.

I'd suggest this article should have This article is about the race between Oxford and Cambridge universities. For other uses, see Boat race (disambiguation). ('Oxbridge' is a bit jargony for a disambiguation) and Women's Boat Race doesn't need a hatnote at all. TSP (talk) 16:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks good. Whizz40 (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Text of 1987 Oxford mutiny

The section relating to the 1987 mutiny stated "A fitness test between Clark and Macdonald (in which the American triumphed) resulted in a call for the Scotsman's removal". However Macdonald was not mentioned in the text before this, so the statement lacked context. For this reason I have slightly amended the statement. Dunarc (talk) 22:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I've edited this further for clarity. It's very literary to talk about "the American" and "the Scotsman", but given that Macdonald's nationality had never been mentioned before and Clark's not for several paragraphs, it's a lot less confusing to simply use their names. TSP (talk) 12:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - I think this makes things much clearer and reads much better. Dunarc (talk) 22:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

The 1877 Boat Race outcome

Contemporary primary sources

The following list of newspapers publishing in 1877 is based on that in "British Historical Facts 1830–1900" ed. Chris Cook and Brendan Keith (St Martin's Press, 1975).

Sunday newspapers of 25 March 1877

• The Examiner
• Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper: "the Cantabs coming with a great and well-sustained effort 100 yards below the Ship, made a DEAD HEAT of it at the finishing point at Barker's rails. ... The Oxonians appealed from the decision of John Phelps, the judge, to Mr. Joseph Chitty, Q.C., the umpire. The learned gentleman was "opening" a case before the Master of the Rolls, when he learned that his presence was desired elsewhere. Straightway the learned advocate was transformed into a judge, and the all-important cause of Oxford and Cambridge was argued before him in the Rolls robing-room. The impartial lovers of aquatics will not be sorry to learn that the judgment of the court below was affirmed, and the appeal dismissed, of course without costs.

Phelps asserts that the boats came in so close together that it was impossible for him to do otherwise than declare it a dead heat." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 7, column 5.

• News of the World
• Observer
• Reynolds Newspaper: "A few strokes from the winning post both boats were exactly level and close alongside one another; but on nearing the flagpost the Oxford coxswain pulled his right string and threw the boats apart again, so that it was most difficult to really see which boat, if either, was ahead. John Phelps, the waterman, fired the gun as the signal of the conclusion of the race. His verdict was a dead heat, but among the crowd of boats which congregated together in the general anxiety to learn the result of so close a finish it was some time before he could be found, and it was at first thought that Oxford had won by a yard or so." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 1, column 4.
• The Spectator
• Sunday Dispatch
• Sunday Illustrated News
• Sunday Referee (founded 1877; check it was by 24 March)
• Sunday Times: "A few strokes from the winning-post both boats were exactly level and close alongside one another; but on nearing the flag-post the Oxford coxswain pulled his right string and threw the boats apart again, so that it was most difficult to really see which boat, if either, was ahead. John Phelps fired the gun as the signal of the conclusion of the race. His verdict was a DEAD HEAT, but among the crowd of boats which congregated together in the general anxiety to learn the result of so close a finish it was some time before he could be found, and it was at first thought that Oxford had won by a yard or so." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 5, column 4.

Daily newspapers

• Daily Chronicle
• Daily News: "Both crews made a grand spurt, and when the gun fired, it was impossible for any one behind to known [sic] the result. Loud cries of "Oxford" announced that Cambridge had lost, and overwhelming applause resounded on all sides. In a few moments the victory of the Dark Blues began to be doubted; questions were asked as to the judge's decision, and one or two on the Press steamer who knew Phelps were the only persons who actually knew what his verdict was. In the ordinary way the judge should have formally given his decision to the umpire, but for some unexplained reason he failed to do so. On all hands, however, the dead heat was acknowledged, after a while, but the decision being called in question, the umpire, Mr. Chitty, Q.C., subsequently had an interview with Phelps, and the matter was settled.

At the dinner in the evening Mr. Chitty made a statement which at once set the matter at rest. Phelps, it appears, was watching the boats from the Middlesex side of the river, and as they passed between him and a post fixed on the opposite shore, he was unable to perceive which of the two boats came past him first. This statement the umpire very rightly decided was equivalent to a dead heat" (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 3, column 4.

• Daily Telegraph
• Manchester Guardian
• Morning Advertiser (?? specialist paper for the licensed trade)
• Morning Post: "Shoot by shoot the Cantabs crept up, and, amid the yells and deafening shouts of countless thousands, the judge declared it a "dead heat". Time, 24min. 4sec.

Some of the Oxford people were not satisfied with the decision of the judge, and it was questioned before the umpire, but Phelps was not moved by anybody, and adhered to his verdict that it was so close he could not say which came in first." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 6, column 6.

• The Standard
• The Times

London evening newspapers

• Evening Standard: "The race finishes about 100 yards above the Ship, at which point Oxford had still a lead of a few yards, and it was not until in the last few strokes that a final spurt on Shafto's part placed the two boats level.

The crowd on the banks and the crush on the river so obscured the winning post that it was only by the smoke from the gun fired by the judge as the crews reached the goal that its whereabouts could be at once discerned. As the crews eased it was impossible to tell from astern which was ahead, and it was some time before an answer could be given to the question "Who won?"

Old John Phelps, who has ever since the University Race has been rowed on the Thames officiated as judge, had again been appointed to this now important post; but after the race was over the umpire was unable to find him in order to ascertain what was really the result, and after half an hour had been consumed in steaming up and down in search of him the umpire's boat returned to town, those on board having to be content with the hearsay statement that the verdict of the result was a "dead heat." In the course of the afternoon Mr. Chitty had an opportunity of seeing Phelps at Lincoln's-inn, and any doubt there may have been as to the result was set at rest." ...

"In the course of the evening Mr. Chitty, Q.C., the umpire, stated that he had had an opportunity of questioning John Phelps on the result of the race, and was satisfied from his replied that both boats had actually passed the post simultaneously, and that the result was, as had previously been stated, a dead heat."

"The telegram announcing the success of Oxford, which reached there as early as nine o'clock and was posted publicly, was read with the greatest possible enthusiasm, which soon gave away to feelings of intense disappointment when an hour later a further telegram announcing a "dead heat" came to hand. The excitement was intensified by the arrival of private telegrams stating that Phelps, the judge, had at first declared Oxford as the winners, and that in consequence the umpire (Mr. Chitty) had suspended his decision until he had had an interview with the judge on the subject. Owing to Mr. Chitty's legal duties compelling him to return to town early the ultimate decision was considerably delayed, and in the meantime public feeling was raised to an unusual extent, the arrival during the day of several persons from the scene of action who declared Oxford had come in first having further increased the agitation. When all doubt had been removed by the confirmation of the unpalatable intelligence of the dead heat the excitement culminated, and a general opinion was evinced that the Oxonians had been the victims of unfairness." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".) page 2, columns 4-5.

• Globe
• Pall Mall Gazette
• The Echo
• The Star

Other newspapers

• Illustrated London News (No. 1968, Saturday, March 31, 1877). "in spite of the desperate exertions of the other seven men, the Cambridge boat rapidly gained; and, though the general opinion was that Oxford won by about a couple of yards, the decision given by John Phelps was a dead-heat, a result with few parallels in the history of rowing." (No mention of "dead heat to Oxford".)

Comments

• I fixed all the formatting errors, no need for any barnstars! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
• If you could add more publication information (e.g. date, author, issue number, page number etc), that would actually be useful for the 1877 article. Otherwise I just get the feeling this is a lengthy exercise to achieve almost literally nothing. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

• • I believe there are no sources from 1877 that quote "dead heat to Oxford" or words to like effect. I could just cite a few, but in that case it may be argued that there were others as yet unchecked which did contain the quote. So I have to find all possible sources where the quote might have appeared, confirm that it did not. I promise that if I find a source that does claim Phelps made some similar remark I will include it. But I have not yet. Of course if you accept that that remark was never made, and there are no contemporary sources for it, then our disagreement is at an end. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:17, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Not at all, I have already explained that I have three sources which claim he did say that or a variation on that. Your quest is all very interesting, and may bring some additional depth to the 1877 article, but it changes literally nothing per your original beef. So, if you continue to pursue this, at least add proper citations so we can use your research to enhance the articles. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

A question

Do we need "Cambridge has led Oxford in cumulative wins since 1930" and "Cambridge has led Oxford in cumulative wins since 1966". If both are accurate surely we only need the first. --Bduke (talk) 05:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

On reflection, I think the first is about the men's race and the second is about the women's race, but it could be clearer. --Bduke (talk) 06:59, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I have tried to clarify this in the article.--Bduke (talk) 09:47, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

in the wee map....

.... I see "harrods depositary". that's not how it's spelled in real life, & it changes the meaning quite substantially. is this out of ignorance or an archaic affectation on the part of our cartographer?

duncanrmi (talk) 14:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

I've changed it, matching the font as best as I can (inexpertly) judge. Thincat (talk) 15:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Boat Race/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 21:10, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Will this be the one to complete the good topic? It has to be pretty close. I'll take a look at this one. Hog Farm _Talk 21:10, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

• As of this revision, the infobox claims that Cambridge women's have won 46, but the rest of the article gives 45?
• The 1829 almost seems to be a one-off? Why was it resumed again in 1836?
• The 1959 mutiny section could use a bit of expansion; why exactly did they attempt to oust the two?
• For the sinkings section - was the 1912 one later rerun?

More to come later. Hog Farm _Talk 21:23, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

• The descriptions of the various courses seem to be largely uncited.
• The Championship Course section is largely uncited and includes a year-old CN tag
• While the Unofficial courses section material is partially cited elsewhere, the locations aren't and neither is " As none of those competing were awarded blues"
• Shouldn't the fact that the women's version has been held annually since 1964 (which appears in the lead) be mentioned in the women's section?
• Shouldn't the attendance/viewership statistics in the lead be included somewhere in the body?
• "Ethnographer Mark de Rond described the training, selection, and victory of the 2007 Cambridge crew in The Last Amateurs: To Hell and Back with the Cambridge Boat Race Crew" - this needs a secondary citation to demonstrate significance
• A fair bit of failed verification in the competitor's section
• "This has caused a debate about a change of rules, and one suggestion is that only students who are enrolled in courses lasting at least two years should be eligible to race" - source is from 2007, any results since this
• "Xchanging also became title sponsor in November 2009 so, from the 156th Race until 2012, the event was known as The Xchanging Boat Race" - source does not indicate that this ceased after 2012
• The Gemini bit is uncited
• Uncited text in the other boat races section
• The popular culture section is entirely self-sourced to the pop culture references themselves; a secondary source should be provided for each to demonstrate significance
• "Book of Days Tales" does not seem to be RS
• Is thames.me.uk RS?
• Learn About Movie Posters does not seem to be RS

I'm sorry, but I'm gonna have to fail this one. There's failed verification, uncited text that has been outstanding for some time, unreliable sources, a very disjointed history section, and lead issues. TRM, I see you haven't edited this one in seven months, and it really doesn't feel prepared at all. Hog Farm _Talk 22:31, 14 April 2022 (UTC)