Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Horse racing page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 30 July 2012.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14

Created 2021 Road to the Kentucky Derby[edit]

Can regulars start going through and adding wikilinks, correcting my mistakes and additional refs in the new 2021 Road to the Kentucky Derby? Its about this time we start getting interested with 6 months to go. Cheers! Brudder Andrusha (talk) 22:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Brudder Andrusha, I've done a couple of bits around the European Road section today. --Bcp67 (talk) 07:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick look too. I couldn't find a formal announcement from Churchill Downs for the new year so I added a note. Jlvsclrk (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing some minor updates on this page and came across from the main Prep races that the Jeff Ruby Stakes (Spiral Stakes) has had the qualification points raised to Championship series - Second Leg on par with main Derbies. I'm looking for any other reference before modifying this in the article, but this doesn't surprise me that Churchill Downs Inc. made a nice deal with Turfway Park due to the change of dates last year with Covid-19 problems. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category ?[edit]

Do we really want this category?
Category:Filmed deaths of animals
Stretchrunner (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weeeelllll... there is the broader category Category:Filmed deaths. I suppose you could run it up the flagpole at categories for deletion and see what happens… I must say I won’t take a position, I’ll just get my popcorn and watch the show... Montanabw^(talk) 19:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention for sports stadia[edit]

A request for comment is open regarding the use of parenthetical disambiguation in relation to articles on sports stadia here: Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RfC Naming convention for sports stadia. Input is welcome. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Female horse owners[edit]

I stumbled across a conversation between @Montanabw: and @Stretchrunner: that I intruded upon believing that the discussion should included to all who participate on this Project. Stretchrunner has the belief that when he creates, updates, or just edit a horse race table, if possible I do my best to find and replace Owner: Mrs. John Doe with showing only HER name. It's very hard to find a female first name but if one gets lucky and does, it can take many hours. I disagree with this approach given that changing the name from what was registered when the horse won the event. If the reference (especially in the period when women were not allowed to be owners) given indicates Mrs. Joe Brown or some pseudonym like when Merman who won the 1900 Ascot Gold Cup the name should stay. If the horse is registered to be owned for example by Mrs. John Magnier then that is what should be in the table. The link can go to who the person is but the registered name is given per the reference (WP:V). Opening this up for discussion. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The name should match the source cited. If the source says "Mrs. Percy Highbottom" instead of "Lola Highbottom" then that is what should be in the box. You would have to cite another source confirming the given name of the female owner if the original literature did not report it (which is, of course, more work). Froggerlaura ^ribbit 21:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

If the woman has a Wikipedia article, a piped link should be used to the correct name. If there is a known name, I see no problem with adding a parenthetical that identifies who they are if sourced. While it is true that we need to faithfully site to registration documents, press reports may have used different styles than did the Jockey Club, so we do have to check... when possible, women should not be treated as mere appendages of their husbands, even if that’s what they did 100 years ago. Similarly, there may be an Argument to do the same for people whose name on the registration records are abbreviated, for example, “J.B. Haggin”, who is James Ben Ali Haggin. Montanabw^(talk) 19:40, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help for requested move: Royal Heroine Mile Stakes -> Royal Heroine Stakes[edit]

I have updated this article but I do not have admin privileges to move Royal Heroine Mile Stakes to Royal Heroine Stakes due to an existing REDIRECT. The event has been run as the Royal Heroine Stakes since 2014. An uncontested technical move has been requested. Can someone with admin privileges perform this move? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 16:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COMPLETED. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment on SSN at WP:Notability (sports)[edit]

There is a discussion on SSN (sport specific guidelines) at RFC on Notability (sports) policy and reliability issues. Feel free to go there and post your comments. Cassiopeia^(talk) 00:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed change in sports notability policy[edit]

A proposal is pending that would prohibit the creation of sports biographies unless supported by "substantial coverage in at least one non-routine source". In other words, articles supported solely by statistical databases would not be permitted, and at least one example of WP:SIGCOV would be required to be included before an article could be created. Also, article creation based on Wikiproject Guidelines would be curtailed. If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, you can express those views at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#Fram's revised proposal. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, I created the horse racing SNGs, this is a concern for us. That said, having more than just a database is definitely needed. Montanabw^(talk) 22:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe its a good time to review this Project's SIG and tighten any loopholes. I know we had some issues with a couple of horses that had articles created that lacked significant notability in the past, but some of the issues point out in the proposals thread are looking for massive deletes.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 02:53, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grand National Winners and Cleanup[edit]

Hey all, I'm new to the site but have created a few pages for Grand National Winners who haven't got one yet and am hoping to make one for them all. I've also started going through the winners and races and standardising them (especially infoboxes, flag icons, layout) as well as adding a Grand National Record table and Pedigree for each winning horse.

The pages I've made:

Looking for feedback, thanks!

Lankyant (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it at all possible to add a 'latest race' link at the bottom of the infobox on the Grand National main page? Example being London Marathon. Think it would be handy but can't work out how to do it. Should also be added to Kentucky Derby.

Lankyant (talk) 02:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a go to tool to design racing silks? Would like to get to work on adding some to add to the Grand National races if it's not too difficult.

Lankyant (talk) 00:15, 14April 2021 (UTC)

pinging Tigerboy1966, JockeyColours and Bcp67 who work in this area. Please be careful about making mass changes to “standardize”articles without obtaining consensus. You have some good ideas but let’s see them in practice. Montanabw^(talk) 01:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I will do, and when I say standardise I mean more just making sure odds and flagicons are listed the same style in every race as well as adding conditions and starting prices that were missing to the infoboxes. So no major things or reworks :)

User: Lankyant 02:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know which silks (which years?) you need and I will happily generate if they don't exist already JockeyColours (talk) 07:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not keen on the use of flag icons on the Grand National articles. The people and horses mentioned aren't "representing" a country, and MOS:INFOBOXFLAG advises against it as well.--Bcp67 (talk) 09:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm sorry Lankyant if it sounds like I'm objecting to everything, but do we need a Grand National record table for every winner's article? In some cases the horse only ran once in the race. A full table of races might be useful, but we don't see that on many horse articles and it would be very difficult to source in any case.--Bcp67 (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More positively, welcome to the project - there aren't many of us here, but (hopefully!) we're a co-operative group and I'd say the standard of the horse racing articles is quite good in general. An article for every Grand National is a good target to aim for. --Bcp67 (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome! In terms of flags I wanted to sort it out because it was only sporadically done and seemed weird and I think it's fine because aren't they seen as 'Irish winners' and 'British trained'? But I agree they aren't entirely necessary I just wasn't liking that they were used differently across different articles.

And I also agree with the record tables for 1 race horses but I saw it more as a quick reference point for people to look at instead of digging into the meat of an article it gives a quick idea of the result but if you dislike I'm happy to delete.

But yes I definitely think that we should aim for a page for each winner.

And yes, I had way too much free time lately so seemed like this would be a useful way to spend it!

[User:Lankyant] 14:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey JockeyColours, sorry I didn't see your reply! That would be great and much appreciated. I will try and get something together obviously the full list for races would be grand especially for 2021 but that's a lot of work but in terms of winners we have nothing it seems pre 2000 so I know that takes some research which I will try and put together. But for now we need Bobbyjo 1999 -red top with gold sleeves. gold Lorraine cross on centre with green cap with gold stripes.

But instead of full race cards I'd like to prioritise the top 4 finishers from 2004 to 2013 and 2015, 2016, 2017 to make a place table with as we only have the winning colours currently.

Thank you!

User:Lankyant 02:33 15 April 2021

Bob Baffert doping mention[edit]

I noticed on the Bob Baffert article that there is no mention of any of the numerous doping issues over the past few years. I think they should be mentioned. Best, Thriley (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

added a bit. whole article needs some tinkering, which I'll done when I'm feeling a little more... charitable. Jlvsclrk (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ideas for British races winners lists[edit]

I've experimented with adding a couple of new columns to the winners lists, one to show the race status for each year, and the other to link the Racing Post reference specifically to the year. I've used one of this week's races as a trial, the Westow Stakes. If you're interested, could you have a look please and give your thoughts there as to whether it's a good idea, looks useful etc. Thanks, --Bcp67 (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about English law regarding Thoroughbred racing. However in the U.S. there is only one reference needed for the race. We do not need a reference for each individual race. Most of what I see on Wiki only goes back to 1976 in the U.S. and in England to 1988. The reason is that U.S. horse racing and casinos etc. all fall under the jurisdiction of state gambling laws and the racetrack proprietor is solely responsible, and liable for, the content of its published information on each race. Hence, all a Wiki article on the Whatsitsname Stakes needs is a link to that page (e.g the NYRA) or a track's media guide. Other than NYRA tracks and Del Mar etc, that are owned by a state government, when the Wiki article refers to something about the race or a participant etc. that is not on the racetrack's info, then we need to insert a reliable attribution. If the track does not publish the info (and most are now dropping their media guides), and has not passed it to Equibase Co, LLC as their only legal representative, then Wioukipedia needs reliable attributions. Stretchrunner II (talk) 00:46, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your source that only one reference for a race is needed? That is poor for an article to only have one sourced reference that is coming from the club that hosts the race. As I have pointed out in the past some of the information in the Media Guides is wrong and incomplete. Also this is Wikipedia with our own criteria to provide information that appropriately WP:V and not a duplicate for what is published by some track's (some holding company) media guide. Obviously you do not think much of the updates to events that I have been doing. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have any single source for British or Irish race results or history - the source for race results since 1988 is usually the Racing Post database, which began that year. Before that it's usually printed sources like newspapers or books. The Racing Post refs are all added in the References sections of race articles at the moment but many races have been tagged as needing inline citations, so one of the ideas of my experiment is to put the RP ref on the table on the same line as the race itself. In addition to the above two ideas, I'm also starting to add winning owners to Group 2 race tables, but that's a longer project. --Bcp67 (talk) 10:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bcp67: My only query about the article Westow Stakes does not deal with the table format that you are trying to improve but whether the event falls under WP:GNG or our own project definitions of what deserves an article. I know that sometimes folks like to create an article about a horse that has not won a Grade I and then the article has to been deleted. Maybe the project should review this for events. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I think listed stakes meet notability on both sides of the Atlantic, although they don't all need articles. For example, the El Camino Real Derby is "only" a listed stakes, but its very much in the news today because of Rombauer. Jlvsclrk (talk) 00:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to our project notability acceptance of an event which has once been a Graded event such as the El Camino Real Derby even though it is Listed now is acceptable since historically it meets the guidelines that the project accepts. However, if the event has only achieved Listed status then I do not see why the event should have an article. There is a cut off point similar to notability of horse and in other sports such as football (players who have not played for professional clubs or teams that have not played in professional leagues). For example why does the Listed Hot Springs Stakes which was created earlier this year have an article and the Listed Gold Fever Stakes at Belmont Park does not? IMO according to our own cutoff point the Hot Springs Stakes should be deleted.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I like the format - it's great to have a link to the chart available if you want to do more research, and its cool that you've got the Racing Post template that doesn't take up all the space that a full ref does. (As an aside, I bet we could do the same for Equibase charts since the URL link is always a code for the racetrack, the date and race number.) For European racing, I don't think you need all the columns that we might include in North America, like distance, because they don't change as much. I get the impression that the purse isn't nearly as important as well. A major difference is we almost always show the owner in addition to the trainer and jockey.

@Bcp67: Sorry for joining this discussion so late. I like the idea (especially if it leads to less warnings about lack of references), but I don't like the redundancy of the data displayed in the Ref column as 99.9% of the time it will be a repeat of the year specified in column 1 (very occasionally a NH race can take place twice in the same calendar year). My preference would be for the RP reference to be used for displaying the Year in column 1, alternatively (via a slightly different RP template) the Ref column could provide (small) added value by displaying the full date on which the race took place. JockeyColours (talk)

Premio Presidente della Repubblica[edit]

Dear WikiProject Horse racing. I was thinking about translating the (newly created) Italian wikipage it:Premio Presidente della Repubblica which is about a prestigious prize of the prestigious scientific institution Lincei National Academy (given every year by the Italian president). I was surprised to see that the English page is about horse racing. I'm not the right person that can evaluate the notability of that (horse racing) page. Can you please verify that the existing page meets the notability criteria? Despite the name, it doesn't seem connected to the Italian institutions. --SimoneD89 (talk) 18:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SimoneD89: The event in question is currently a Group II event and was once a Group I event and I would assume one of the more prestigious horse races in Italy which according to this Horse Racing Project is well within the WP:GNG guidelines to have an article about it. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 23:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, the article is about a notable horse race (granted far more notable in the past than at present). We could move it to XXXX (horse race) or add an about template to link to XXXX (prize), or create a DAB page that links to both. Whatever works. Jlvsclrk (talk) 01:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your comments. I think it is a good idea to rename the article to XXX (horse racing), because in Italian premio is prize and I've heard only gran premio (grands prix/grand prizes) connected to racing. It is an unfortunate name because the republic president doesn't seem to be involved and also it doesn't seem to be connected with the Italian institutions. I'm really surprised that one can give such a name to something that is not directly organized or connected to the state. I will name the Lincei prize article XXX (prize) and I will let you know when the article is created. --SimoneD89 (talk) 06:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SimoneD89: A move have been made for the horse race article and a redirect disambiguation page now holds that title - Premio Presidente della Repubblica Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your availability. --SimoneD89 (talk) 11:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For information purposes: I posted the following to User talk:Onel5969[edit]

Your edit : Broadway Stakes (NYB) moved to draftspace

All Thoroughbred racing in the United States is governed by state gambling laws. Hence, there is only one legal source for referencing those races, that being the racetrack proprietor who holds the gambling license. In the case of the Broadway Stakes, it is owned by the New York Racing Association (NYRA) and all information contained in the Wikipedia article on the Broadway Stakes is derived from the referenced NYRA. Note that in this case the NYRA is a government entity owned by the State of New York. In articles where there might be information not covered by the track owner, i.e. comments about the events during the race that the jockey moved too early etc., or a comment that the horse had not run for two months due to an injury, or the winner lost for the first time in four starts, and more. Those comments come from the media and are referenced at Wikipedia to reputable sources such as the Daily Racing Form, Thoroughbred Daily News, the New York Times, Blood-horse magazine and the like. Further, Equibase Co., LLC is an official source having been authorized as such by racetrack owners plus by licensed breeders for pedigree records. However, Equibase Co., LLC only document races back to 1976 and in a great many cases the races created at Wikipedia go way past that to times as early as 1860. Note too, there are defunct/discontinued races from long ago, many of which are because the racetrack closed or were forced to close through state anti-gambling legislation such as the Hart-Agnew Law. For these historically important Wikipedia articles, we use very reliable sources as references. I hope this helps but I think it would be a lot easier for you and others who work hard to ensure quality for Wikipedia but who don't have in-depth expertise on this particular subject to leave a question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing where someone knowledgeable will certainly answer it. Kindly reverse your edit. Thanks. Stretchrunner II (talk) 20:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969:IMO, does Broadway Stakes (NYB) even qualify under WP:GNG ? Its not a graded event and it is merely restricted to NY breds. IMO this article should be deleted or not even started. Under our own project criteria this article is dubious from the start. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:07, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brudder Andrusha, that was one of the two primary reasons I moved it to draft. First, it is woefully undersourced wholly by primary sources. Second, was the notability issue. I'm just slogging through my NPP work and haven't yet responded to yesterday's talk page questions, so this will stand as my response. However, as per draftify, if the process is contested, regardless of its merit, the draft should be returned to mainspace, which I will do shortly. I would definitely vote delete at an AfD, as I can't find enough in-depth coverage to show it passes WP:GNG. And thanks for the ping, I was unaware of this discussion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:36, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Onel5969, I totally agree with your response about the formation and content and your direction of questioning the existence of this article. Once the article is live, tag it with an AfD and we'll go from there. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969:, Project Members: an AfD has been tagged for Broadway Stakes (NYB). Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broadway Stakes (NYB). Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:19, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: - Article was deleted. This brings up the question why there is a category of Category:Restricted stakes races in the United States which now has one less entry at 30, and whether the events in this category would qualify under WP:NHORSERACING. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Kentucky Derby and related articles[edit]

Hi all. Can I ask for help reviewing any and all pages related to the 2021 Kentucky Derby. Although the second sample for Medina Spirit was also positive, he has NOT yet been disqualified. That decision will be made by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, which will deliberate at its own sweet pace. (For reference, it took four years before Dancer's Image DQ was officially official.) Folks want to jump ahead of the process though and change the winner. I'm updating as I come across stuff. Oh, and the ban of Baffert at Churchill Downs is official, for now, but we don't yet know to what extent it will be followed at other tracks. Bloodhorse has lots of stuff. I'm using the WaPo article for now, and I expect NYT will have some great stuff since they broke the story on Justify's positive. Jlvsclrk (talk) 00:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the admins of our project should lock on 2021 Kentucky Derby, Medina Spirit and Bob Baffert until things settle down. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, the Derby and Medina Spirit’s articles look mostly OK to me, but if they turn into an editor timesink, RPP could still be requested (I’m not an admin, dang.). Baffert’s article has pending changes protection on it as of today, but someone was doing a bit of a POV hatchet job on the piece, and there were a lot of new and IP edits, so I requested temporary semi-protection to slow things down a but more…I also toned down some of the material to meet NPOV and address recentism. We had a similar problem with Doug O’Neill a few years ago, these drug scandals just need to stick to BLP and usually it all shakes out appropriately in the long run. Montanabw^(talk) 07:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Rickman (broadcaster)[edit]

Hi all. I don’t normally create articles in this area, but in researching a different topic, I came across John Rickman the longtime broadcaster journalist of British horse races and created a quick stub. The article is currently an orphan. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:05, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I've managed to find a mention of him in the ITV Seven article and linked. Famous for doffing his trilby hat to the viewers! --Bcp67 (talk) 20:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you.4meter4 (talk) 21:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfD created for Hot Rod Charlie[edit]

An Afd has been entered for the article about Hot Rod Charlie. Hot Rod Charlie has only won a Grade II event. IMO, a Grade I victory is a minimum to meet the criteria to have an article meeting the project requirements for WP:N and WP:GNG. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 23:41, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hot Rod Charlie. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:20, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Hot Rod Charlie meets GNG, there is no end of coverage of independent and secondary, reliable sourced articles out there for the horse. He does not require any help from the SNG to meet notability. As you all know, no horse needs to win a Grade I race to obtain notability for GNG. However, using SNG is another way a horse may obtain notability, as in the case of winning GI, or multiple significant GII/GIII grade/group races. There are also the hall of fames and such in the SNG. Obviously, if we applied GI as mandatory to GNG, there would be 100s or 1000s of existing articles in violation. dawnleelynn^(talk) 21:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dawn, I saw the links. Frankly, they are a mess. You have ones running together making it hard work to look at them. Some I did look at are routine race coverage. BTW, Bleacherreport isn't acceptable. Please link up the run on links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WilliamJE I appreciate your time. The bullets seemed to work fine in my browser so it's strange. I will use a different method though. Some really good links also reside in the article itself. Thanks for letting me know about Bleacherreport. I will look at the links, maybe remove some and add others. Your suggestions are very good. I should be able to get to this tonight. Thanks! 00:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)dawnleelynn^(talk)[reply]

WilliamJE The article has been updated.dawnleelynn^(talk) 03:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Might be good for more folks here to comment over there. It’s a useful discussion of both the differences between GNG and SNG (which is a frequent discussion at AfD across multiple topics) and useful to us to help form a consensus for future reference. One thing that periodically has me scratching my head in the past is how to handle notability of those longstanding, historic Derby preps like the Louisiana Derby that may have at times been GI or the equivalent, but aren’t at the moment. Montanabw^(talk) 06:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. "Grade I" can be a tricky criteria because the grading looks at past runnings and doesn't reflect the quality of the current year's field. It does seem odd that we'd give Super Stock an automatic notability pass for having won an exceptionally weak Arkansas Derby, but have trouble with Hot Rod Charlie, who won what was one of the strongest preps of the season (the top 3 in Louisiana were in the top 6 of the Derby, and that doesn't even count Mandaloun, who threw a clunker in Louisiana). Right now, Hot Rod Charlie is matching up favourably with where Gun Runner was at the same point in the season (won Louisina Derby, placed in the KD and then had a great performance in June). We waited though for Gun Runner until he turned into a monster at age four. I could argue that almost all of the coverage that includes Hot Rod Charlie is related to the races and not the horse in particular. That was why I originally agreed that the article should be deleted. Now I'm leaning the other way, especially given the Beyer assigned to him from the Belmont (107 - higher than American Pharoah) and the praise for him hanging on despite the torrid pace. (Andy Serling called it the best losing effort in New York since Seattle Slew lost to Exceller - praise indeed). So, yeah. Tough call. Jlvsclrk (talk) 20:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to have a horse like Hot Rod Charlie in my stable but with regards what has been asked of us in the past as Wikipedia contributors is to give feedback within the project and provide input and barnstorm with other contributors as to what is acceptable and what is not. I've been involved with WP:FOOTY and that project had serious discussions withing its project to setup the WP:SNG for WP:NFOOTY. That project like other sports projects had to deal with an abundance of contributors that would create dubious articles that would at times annoy the admins and spark off a continuous stream of AfD. They had to specifically determine the criteria of what was an allowable article and what was not. The same was asked of our project that contributors were asked what would be a manageable entry so that articles could withstand the onslaught of questionable actions. No different with this article as the temptation of WP:RECENT is placed asunder while acceptance of an arguable exception is promoted. I think patience would be a virtue with this article but some folks think that just because there is an article on the web about a horse and his performance - IMO that does not make him notable even though you can Google and find many hits. The criteria that was set up by the members of this project for the SNG and decided what is the minimum criteria for an article should stand and be accepted. The changes then should be pointed at WP:NHORSERACING whether exceptions should clearly be added which would accommodate situations such as with Hot Rod Charlie where his performance in US Classic Races this year can been a reason for inclusion. As to the grading of events - that is something we must accept from the TOBA's American Graded Stakes Committee and not for us to judge what is good one year and not another. Its great discussion but to me its off tangent when we clearly have our guidelines. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to be clear, WP:NOTE specifies a topic is presumed to merit an article by meeting the WP:GNG or the criteria below outlined below or in the related subject-specific notability guideline (SNG). In this case, the WP:SPORT guideline applies, which states, ""If the article does meet the criteria set forth below, then it is likely that sufficient sources exist to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. Failing to meet the criteria in this guideline means that notability will need to be established in other ways (for example, the general notability guideline, or other, topic-specific, notability guidelines)."

Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept."

So we have here the direct content that says failure to meet the Horseracing SNG does not mean an article must be deleted. It also states we can try to meet GNG. Regarding WP:RECENT, of the three Triple Crown races, for which there were 25 horses who ran in the combined three races, only seven articles were created. That doesn't sound like an abundance.

Funny what you said about "does not make him notable even though you can Google and find many hits." If I can't Google to find sources, how do you suggest that I find sources, btw? You know I don't just do a search and throw sites in here in five minutes. It takes time because I do research and learn about the horse and the sites. Last of all, I guess I need to provide the sources again--I mean just the ones that document that he was covered prior to the TC races. And also I am providing three sources wherein the trainer talks about his potentially racing Charlie in one of three upcoming races in the next couple months. Even though the GNG says proof of future notability is not required.

Prior to May 1, 2021:

Early references:

Pedigree Fun Facts: Hot Rod Charlie
Tales from the Crib: Hot Rod Charlie
Hermitage-born Hot Rod Charlie top Derby horse

Breeders Cup

Hot Rod Charlie Fresh Off Juvenile Shock
Breeders' Cup Cocktails & Conversation Welcomes Boat Racing, Co-Owners of Hot Rod Charlie, to This Week's Show
Breeders Cup Contender Hot Rod Charlie

Lousiana Derby

Hot Rod Charlie sets track record, gets first GII victory in $1M Louisiana Derby
Hot Rod Charlie Breaks Through in Louisiana Derby Win
Hot Rod Charlie Speeds To Victory In Louisiana Derby
Hot Rod Charlie Speeds In For Louisiana Derby
Hot Rod Charlie full throttle in TwinSpires.com Louisiana Derby win

Santa Anita Park

O'Neills Hot Rod Charlie gets in final Kentucky Derby Work As He Drills Six Furlongs in 1:13:68 Prior to Saturday's First Place
Hot Rod Charlie Tunes Up at Santa Anita

Future races:

Pacific Classic Could be Next for Hot Rod Charlie
Hot Rod Charlie Full Of Energy After Gallant Belmont Try
Saratoga rivalry may be in offing for Essential Quality, Hot Rod Charlie

3Also, I spent much time fixing up his article. dawnleelynn^(talk) 23:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Horse races - Notability[edit]

Wikipedia:Article deleted/Broadway Stakes (NYB)[edit]

This article was put up for deletion by WikiProject Horse racing member User:Brudder Andrusha who stated the following as their reasoning:

The article is about an event that fails WP:GNG for the Wikipedia:WikiWikiProject Horse racing. Under project guidelines the event should be at a minimum be graded. This event is a non-graded restricted race which lacks notability. (talk) 11:40, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

While I may strongly disagree with User:Brudder Andrusa that Thoroughbred race articles at Wikipedia should be at a minimum be graded which eliminates all Listed, Restricted, Ungraded, and Black type stakes races, I respect the opinions of the WikiProject Horse racing members who did not object to the deletion of the Broadway Stakes (NYB) as the members were adhering to the WikiProject guidelines.

Over and above the Non-graded stakes races, there are no Graded stakes races in North America prior to 1973 and prior to 1971 for British & Irish races so this problem will have to be dealt with. Deleting the Listed, Restricted, Ungraded/Black type races represents a massive job. And, these required race deletions will have a profound effect on a multitude of other Wikipedia articles including those for jockeys, trainers, and owners. I do not know how this very difficult deleting situation should be organized in the context of "the event should be at a minimum be graded" policy.

Regarding articles for horses User:Brudder Andrusha has also stated: "IMO, a Grade I victory is a minimum to meet the criteria to have an article meeting the project requirements for WP:N and WP:GNG.

I, and obviously the industry itself, believe State/Province-bred races are a very important and vital part of Thoroughbred racing as are a number of ungraded/Black type stakes. My view is shared by many other editors at Wikipedia as evidenced by the volume of those types of articles they have created or contributed to which includes Brudder Andrusha' substantial edits and races. (e.g. Charles Town Oaks, Harlan's Holiday Stakes, Parx Dash Stakes and others). Although WikiProject's deletion policy will have enormous consequences for Wikipedia we nevertheless have to accept that the Broadway Stakes (NYB) article had to be deleted as User:Brudder Andrusha's position is that the article's deletion is enunciated in the WikiProject's established guideline and was done through the due process Wikipedia stipulates for article deletions.

There are many more such races in Wikipedia for Europe that don't meet the WikiProject guidelines and we will need a number of volunteers to help prepare them for the deletion process. There are Wikipedia articles List of British flat horse races#Other races and List of Irish flat horse races#Other races as follows, all of which will have be deleted in order to meet the WikiProject's guideline.

Similarly, there are Australian listed races like the G A Towton Cup that will have to be deleted. I could not find a list.

Long lists of articles

Month	Race Name	Racecourse	Status	Distance	Age/Sex	2021 winner
March	Patton Stakes	Dundalk	Listed	1m	3yo	My Generation
March	Devoy Stakes	Naas	Listed	1m	4yo+	Broome
April	Cork Stakes	Cork	Listed	6f	3yo+	Laugh A Minute
April	Noblesse Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m 4f	4yo+ f	Moll
April	Leopardstown 2,000 Guineas Trial Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	7f	3yo	Poetic Flare
April	Heritage Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m	4yo+	Lope Y Fernandez
April	Committed Stakes	Navan	Listed	5f 164y	3yo	Measure of Magic
April	Salsabil Stakes	Navan	Listed	1m 2f	3yo f	Rocky Sky
April	Woodlands Stakes	Naas	Listed	5f	3yo+	Mooneista
April	Victor McCalmont Memorial Stakes	Gowran Park	Listed	1m 1f 100y	3yo+ f	Too Soon To Panic
May	Polonia Stakes	Naas	Listed	5½f	3yo+ f	Measure of Magic
May	Vintage Tipple Stakes	Gowran Park	Listed	1m 6f	4yo+ f	Mighty Blue
May	First Flier Stakes	Curragh	Listed	5f	2yo	Castle Star
May	Tetrarch Stakes	Curragh	Listed	7f	3yo	Lunar Space
May	Saval Beg Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m 6f	4yo+	Emperor of the Sun
May	Sole Power Sprint Stakes	Curragh	Listed	5f	4yo+	Logo Hunter
May	Yeats Stakes	Navan	Listed	1m 5f	3yo	Sir Lucan
May	Rochestown Stakes	Naas	Listed	6f	2yo
May	Owenstown Stud Stakes	Naas	Listed	7f	3yo+	Snapraeterea
May	Marble Hill Stakes	Curragh	Listed	6f	2yo	Castle Star
June	Orby Stakes	Curragh	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+	Reve De Vol
June	Nijinsky Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m 4f	3yo	Fernando Vichi
June	Glencairn Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m	3yo+	Magnanimous
June	Midsummer Sprint Stakes	Cork	Listed	5f	3yo+	Logo Hunter
June	Naas Oaks Trial	Naas	Listed	1m 2f	3yo f
June	Celebration Stakes	Curragh	Listed	1m	3yo+
June	Belgrave Stakes	Curragh	Listed	6f	3yo+
June	Ulster Derby	Down Royal	Handicap	1m 4f 190y	3yo+
July	Her Majesty's Plate	Down Royal	Listed	1m 6f	4yo+
July	Lenebane Stakes	Roscommon	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+
July	Tipperary Stakes	Tipperary	Listed	5f	2yo
July	Cairn Rouge Stakes	Killarney	Listed	1m 100y	3yo+ f
July	Sweet Mimosa Stakes	Naas	Listed	6f	3yo+ f
July	Vinnie Roe Stakes	Naas	Listed	1m 6f	3yo
July	Corrib Fillies Stakes	Galway	Listed	7f	3yo+ f
August	Platinum Stakes	Cork	Listed	1m	3yo+
August	El Gran Senor Stakes	Tipperary	Listed	7f 100y	2yo
August	Abergwaun Stakes	Tipperary	Listed	5f	3yo+
August	Hurry Harriet Stakes	Gowran Park	Listed	1m 1f 100y	3yo+ f
August	Ruby Stakes	Killarney	Listed	1m 100y	3yo+
August	Curragh Stakes	Curragh	Listed	5f	2yo
September	Oyster Stakes	Galway	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+ f
September	Listowel Stakes	Listowel	Listed	1m 1f	3yo+
September	Ingabelle Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	7f	2yo
September	Blenheim Stakes	Fairyhouse	Listed	6f	2yo
October	Martin Molony Stakes	Limerick	Listed	1m 4f 110y	4yo+
October	Star Appeal Stakes	Dundalk	Listed	7f	2yo
October	Finale Stakes	Curragh	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+
October	Staffordstown Stud Stakes	Curragh	Listed	1m	2yo f
October	Testimonial Stakes	Curragh	Listed	6f	3yo+
October	Legacy Stakes	Navan	Listed	5f 182y	2yo
October	Carlingford Stakes	Dundalk	Listed	1m 2f 150y	3yo+
October	Navigation Stakes	Cork	Listed	1m 100y	3yo+
October	Bluebell Stakes	Naas	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+ f
October	Garnet Stakes	Naas	Listed	1m	3yo+ f
October	Mercury Stakes	Dundalk	Listed	5f	2yo+
October	Trigo Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+
October	Knockaire Stakes	Leopardstown	Listed	7f	3yo+
October	Cooley Fillies Stakes	Dundalk	Listed	1m	3yo+ f

Ireland:

Month	Race Name	Racecourse	Status	Distance	Age/Sex	2021 winner
February	Kachy Stakes	Lingfield	Listed	6f 1y	4yo+	Exalted Angel
February	Winter Derby Trial	Lingfield	Listed	1m 2f	4yo+	Bangkok
February	Hever Sprint Stakes	Lingfield	Listed	5f 6y	4yo+	Lord Riddiford
March	Road to the Kentucky Derby Conditions Stakes	Kempton	Conditions	1m	3yo	Highland Avenue
March	Spring Cup	Lingfield	Listed	7f 1y	3yo	Apollo One
March	Lady Wulfruna Stakes	Wolverhampton	Listed	7f 36y	4yo+	Mums Tipple
March	Brocklesby Stakes	Doncaster	Conditions	5f 3y	2yo	Chipotle
March	Doncaster Mile Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	1m	4yo+	Top Rank
March	Cammidge Trophy	Doncaster	Listed	6f 2y	3yo+	Royal Commando
March	Magnolia Stakes	Kempton Park	Listed	1m 2f	4yo+	Global Giant
April	Cardinal Stakes	Chelmsford City	Conditions	1m	3yo	Fundamental
April	Burradon Stakes	Newcastle	Listed	1m 5y	3yo	Megallan
April	Snowdrop Fillies' Stakes	Kempton Park	Listed	1m	4yo+ f	Lavender's Blue
April	Barry Hills Further Flight Stakes	Nottingham	Listed	1m 6f	4yo+	Sir Ron Priestley
April	Feilden Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 1f	3yo	Highland Avenue
April	Lansdown Fillies' Stakes	Bath	Listed	5f 10y	3yo+ f	Declaring Love
April	Blue Riband Trial Stakes	Epsom	Listed	1m 2f 17y	3yo	Wirko
April	King Richard III Stakes	Leicester	Listed	7f	4yo+	Pogo
April	Nottinghamshire Oaks	Nottingham	Listed	1m 2f 50y	4yo+	La Lune
May	Paradise Stakes	Ascot	Listed	1m	4yo+	Oh This Is Us
May	Chelmer Fillies' Stakes	Chelmsford City	Listed	6f	3yo f	Happy Romance
May	Daisy Warwick Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 3f 218y	4yo+ f	Alpinista
May	Newmarket Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 2f	3yo c&g	Mohaafeth
May	Conqueror Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m	3yo+ f	Illykato
May	Pretty Polly Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 2f	3yo f	Mystery Angel
May	Cheshire Oaks	Chester	Listed	1m 3f 75y	3yo f	Dubai Fountain
May	Dee Stakes	Chester	Listed	1m 2f 70y	3yo c&g	El Drama
May	Oaks Trial Stakes	Lingfield	Listed	1m 3f 133y	3yo f	Sherbet Lemon
May	Derby Trial Stakes	Lingfield	Listed	1m 3f 133y	3yo c&g	Third Realm
May	Buckhounds Stakes	Ascot	Listed	1m 3f 211yd	4yo+	Albaflora
May	Kilvington Fillies' Stakes	Nottingham	Listed	6f 18y	3yo+ f	Light Refrain
May	Spring Trophy	Haydock	Listed	7f 37y	3yo+	Qaysar
May	Royal Windsor Stakes	Windsor	Listed	1m 31y	3yo+ c&g	Solid Stone
May	Westow Stakes	York	Listed	5f	3yo	Winter Power
May	Marygate Fillies' Stakes	York	Listed	5f	2yo f	Nymphadora
May	Michael Seely Memorial Stakes	York	Listed	7f 192y	3yo f	Primo Bacio
May	Carnarvon Stakes	Newbury	Listed	6f	3yo	Creative Force
May	Fairway Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 2f	3yo	John Leeper
May	King Charles II Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	7f	3yo	Bellosa
May	Fillies' Trial Stakes	Newbury	Listed	1m 2f 6y	3yo f	Eshaada
May	Leisure Stakes	Windsor	Listed	6f 12y	3yo+	Dream of Dreams
May	Rothesay Stakes	Ayr	Listed	1m 2f	4yo+ f	Bharani Star
May	Heron Stakes	Sandown	Listed	1m	3yo	Mostahdaf
May	Cecil Frail Stakes	Haydock Park	Listed	6f	3yo+ f	Twilight Spinner
May	Height of Fashion Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 1f 197y	3yo f	Ad Infinitum
May	Cocked Hat Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 3f 44y	3yo c&g	Lone Eagle
May	Festival Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 1f 197y	4yo+	Stormy Antartic
May	Tapster Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 3f 218y	4yo+	Hukum
May	National Stakes	Sandown	Listed	5f 10y	2yo	Ebro River
June	Achilles Stakes	Haydock Park	Listed	5f	3yo+	King's Lynn
June	Hilary Needler Trophy	Beverley	Conditions	5f	2yo f	Lady Ayresome
June	Surrey Stakes	Epsom	Listed	7f 3y	3yo	Mehmento
June	Woodcote Stakes	Epsom	Conditions	6f 3y	2yo	Oscula
June	Abingdon Stakes	Newbury	Listed	1m 2f	3yo f	Creative Flair
June	Maggie Dickson Stakes	Musselburgh	Listed	7f 33y	3yo+ f	Just Beautiful
June	Ganton Stakes	York	Listed	7f 192y	3yo+	Space Traveller
June	Scurry Stakes	Sandown	Listed	5f 10y	3yo	Atalis Bay
June	Grand Cup	York	Listed	1m 5f 188y	4yo+	Roberto Escobarr
June	Cathedral Stakes	Salisbury	Listed	6f	3yo+	Line Of Departure
June	Wolferton Stakes	Ascot	Listed	1m 1f 212y	4yo+
June	Windsor Castle Stakes	Ascot	Listed	5f	2yo
June	Chesham Stakes	Ascot	Listed	7f	2yo
June	Queen Alexandra Stakes	Ascot	Conditions	2m 5f 143y	4yo+
June	Land O'Burns Fillies' Stakes	Ayr	Listed	5f	3yo+ f
June	Pontefract Castle Stakes	Pontefract	Listed	1m 4f 5y	4yo+ f
June	Eternal Stakes	Carlisle	Listed	6f 195y	3yo f
June	Empress Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	6f	2yo f
June	Fred Archer Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 4f	4yo+
June	Midsummer Stakes	Windsor	Listed	1m 38y	3yo+
July	Dragon Stakes	Sandown	Listed	5f 10y	2yo
July	Gala Stakes	Sandown	Listed	1m 1f 209y	3yo+
July	Coral Distaff	Sandown	Listed	1m	3yo f
July	Coral Marathon	Sandown	Listed	2m 50	4yo+
July	Pipalong Stakes	Pontefract	Listed	1m 6y	4yo+ f
July	Queen Charlotte Fillies' Stakes	Chelmsford City	Listed	7f	4yo+ f
July	Sir Henry Cecil Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m	3yo
July	City Walls Stakes	York	Listed	5f	3yo+
July	City Plate	Chester	Listed	7f 1y	3yo+
July	Rose Bowl Stakes	Newbury	Listed	6f 8y	2yo
July	Glasgow Stakes	Hamilton	Listed	1m 3f 14y	3yo
July	Steventon Stakes	Newbury	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+
July	Weatherbys Super Sprint	Newbury	Sales	5f 34y	2yo
July	Aphrodite Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+ f
July	Star Stakes	Sandown	Listed	7f	2yo f
July	Lyric Stakes	York	Listed	1m 2f 56y	3yo+ f
July	Pat Eddery Stakes	Ascot	Listed	7f	2yo
July	Pomfret Stakes	Pontefract	Listed	1m 6y	3yo+
August	Chalice Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+ f
August	Queensferry Stakes	Chester	Listed	6f 17y	3yo+
August	Dick Hern Fillies' Stakes	Haydock Park	Listed	1m 37y	3yo+ f
August	Upavon Fillies' Stakes	Salisbury	Listed	1m 1f 201y	3yo+ f
August	St Hugh's Stakes	Newbury	Listed	5f 34y	2yo f
August	Denford Stakes	Newbury	Listed	7f	2yo
August	Flying Fillies' Stakes	Pontefract	Listed	6f	3yo+ f
August	Galtres Stakes	York	Listed	1m 3f 188y	3yo+ f
August	Stonehenge Stakes	Salisbury	Listed	1m	2yo
August	Roses Stakes	York	Listed	5f	2yo
August	Hopeful Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	6f	3yo+
August	August Stakes	Windsor	Listed	1m 3f 199y	3yo+
August	Ripon Champion Two Years Old Trophy	Ripon	Listed	6f	2yo
September	Beverley Bullet Sprint Stakes	Beverley	Listed	5f	3yo+
September	Chester Stakes	Chester	Listed	1m 6f 87y	3yo+
September	Ascendant Stakes	Haydock Park	Listed	1m 37y	2yo
September	Garrowby Stakes	York	Listed	6f	3yo+
September	Scarbrough Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	5f 3y	2yo+
September	Flying Scotsman Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	7f 6y	2yo
September	Stand Cup	Chester	Listed	1m 4f 63y	3yo+
September	John Musker Fillies' Stakes	Yarmouth	Listed	1m 2f 23y	3yo+ f
September	Fortune Stakes	Sandown Park	Listed	1m	3yo+
September	Doonside Cup	Ayr	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+
September	Harry Rosebery Stakes	Ayr	Listed	5f	2yo
September	Haynes, Hanson and Clark Stakes	Newbury	Conditions	1m	2yo c&g
September	Arran Scottish Fillies' Sprint Stakes	Ayr	Listed	5½f	3yo+ f
September	Dubai Duty Free Cup	Newbury	Listed	7f	3yo+
September	Foundation Stakes	Goodwood	Listed	1m 1f 197y	3yo+
September	Jockey Club Rose Bowl	Newmarket	Listed	2m	3yo+
September	Rosemary Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m	3yo+ f
September	Godolphin Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+
October	Noel Murless Stakes	Ascot	Listed	1m 6f 34y	3yo
October	Rous Stakes	Ascot	Listed	5f	3yo+
October	October Stakes	Ascot	Listed	7f	3yo+ f
October	Two-Year-Old Trophy	Redcar	Listed	6f	2yo
October	Guisborough Stakes	Redcar	Listed	7f	3yo+
October	Rockingham Stakes	York	Listed	6f	2yo
October	Boadicea Fillies' Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	6f	3yo+ f
October	Beckford Stakes	Bath	Listed	1m 6f	3yo+ f
October	Silver Tankard Stakes	Pontefract	Listed	1m 6y	2yo
October	Doncaster Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	6f	2yo
October	Radley Stakes	Newbury	Listed	7f	2yo f
October	Fleur De Lys Fillies' Stakes	Lingfield Park	Listed	1m	3yo+ f
October	River Eden Fillies' Stakes	Lingfield Park	Listed	1m 5f	3yo+ f
Oct / Nov	Bosra Sham Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	6f	2yo f
Oct / Nov	James Seymour Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+
Oct / Nov	Ben Marshall Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m	3yo+
Oct / Nov	Montrose Stakes	Newmarket	Listed	1m	2yo f
November	Floodlit Stakes	Kempton Park	Listed	1m 4f	3yo+
November	Gillies Fillies' Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	1m 2f 60y	3yo+ f
November	Wentworth Stakes	Doncaster	Listed	6f	3yo+
November	Churchill Stakes	Lingfield Park	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+
November	Golden Rose Stakes	Lingfield Park	Listed	6f 1y	3yo+
November	Hyde Stakes	Kempton Park	Listed	1m	3yo+
December	Wild Flower Stakes	Kempton Park	Listed	1m 3f 219y	3yo+
December	Quebec Stakes	Lingfield Park	Listed	1m 2f	3yo+

Canada[edit]

Category:Restricted stakes races in Canada
Category:Ungraded stakes races in Canada

In Canada where all Thoughbred races are part of the U.S. graded stakes system, the races restricted to Province-breds led to a highly successful breeding industry aided and inspired by the astonishing success of the now legendary Northern Dancer. Regardless, we must follow WikiProject guidelines and delete the following 62 Restricted races in the Province of Ontario:

Canadian Triple Crown races:
Queen's Plate,
Prince of Wales Stakes,
Breeders' Stakes
plus:

In addition to the above Canadian Restricted races there are forty Ungraded stakes races in Canada that will also have to be deleted. They are:

We currently have 66 WikiProject Horse racing members so we need to pitch in and get this cleanup done ASAP. Thanks. Stretchrunner II (talk)

Comments[edit]

3 things

Don't like your use of must or done asap. Editors can differ and have you ever heard of WP:NODEADLINE?

There are 66 members but how many are actually active is anyone's guest. My own horse racing expertise is harness racing.

Lastly, at least one of those races was a Grade III race.

Now back to something else....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So if I'm reading this correctly, we might as well stop updating the results tables for all British and Irish Listed and ungraded races now, because the race articles are going to be deleted? --Bcp67 (talk) 13:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bcp67, Stretchrunner II before gung-ho on deleting ad-hoc, there needs to be a project wide discussion of our path forward after what was deleted (Broadway Stakes (NYB)) and what was not (Hot Rod Charlie) and what you have just delivered in your grand scale analysis. The discussion should deal upon WP:NHORSERACING's inclusion and whether there needs to be an adjustment. Also each country is different. For instance we had this discussion a few years ago and the Europeans, in particularly the British have "Heritage" events that are not graded but historically important. Also Canadian restricted races are not equivalent to State bred NY Restricted. While I am opposed to state bred restricted events I am definitely not against Canadian restricted (e.g. Canadian Triple Crown but yes against Ontario provincial restrictions) and not against Australian events like the Magic Millions and All Star Mile etc. Also some Listed race will need to stay because they were once Graded/Group events so that makes the qualify under today's inclusion. For example your example of the Western Australian G A Towton Cup is incorrect since in 2004 it was GIII which makes it ok. I think this is an excellent opportunity for the project to focus on whats appropriate (so we can dedicate time and effort) and whats not (so we don't get disappointed and defensive about articles that have been created with much time spent and then seeing them deleted). Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: First off, WHOA! **I** wrote the Horse racing SNG as a guideline for those outside this sport who needed guidelines about people and horse notability (this after someone tried an AfD on a 19th century jockey because he was supposedly an "amateur" not a "professional"... sigh). I did post here when I was doing it, and I can't recall if there was much comment, but I would have included anything mentioned. At WP:NHORSERACING, the "GI OR EQUIVALENT" criteria is intended to be an inclusive "presumed notable" slam dunk without need for additional discussion. It is not an exclusionary comment that anything or anyone not a GI is not notable. Further, the SNG (which no one seems to have actually read) contains the statement "Notability for horses or persons associated with horse racing who were not competitors or do not meet the criteria above may be presumed notable if they meet GNG for any of the following..." The whole thing is to make the easy calls. GNG always applies beyond an SNG. Montanabw^(talk) 15:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Further, to not bog down NHORSERACING, I wrote a supplementary essay of additional guidelines, linked at the SNG, and it is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Horse_racing/Notability In that essay, I outlined some general guidelines that would be of additional assistance, including horse races. There, I outlined the following criteria:

A race or a race meet that may be questionable by the general WP:GNG criteria may be notable or not by assessing the following additional factors:

Criteria supporting notability

A group 1, grade I or equivalent race is presumed notable
A race that previously was a group 1, grade I, or equivalent race is presumed notable even if it is no longer held or no longer in that class
A race meet with multiple graded stakes races or the equivalent
A race meet offering races with large amounts of purse money for the region in which they are held
A race or race meet that is unique in some fashion that generates coverage from neutral third-party news sources, even if not national in focus. Examples may include pony races for young riders, mule races, races for horse breeds that have limited racing opportunities.
A race meet, even if small, if it is one of a very few that exist in the given area (state, region or nation).
Races or meets that are in some fashion a significant historic first (the competition itself, not the participants)

Criteria supporting deletion

These criteria do not mandate deletion, but may indicate that a competition is not notable

A race meet with no graded stakes races, such as a county fair meet, unless the meet or type of race has characteristics noted above in criteria supporting notability.
Imaginary horse races or fictional horse race meets
Races or meets merely named after a famous individual without otherwise meeting any indicia of notability

I hope this clarifies things, and for godsake, let's all settle down here! Montanabw^(talk) 15:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I may not be as much of a horse expert as others. But i have worked with the Notability guidelines quite a bit. Let me say first that montanabw has made a plethora of good points and quoted guidelines that you should probably study. I know I will.

Now in reference to WP:N. “A topic is presumed to merit an article if: it either meets GNG below, or the criteria outlined in a SNG.”

And basically, the WP:NSPORT SNG says the same at the top.

And now, there are four basic paths for notability in WP:NHORSERACING. And after those are seven alternate paths to notability. What is so special about Grade I that someone thinks it can be used to fail an article from GNG? And if you could use it, then all paths being equal, you can use all paths. So now we can fail a horse for not being in the hall of fame. That’s why all of this is faulty logic.

As listed in the GNG, the only SNGs that can be used in some way, that is to keep an article from being written are biographies, politicians, and films.

Also in the horse racing SNG, "Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted;"

I affirm Montanabw’s position along with what I’ve written. dawnleelynn^(talk) 18:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From your understanding what is your opinion about the article Yaddo Handicap, an event which was on the above list provided by Stretchrunner II which is a restricted New York State Bred event. The article has two references for the whole article, both of which are dead. The article has been in existence since 2011. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 18:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This issue obviously falls under the umbrella of supplementary essays montanabw wrote. And I see she has responded.dawnleelynn^(talk) 03:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was more interested in seeing whether you would agree if the article fails WP:V and not whether the fact that its a restricted NY Bred race which IMO doesn't makes it notable. The article is not unsimilar to the recently deleted Broadway Stakes (NYB). Remember, that article was initially found to be deficient by a Wikipedian that is not on member of this project. Maybe @Onel5969: can shed some light on what they think of the Yaddo Handicap article. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 14:28, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brudder Andrusha, hi, and I want to make it clear that I'm only responding to your question, not commenting on this discussion as a whole, since I have no expertise in horse racing. Regarding the article you ask about, currently it doesn't come close to passing GNG, since the only 2 sources are primary. A brief WP:BEFORE search did not turn up the type of in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources which would meet GNG. Hope this helps, for what it's worth. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

•Yaddo Handicap

•Sabellina Takes Narrow Yaddo Handicap Victory

•Saratoga Race Course 2021 Schedule

•Ransom's Pride wins Yaddo Handicap

•Bond Racing Stables

•Saratoga Race Course’s 2020 Stakes Schedule Topped by Early Travers on August 8

•New York-Bred Revised Stakes Schedule

•Yaddo Archive Records

dawnleelynn^(talk) 03:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC) now we have replacements for the two dead links…[reply]

Yaddo Handicap as it stands now has been tagged for WP:V and WP:Notability. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

Yes, about that... I thought you had understood the guideline regarding doing due diligence on sources prior to tagging for notability for AfD or on current articles. However, I'm not sure now after seeing the tagging and comments on Yaddo Handicap.

I let your previous comment go regarding Hot Rod Charlie because of your misunderstanding of the SNG versus the GNG and the Grade 1 "requirement." Your comment, "IMO that does not make him notable even though you can Google and find many hits." The guideline actually requires you to search for hits prior to putting an AfD tag on an article. See here:

Reading from WP:BEFORE which is in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, it says, "D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects." There is more to read there. Similar content exists in Wikipedia:New pages patrol under Articles for deletion (AfD). It says, "You must read and follow WP:BEFORE before nominating an article at AfD..." And again, there is more to read, a listing of places to search and some scripts to use to find sources.

Let us also address putting a notability tag on an article as has been done on Yaddo Handicap. See WP:N. "Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article"

"The absence of sources or citations in an article (as distinct from the non-existence of sources) does not indicate that a subject is not notable. Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article." I have copied in just the immediate portion but it goes on to state further that editors have more responsibility for the article before doing an AfD or tagging an article. Thus, you cannot tag an article for Notability based on just the sources you see there. In fact, the wording of the tag you placed says, "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline." The topic (or subject) and not the article is what is being disputed regarding notability by that tag. You cannot know if the subject is notable solely by the references in the article.

Now regarding Wikipedia:Verifiability WP:V Here is another area where there is more to the guideline to consider than just a simple tag and go. But I will just say that most editors will object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. However, all content that is not cited in an article is subject to this tag...as the guideline states, although it does make the suggestion that if you suspect it can be cited, you should cite it if you can.

Since you claim to be a stickler for the guidelines, I assume you want to be certain that there are or are not enough reliable sources for Yaddo Handicap in the places mentioned in the WP:BEFORE section. I only searched in the first one. It's really up to you in this case since you tagged it. Wikipedia is at the core first about Notability and it is not designed for tagging articles with a Notability tag or putting them up for AfD without some legwork first.dawnleelynn^(talk) 03:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Things like restricted stakes races probably need to be more fully discussed by the project, but they may meet GNG in some cases. I am not sure if other countries besides the US have these races with geographic restrictions (in the US they are tied to breeder incentives and the purses are usually funded by state gambling tax money, which is why they are popular), but it's a good conversation to have. Basically, we don't need to have an article on every race at every track in the world, but there may be room for some of them under the "one season of professional cricket in Manchester" standard. Don' t know. Montanabw^(talk) 22:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Canada has a lot of restricted races, some of which have articles, some (most I daresay) do not. There are a few obvious ones that should and do: the Triple Crown and Triple Tiara being the most obvious. Just about all of the rest get some coverage in the press, and a lot more so if they attract a notable horse. But from a maintenance POV, they're a bit of a nightmare because there's really no way of knowing if they have an article or not, and you can't see a race history in Equibase for ungraded races (although you can of course find individual charts if you already know the winner). To illustrate the maintenance issue, I took a look at Pink Lloyd's wins: half of them are graded and the underlying race articles are up to date - great. The other half are restricted, which is where it gets tricky. One doesn't have an article, which is fine. That leaves five restricted races with articles, only 1 of which is up to date. Anyways, I don't like the idea of deleting articles created in good faith, and especially if they've had notable winners in their day, but the ones we keep could use some polish. I see a lot are still talking about Polytrack when Woodbine switched to Tapeta ages ago. Ah well, time to get busy. Jlvsclrk (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Sorry I'm late, and I'm not sure how relevant this is but... At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, I think we should not lose sight of the fact that the final "G" of GNG and SNG stands for "Guidline". I tend to deal with horses rather than races and my rule of thumb is that if a post-1971 horse didn't win a G1 there should be very good reasons for creating an article and that these reasons should be spelled out in the lede. So for example Celestial Storm never won a G1 but was one of the highest rated horses in Europe in 1986 and 1987. Quixall Crossett could not have won a G1 if you strapped a rocket to his rear end, but he got more mainstream media attention than most G1 winners. Common sense is the best guideline. Tigerboy1966 08:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tuesdee Testa and Dark Mirage[edit]

Would some members from this WikiProject mind taking a look at Tuesdee Testa#Dark Mirage? I'm not sure all of the extra detail about the horse is really necessary because there's already a stand-alone article about the horse at Dark Mirage. I've started a talk page discussion about this at Talk:Tuesdee Testa#Dark Mirage for reference and would appreciate any input. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:17, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Baerlein[edit]

Hi all. In expanding Deaths in 1995, I discovered an obituary on horse racing journalist Richard Baerlein, who we currently have no article on. I thought someone from this project might be interested in creating one, so I dug up another source as well. Here they are:

Tim Fitzgeorge-Parker (23 October 2011). "OBITUARY:Richard Baerlein". The Independent. (originally published in 1995, but the online article doesn't give a day)
"An Observer Classic; Richard Baerlein, the Observer's celebrated racing correspondent sings the praises of the horse he had famously tipped for victory the previous Christmas". The Observer. 4 June 2000.

If you have access to newspapers.com, there is also an obituary in The Guardian: here. Best.4meter4 (talk) 22:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cannabis and sports[edit]

New stub: Cannabis and sports. Any project members care to help expand? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It’s pretty much illegal for the horses. Maybe let us know if that becomes an issue in the article. Montanabw^(talk) 18:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Letruska[edit]

Hi y'all. If anyone knows of any sources for Mexican horse racing, I need them for details on Letruska's first six starts. Thanks! Jlvsclrk (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Jo Rubin[edit]

My draft for Barbara Jo Rubin was recently put into mainspace. According to sources, Rubin is the first woman to win a professional horse race. Any help with the article would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 18:21, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thriley:, Inadded a little. Hope it helps. Montanabw^(talk) 18:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Percussionist[edit]

I was wondering if the Subsequent Group 1 wins section of 2013 Epsom Derby should include Percussionist's win in the Grand National Hurdle Stakes. Tigerboy1966 07:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afd[edit]

Discussion in progress of peripheral interest to members of this project: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Celebration of Horses: The American Saddlebred. Montanabw^(talk) 18:29, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

State Of Rest[edit]

Calling @Tigerboy1966:, @Bcp67:, @Jlvsclrk:, @Sunline02:. Please take a look at the article I've created for dual hemisphere GI winner State Of Rest. I usually don't go down this path of creating an article for a horse and I known you folks are more experienced in this area. I have missing links and a background update into the breeding aspect of the horse would be a great addition. Thanks. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 09:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. I have added some material to the background and pedigree. I will also look up the sales results in the original currency which would be either euros or guineas. Tigerboy1966 09:48, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tigerboy1966: Looks like £45,000 as a foal and 60,000 guineas as a yearling, per this report [2] --Bcp67 (talk) 11:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tattersalls still selling in guineas. Looks like RP's error.81.168.89.89 (talk) 13:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I didn't spot that. It's certainly 45,000gns at the Tatts December 18 foal sale from the sales result cited in the article.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Super. Also there is a change of ownership. Not sure if it was early this year or if it was last year. The Sportinglife charts don't list the owner at the time of the event. I didn't check Racing Post but I think you folks will quickly pick that up. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 09:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two possibly non-notable stubs[edit]

Hi, I found these two related unsourced racehorse stubs, both tagged for notability for over a decade: Secret Firm and Secret Hello. Some Googling on my part seems to confirm that they probably don't pass WP:GNG, but I don't know the first thing about horse racing/racehorses and whether any specific criteria may apply. Could someone here determine whether these articles need to be deleted or saved? Thanks! Lennart97 (talk) 12:52, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that these two were also included in a list of possible deletion candidates many years ago by Tigerboy1966. Out of the articles mentioned there, Altibr and Grozny (horse) are also still around without any proper sourcing. And while we're at it, Danetime has the same issue. Lennart97 (talk) 13:02, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could Grozny not be notable for winning the Derby Nacional? He is listed as a winner here [3] with further details here [4]

Lankyant (talk) 14:21, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for raising this again. Secret Firm and Secret Hello have now been prodded. Altibr, Grozny (horse) and Danetime were all decent racehorses but fail GNG so feel free to prod them as well. Tigerboy1966 18:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually both articles are at AFD now....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think Danetime can probably be salvaged. One source, but indicated he was a leading sire in Western Australia. Even if he didn’t have a G1 racing record, if he was significant as a sire, that would meet GNG. Probably worth looking into and seeing if more could be added. I’ll look at the other two and see if we can find more. Montanabw^(talk) 20:04, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up— basically, I think Secret Hello just barely passes the criteria for GNG, as I think he won a grade one futurity as a two-year-old. I think Grozny can also be salvaged, as we have very little on races in Latin America and the one he did win appears to be quite significant. I do think it is important that we factor in that most of the sources on that article are probably in Spanish. I think that Altibr and Secret Firm can both go, as neither of them won a grade one race, nor do I see a significant record at stud. Given that we do have a SNG for race horses, I think we can apply it in these cases to help refine where the line is. Montanabw^(talk) 20:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Montanabw Lankyant (talk) 05:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, for picking this up so quickly! Lennart97 (talk) 10:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Hello has been relisted. My own position is that this horse’s article is exactly where the line for notability gets drawn, I just am not quite sure which side we should draw on. I voted “week keep“ at the AFD, and would value everyone else weighing in, so that we have a really good test case for consensus.Montanabw^(talk) 20:39, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another delete[edit]

Clickity Clack - should it be deleted? The horse won only one non-graded stakes which was a restricted stakes which kind have been deleted at Wikipedia). Stretchrunner II (talk) 12:50, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CLickity Clack's win came in the Princess Elizabeth Stakes (Canada), whose article says it is Canada's most valuable race for juvenile fillies. The race is restricted to Canadian-bred horses, but so is the Queen's Plate, which is non-graded for the same reason. I'd say keep. if it passes the GNG.--Bcp67 (talk) 15:17, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How does a GNG assessment happen? I have always assumed "notability" came from a major race win in whatever country (Canada's Queen's Plate is, the Princess Elizabeth is not), or internationally such as a Breeders' Cup, an "Arc" and the like worldwide. Stretchrunner II (talk) 14:41, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage in reliable sources basically - see WP:GNG. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi gang, PLEASE read our SNG for racehorses at WP:NHORSERACING and its supplemental subpage. I busted my ass to create those guidelines, and carefully Sheparded them past the NSPORTS crowd to make it a solid guideline. We can tweak the guideline, but could you guys please read the dang thing first before putting up a bunch of stuff for deletion and then creating drama. Sorry to be a little grumpy, but I really did put lots and lots and lots of careful work into that SNG, with input from the group that was here at the time it was created. Montanabw^(talk) 20:31, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and, if some guy who played a couple games of professional football in the Extreme Football League gets his Wikipedia article, God knows a winner of a G1 race should get their article too, lol. Montanabw^(talk) 20:36, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again discussion about inclusion is worth debating and revisted. Articles about winners of restricted race is well documented in debates above. Allowing articles like this joke is opening doors for a barrage of puerility. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 16:37, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This particular horse is yet another example of the gray area. Like I say, if some guy who played a single game of professional cricket in Sri Lanka gets a WP article than so should horses like these. But I'm not sure what the current consensus is for notability of obscure cricket or football players. Anyone? Montanabw^(talk) 03:00, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New York Driving Club? Gentlemen's Driving Association?[edit]

I've been working on Fleetwood Park Racetrack. My main interest is as part of Bronx history; I know almost nothing about horse racing. One thing that puzzles me about the historical sources is the mention of both the New York Driving Club and the Gentlemen's Driving Association. Were these two separate entities who ran the track at different times? Two names for the same entity? Two different entities that co-existed and did different things? Anybody know anything about this history? -- RoySmith (talk) 23:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no sooner did I post the above, I found this. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RFC that could affect this project[edit]

There is a titling RFC at Wikipedia talk:Article titles that will affect many articles at this project. There was discussion of making the RfC handled bit by bit before all projects understood the ramifications with entertainment being singled out next in a deleted draft, and other projects after that. Whether you agree or don't agree please join in the discussion for this massive Wikipedia change. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:41, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability SNG update[edit]

I noticed that WP:NOTABILITY has been updated a little bit since the horse racing SNG was created. Basically, the notability standard now ranks GNG & SNG as coequal alternative criteria, one does not supersede the other. So I made a few minor copy edit at Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing/Notability, and if anyone wants to look at them, now you know. ;) Montanabw^(talk) 18:48, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Popular pages[edit]

Hi, Today I added "Popular pages" wikilink for "WikiProject Horse racing" to the project page. Popular pages is a bot-generated (monthly) list of pageviews, useful for focused cleanup of frequently viewed articles. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 17:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Latin American Racing[edit]

I have noticed a dearth of articles and information on horse racing in Latin America (probably largely due to a similar dearth of available sources in English). Thus far, almost everything (racetracks, graded/group stakes races, notable people and horses, etc.) is either non-existent or a stub, with the occasional exception of some horses that came north to the US to race. I'm slowly trying to help fill that gap, but it's a pretty large one. The main priority is the countries of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru, since they are the largest, most important, and most notable horse racing countries in the region; Argentina in particular. Uruguay, Puerto Rico, Panama, and Venezuela are of lesser but still notable importance, and a lot of notable US racehorses did a significant amount in Mexico in the 20th century, even if modern racing in the country is much less notable. There is also some racing/breeding in Ecuador, Columbia, the Dominican Republic, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Bolivia, and Guatemala, but probably not of enough importance to be anything more than noted as existing.
The main international group in the region is OSAF, and they have a website in English. I have compiled a list of potential sources (mostly in Spanish and Portuguese, although with a few in English). I would greatly appreciate any help or recommendations for articles of priority to create/edit (I keep flitting between giving primary priority to important G1 races, racetracks, prominent people, top modern horses, and horses of significant historical importance). TabbyLadrona (talk) 16:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pending proposal to declare NSPORTS (and NHORSERACING) an invalid argument at AfD[edit]

A new proposal is now pending to add language to NSPORT providing, among other things, that "meeting [NSPORTS or NHORSERACING] would not serve as a valid keep argument in a deletion discussion." If you have views on this proposal, one way or the other, please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Subproposal 1 (NSPORT). Cbl62 (talk) 18:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notable?[edit]

I'm thinking of nominating Garde Champetre for deletion. Cross-country specialist and a Cheltenham Festival winner, but his highest-level win was a Grade 2 novices' ~~chase~~ hurdle. I can't see any great claim to notability here. Any views? --Bcp67 (talk) 21:05, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the references better in the article and I found this reference: [5], is that a good cause for notability? Lankyant (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would lean slightly towards keeping. I suppose strictly doesn't meet WP:NHORSERACING but multiple Festival wins plus the Grade 2 feels like he is only missing out because the X-Country isn't graded, even though it's the top race in the discipline. Peaky76 (talk) 21:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair comment, and the sales record article also gives it a nudge towards notability as well. I won't nominate it.--Bcp67 (talk) 08:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Horse age debate[edit]

There's a debate about how to display the age at death of a horse, discussion at Talk:Bobs Worth#Age at death/horse age. Would be good to get the views of project members. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes and major races[edit]

After a hiatus, I've finally found time to get back doing British jockey biographies. I've built a script to help generate infoboxes and it occurred to me - I'm not aware of any agreed criteria on what goes in them. Are there any? My default has been:

Races: Group/Grade 1 wins with years, Classics listed first in a separate list
Horses: Any horses on which the jockey has won a Group 1, if the horse has an article
Awards: Champion Apprentice/Jockey, Lester Awards, Sports Personality of the Year (or equivalent)

The races are then duplicated in the major races section of the main article. I'm kind of ambivalent about this - it feels like unnecessary duplication, but then again I'm sure some people prefer them listed here than the infobox. I'm also ambivalent at what goes in them. For the likes of Moore or Dettori, the listing seems to go on forever, even with just G1s, but for some lesser known jockeys it feels like major handicaps might be worth including as career landmarks. The long and the short of it is - what do we want in the infoboxes/major races list? Peaky76 (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Major races has always been a problem for me! Races like the Grand National and Irish Grand National often get included in major wins and I usually remove them - objectively the National is "just" a Grade 3 handicap, but we all know that it's a huge race, and a world of difference from the ordinary Grade 3 jumps race. So maybe the major wins criteria could be G1 wins, plus a specific list of other major races. Problems also arise for jockeys who rode in the pre Group-race days, where something like the Cambridgeshire or Imperial Cup would have been viewed as a major race at the time, or races which have changed status - my favourite example is the Lockinge Stakes, now a G1 but when I started watching racing it was a G3 race - we include all wins in it in a jockey's major wins section, regardless of its status at the time. We don't include G1 wins for races which have lost their status I think - the Flying Childers is the only UK example of this, but there are many Italian ex-G1 races. By rights we ought to show all a jockey or trainer's G1 wins I'd say.

Back to the infobox / major wins discussion - I'd rather see the wins and horses in the article section than infobox given the choice, to avoid duplication and an over-long infobox. Anyway, preferably one or the other but not both.

There's also often an honours section in the infobox too, showing where a race or award has been named after someone - more often a horse but sometimes a jockey or trainer.--Bcp67 (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you've hit on some of my dilemmas there! Most of my biogs are for historic jockeys and sources make a much bigger fuss about stuff like the Cambridgeshire, Lincoln and November Handicap. Makes me think we should possibly make a distinction/allowance for historical value. I know what you mean about the GN as well. My thoughts would be that to non-racing people the GN is *the* big race, so to not include it might be correct in a racing purist sense, but less useful in a general encyclopaedic one. And naming of races is another dilemma. My particular bugbear is the Vertem Futurity. I can't get used to that IRL and it seems weird using it anachronistically here, so where obvious I'm using the historic names - Timeform Gold Cup, Racing Post Trophy - where I can.

If I started noting some of this down as guidance on the infobox page, would you mind casting your eye over it? Peaky76 (talk) 14:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

China Horse Club[edit]

Hello, I noticed a brand new editor has been adding unsourced promotional material to China Horse Club. Any help would be appreciated. Thriley (talk) 18:52, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Who" versus "it", "that" or "which"[edit]

I have noticed several times that some people on Wikipedia seem to like to use "who" to refer to racehorses. For examples, see the opening sentence of Secretariat (horse), Seattle Slew, War Admiral, Whirlaway and Rombauer (horse). To me it seems a bit strange. I doubt that is generally done for other animals. Is this a widely supported convention? Has this been previously discussed as a matter of Wikipedia MoS convention? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 06:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has been previously discussed. "Who" is used to introduce relative clauses for named horses. I don't follow other animal articles but have noted they follow the same convention. Jlvsclrk (talk) 21:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just found it in some articles about other animals as well (e.g., for named individual orcas and giant pandas). Perhaps it should be included in the MoS. I looked for it there and didn't find it. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a further discussion of this issue at WT:MOS#Using "who/whose/her/him/hers/his" in the context of named individual animals. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Davies (Hampshire cricketer)[edit]

Hi all, just over from the cricket project. I was looking to expand this rather obscure Hampshire cricketer, only to find out he was a rather successful jockey, riding in 1,064 races and winning 332 of these. I wonder if anyone here can find some reliable sources for his horse racing career? Cheers, StickyWicket (talk) 19:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Grand National[edit]

Can anyone please add a race summary to 2022 Grand National ASAP so we can get it on the In The News? Lankyant (talk) 00:17, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The race summary still needs doing, I think it's a fairly strong article and could go for good status but it needs a race summary. Anyone able to give it a go? Lankyant (talk) 13:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User script to detect unreliable sources[edit]

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sonny Leon jockey of Rich Strike[edit]

I recently created an article for Sonny Leon, the jockey of Rich Strike, the winner of the 2022 Kentucky Derby. His notability has been questioned. I think he meets notability requirements with the derby win. Thriley (talk) 03:20, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Without a doubt a Grade 1 Classic winning jockey in my mind would qualify under WP:GNG. What is needed for the original article before it was REDIRECTed is more references indicating his notability. For example the jockey has won 770 events in his career in the US since 2015 (Equibase). According to the DRF ref on the 2022 Kentucky Derby (used also in the original article) is that he has established himself on the Ohio circuit and has won several meetings as the winningest jockey. Well that's a start... But I don't think this is the end because he definitely was a top jockey in his native Venezuela. I'm sure this capable jockey by his phenomenal ride, we have not heard the end of this and if Rich Strike continues to perform well then there will be more articles about this jockey. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 08:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jockey jerseys[edit]

Hi! I'm not much of a horse racing guy, but I saw Lester Piggott up at WP:ITN/C. Are the jerseys for all major events underneath the infobox really suitable? On mobile it takes up between 5 and 8 full screens before you can through the remainder of the article prose. This seems quite crufty to me.Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They should never have been included in the article relating to Lester Piggott, they should only be in a specific horse race, such as 1983 Epsom Derby. They include also include second and third place finishes too, I have therefore removed them. SethWhales^talk 21:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a significantly common occourance, the amount of jockeys at [6]. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only one set of thumbnails should be shown unless user explicitly expands to show more. However the templates used do not seem to collapse correctly on mobile. I will investigate and try to get templates updated. JockeyColours (talk)

I have now edited this page Queen_of_Scots_Stakes to not display images when accessed via a mobile device (max-width: 767px). Note that simply accessing the mobile site (en.m.wikipedia.org) via a PC will still display images. Any thoughts? JockeyColours (talk)

Looks like a good solution - I tried the page on mobile and couldn't see the colours, as expected from your comment above.--Bcp67 (talk) 13:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This change has now been carried out on the standard templates used to display this type of content, so now applies to all pages. Thanks to the administrators of these templates for making it happen.

Does Munnings deserve an article by now?[edit]

Munnings 2006 (Speightstown - La Comete, by Holy Bull) never won a G1 but did win 3 G2s including Woody Stephens Stakes, Tom Fool Handicap and the now Listed Gulfstream Park Sprint Championship Stakes. However, what's more impressive about Munnings has evolved as a sire. He now has sired five G1 winners including multiple G1 winner Jack Christopher who this Saturday also won the now G1 Woody Stephens Stakes. He's on my do list but if someone wants to start I'll help out. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 17:45, 12 June 2022 (UTC) @Brudder Andrusha: if you haven't gotten started on this, just FYI that WP:NHORSERACING clearly allows sires of significance (i.e. Tapit) to be deemed notable even if their own race record was modest. Montanabw^(talk) 16:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The linking of "turf"[edit]

There appear to be almost 400 horse-related articles that link the word "turf" like this: [[grass|turf]]. This odd way of linking made sense in the years before 2016, when Turf was a disambiguation page and Grass a broad-concept article. But that's not the case anymore: "Grass" is now a redirect to the plant family Poaceae, which is clearly not the intended meaning here.

What should we do about these? Assuming there are no instances of "turf" simply referring to horse racing in general, we could either change the link to point to something more relevant (Turf? Sports turf? an as-of-yet-nonexistent redirect to a relevant section of Horse racing?), or unlink it altogether (per MOS:OL).

Any thoughts or ideas? – Uanfala (talk) 13:17, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't notice this earlier but it's a good point. Perhaps such links should go instead to the article on Track surface, which could be expanded to talk more about turf as a racing surface, perhaps why it's generally safer for horses to run on, how its affected by weather... Jlvsclrk (talk) 23:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That or the Glossary... if we have an entry for turf in the glossary. But Sports turf works for me, maybe just touch up that article so there's an anchor link to a horse racing section?? Montanabw^(talk) 16:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flightline - Beyer Speed Figure[edit]

With all the frenzy about Flightline an unreferenced addition to his statistics to include his Beyer Speed Figure in his statistics. My problem with this inclusion, is that there is already a reference for his performance from Equibase in his statistics - not Daily Racing Form where the Beyers are published. Equibase provides a timeform rating which is included in the general "Results" not in each individual race result. These kind of inclusions open a can of worms. In particular, changing format of the Statistics table (which IMO should be standardized), updating other horse's statistics, etc. Thoughts from others? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 05:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, the Equibase speed figure is not a Timeform rating. It's not adjusted for the racing surface - handicappers don't really pay attention to the number as a result. (For example, his second start was impressive enough, but giving a figure to it of 127 compared to "just" 128 for the Pacific Classic makes a mockery of their method). The Beyer Speed Figure is the most generally recognized figure in North America, and there's a reference in the body of the article for each number. I'll update the ref cells in the table to include the sources for the BSF. Jlvsclrk (talk) 23:32, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. There were formatting errors with the references. I corrected them.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 07:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. And speed figures are not only different for every race but sometimes are adjusted later. They could be discussed in the commentary, but I don't think we want to start putting these in infoboxes or tables.Montanabw^(talk) 16:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Genetic pedigrees[edit]

Seems like it would be information to mention, on pages like that for St. Simon, that strong l DNA evidence now shows a divergence between the GSB pedigree and some actual genetic lineages.

The correction significantly changes the apparent contemporary influence of founding sire lines.

“According to pedigree information only few of the tested males trace back paternally to Byerley Turk… All 30 patrilineal descendants that coalesce in Herod, born in 1758, whose ancestry in turn traces back to Byerley Turk, carried the Tb-oB1 specific allele 208… We also confirmed Tb-oB1 in eleven horses tracing back to St. Simon, born in 1881. According to stud records, St. Simon was the son of Galopin, born in 1872, who was sired by Vedette, born in 1854. The line should trace back to Eclipse, born in 1764 (Fig. 3) according to stud books. All descendants of St. Simon carry Tb-oB1, undoubtedly the HT of Herod (Fig. 3), and not that of Eclipse (Tb-dW*). Thus, an incorrect paternity assignment must have occurred in this lineage. In a discussion recorded in the early to mid 19th century, one party claimed that instead of Vedette a moderate performer named Delight, born in 1863, a Byerley Turk descendant (Fig. 3b), fathered Galopin; our molecular data support this view.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-42640-w#MOESM10 Greenineugene (talk) 17:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found that really interesting - digging around I found an article in the Bloodhorse with more detail about Galopin's ancestry [7] and the Galopin article covers the subject - it probably needs noting on the pedigree charts of St. Simon, Donovan etc that modern genetic evidence suggests that Delight was Galopin's sire. Bcp67 (talk) 19:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's pretty significant evidence that Bend Or wasn't really Bend Or too. Actually, many breed registries have all kinds of obvious discrepancies (a gray born to two non-gray parents or a bay foal born to two chestnut parents are my favorites—genetically impossible). But we have to stay with WP:RS and avoid WP:SYNTH. My suggestion is to note these discrepancies in the article text where there are reliable sources, but use whatever "Official" sources say for the actual pedigree—with the caveat that it doesn't line up with DNA evidence noted before the pedigree rather than after...there's tons of fascinating stuff out there. Montanabw^(talk) 16:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Desormeaux vandalism[edit]

How do I ask for a restriction on editing a page? specifically Kent Desormeaux. I seem to be in an edit war with an anonymous user who can't understand that even Equibase can make mistakes, and insists on removing very well sourced info. Driving me crazy! See my page for details if you're interested. Jlvsclrk (talk) 02:58, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it. Request page protection—someone has it in for him and vandalizes that page all the time. For future reference, see WP:RPP.Montanabw^(talk) 16:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cody's Wish[edit]

I've just created an article about Cody's Wish. I'm sure there is more that can be elaborated upon in that article, so any help to expand would be appreciated. Thanks! JRHorse (talk) 18:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviations[edit]

Looking at Amounis#Race_record, I see abbreviations like "f" and "l". What do these mean? I'd like to expand them for clarity or link to a definition somewhere. Is "l" not the same as "lengths"? -- Beland (talk) 21:57, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Usually these abbreviations are expanded in the title of the table - for distance "f" would mean furlongs and for margins "l" would be lengths. More often they are spelled out completely. Check out in the recently entered article Cody's Wish. However, some authors have taken the liberty to just leave one letter since it is understandable for those who follow horse racing. Sometimes distances are are non-standard and due to space constraints in the table they are abbreviated - such as 1m 3f 218y for a race distance at Goodwood Racecourse in the UK. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image discussion[edit]

There is a discussion at Talk:Thoroughbred#Infobox_Image which may be of interest to members of this project. ‡ El cid, el campeador ^talk 18:31, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Races[edit]

Most of the UK horse racing content originates from List_of_British_National_Hunt_races and it's flat (and Irish) equivalents. Recently I saw that all Premier Handicaps except ONE listed on this page had their own pages, so it seemed logical to fill that gap. I therefore created Byrne Group Handicap Chase. This page has now been rejected with reason: "not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG", and the page automatically redirects back to List_of_British_National_Hunt_races. As I have been involved in the creation of many of these race pages I am well aware of the format used and have replicated that. It is therefore certain that there are 100+ pages that have been accepted which differ in no significant way to this one that has been rejected.

Similarly when reading recently about Cheltenham Gold Cup winners of the eighties I became aware that there was no page for the Edward Hanmer Chase (at Haydock) which many used as an early season target on the way to the big race. Convinced of its notability, I therefore researched and created a page: Draft:Edward_Hanmer_Memorial_Chase but this was rejected on grounds of notability and lack of reliable sources. As the sources used were Timeform Annuals and the Racing Post website my personal feeling is that for the topic of British Horse Racing there is nothing more reliable!

I understand that the reviewers have a difficult job and are working hard to maintain the quality and standards of Wikipedia content, but there seems to be a disconnect here between their overall view and that of people working within a specific area who have a deeper knowledge of what is and what isn't both reliable and notable.

I would have no issue with a judgement that the vast majority of Premier Handicaps are not notable and so should not have their own pages. However if a decision has been taken (or simply evolved) to catalog the current state of UK Racing down to Group 3 (Premier Handicap) level then a full picture is surely better than a partial one.

Likewise if we have a format that has been used to successfully document hundreds of races can it not be agreed with reviewers that this is equally appropriate for any new pages that are created. I believe that we have an admirably consistent approach to the layout of these race pages, but over the years some have been flagged with Reviewer warnings (which have never been removed) and now it seems new pages will be rejected completely.

It is certainly counter productive if an Us against Them feeling might exist between contributors and reviewers, so is it possible that guidelines and formats specific to Horse Racing can be fed back to Review teams to ensure that we all have a common goal and pull together not against each other? (JockeyColours (talk) 13:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC))[reply]

@JockeyColours: it may or may not help to check our own notability criteria at WP:NHORSERACING and the supplemental page linked there. Truth is, it may not be notable to have a lage for every race, as we generally require races to be (or have once been ) equivalent to Grade I or Group 1 … but sometimes a list can be used for the others… just a thought. Montanabw^(talk) 06:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a waste of time continuing to update any race article which isn't a Grade 1 or Group 1 then. --Bcp67 (talk) 09:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I suspect we have over extended our coverage beyond the scope of notability. It's been fun doing it, and to my knowledge the evolution of these races over time is not covered so well anywhere else, but it doesn't look like we will be able to preserve it at this level.

I wonder if we could move away from individual race pages to race categories like "Two mile Premier Handicap hurdles" where we could assemble the content of multiple races? But would such pages be "notable"?

On reflection I think it is better to put our own house in order by removing pages that don't satisfy our own notability criteria rather than wait for the content to be defaced by warnings and slowly whittled down by independent reviewers.(JockeyColours (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Could we not discuss expanding notability? Or is it fixed in stone? I would trust your verdict if you think it's notable. Lankyant (talk) 23:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See this post from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals : 96+ horses need a wikiproject attached to it (mostly racehorses !)[edit]

Many pages of animals do not have either wikiprojects attached to them or even existant talk pages, on this linked post i listed in my sandbox (since otherwise it would clogged a lot) about 300 such pages, some of which are pertinent to this wikiproject, notably around 96 horses and 1 pony breed. There is probably also a few others pages (hippodromes, etc) that could be pertinent to this project.

Entry of the talk page : Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals#Are_individual_animals_page_in_the_WikiProjectMammals_?

Cheers ! Gimly24 (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done them all, all horse racing related ones added to the WP. Lankyant (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lankyant:, can you please also assess class and importance when you tag? 99.99999% of these will be {{WikiProject Horse racing|class=start|importance=low}}, occasionally something is well enough written to be class Cor B. But anyway, it’s usually real easy. Montanabw^(talk) 07:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a side comment that some of these may not meet our own notability standards (see WP:NHORSERACING and the additional page that supplements it). I recommend tagging some of them for deletion if they are fluff/vanity pages. For example, one of the dressage horse ones was a 2012 article that I prodded. Montanabw^(talk) 06:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montana, i added the same assessments to the 8 articles Lankyant missed. And i agree that most should class=stub or start with importance=low. Cheers ! Gimly24 (talk) 12:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a few of the British- or Irish-trained horses, all rated either stub or start so far, and all low importance. You can get a list of what needs to be assessed at WP:WikiProject Horse racing#Assessments - clicking one of the numbers in the table gives you the list. --Bcp67 (talk) 13:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project-independent quality assessments[edit]

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Loose horse[edit]

The redirect Loose horse is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 25#Loose horse. The discussion would greatly benefit from input from editors knowledgeable about horse racing and/or horses more generally. Thryduulf (talk) 08:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

on it. Others can feel free to comment, but I put in my two bits.Montanabw^(talk) 18:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 US Hall of Fame[edit]

The inductees have been announced and a discussion has been started on whether the National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame page should be updated now or when formally the induction occurs during the Saratoga meeting in August. @JRHorse: has updated each individual articles with a reference indicating of the honor bestowed. My feeling is that this is not a WP:CRYSTAL issue. Since events in the future are well documented if there is adequate references and sourcing. Thoughts ?Brudder Andrusha (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say update it now - the induction is a ceremony but the inductees are already members of the Hall of Fame. I took a look at the List of members of the Baseball Hall of Fame and the 2023 inductees are listed there already - they were announced in December 2022 but will not be inducted formally until July. I agree it's not a CRYSTAL issue, the announcement has already been made. --Bcp67 (talk) 12:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Horse deaths at Churchill Downs[edit]

Is the article about the running of the 2023 Kentucky Derby a platform to propagate deaths of horses and the failings of this industry. There's much more missing from this article which is directly associated with the race and should be added. There is a mention of the scratching of Lord Miles which I feel is acceptable but the rest questionable.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 19:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the comment. I have added a proposal to the talkspace that the section of the article concerning horse deaths be removed, and that expanding in the lead that the Derby was noted for its mainstream media coverage of equine deaths in the days leading up to the race. JRHorse (talk) 18:51, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Gentry Brothers (Thoroughbred stable)[edit]

Gentry Brothers Farm was (still is?) a Thoroughbred racing and training stable owned by brothers Robert and Bruce Gentry. Should we keep this article?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gentry Brothers

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 11:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Paddington[edit]

I've started an article for Paddington in template format. Seems no one wanted to do this even after 4 Group 1 wins. ;) I let the folks who follow British racing to continue updating. Cheers. 15:53, 9 August 2023 (UTC) Brudder Andrusha (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whitney Stakes (NYRA)[edit]

I've started a talk page discussion to change the name of the article above to Whitney Stakes. I believe there is no reason to have a (NYRA) at the end of that title, as there is only one Whitney Stakes. It's my opinion there is no need for disambiguation, and the current naming is not consistent with the names of other horse racing stakes articles. I started a move discussion because I'm not sure whether or not the change would be uncontroversial. JRHorse (talk) 12:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks uncontroversial to me, I can't see any reason for the disambiguator and I've supported the RM. It will need someone with page mover rights to move the article as Whitney Stakes redirects to the (NYRA) one - I could have done that, but now the RM needs to take its course. --Bcp67 (talk) 13:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have pagemover rights, by the way. Next time if you need that done, message me at my talkpage—I’m not editing a lot these days, but all talk page messages ping me on email and I can pop in to help. Montanabw^(talk) 05:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion for Silver Train[edit]

An editor has requested that Silver Train be moved to Silver Train (horse), which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Aoeuidhtns (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FA review for Fleetwood Park Racetrack?[edit]

I've submitted Fleetwood Park Racetrack to WP:FAC. I wrote it more from the Bronx history side than from the horse racing side, but it may be of interest to people here. In particular, it could use some additional reviews for FAC. Thanks for taking a look. RoySmith (talk) 17:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work. Enjoyed reading about the track. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 09:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Brudder Andrusha Thank you for the kind words. Could I trouble you to leave some comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fleetwood Park Racetrack/archive1? That would help move the review process along. RoySmith (talk) 14:04, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lines across image[edit]

I have just updated the colours for Prix du Cadran and have ended up with two lines across the image of the third place colours. I cannot work out where they come from. Any ideas? Southdevonian (talk) 11:37, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything either. Maybe @JockeyColours: could take a look and see if they can fix it. --Bcp67 (talk) 13:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed by @JockeyColours: now. Thanks! Southdevonian (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Auguste Rodin - edit war.[edit]

Can some admin from our European group looking into the edit war between ‎Billsmith60 and a new contributor LALTBBPITP in the article about Auguste Rodin dealing with the introduction? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox - discussion post Breeders' Cup[edit]

A debatable issue arose after the recent Breeders' Cup where many articles were updated with regard to the infobox of a thoroughbred. The discussion is on the Inspiral (GB) Talk page, the winner of the Breeders' Cup Filly & Mare Turf and deals with what is placed in the section Major wins.Brudder Andrusha (talk) 05:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Blood-Horse magazine List of the Top 100 U.S. Racehorses of the 20th Century#Requested move 21 November 2023[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Blood-Horse magazine List of the Top 100 U.S. Racehorses of the 20th Century#Requested move 21 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 04:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox assistance request[edit]

Hello all. I just created Desert Hero (my first racing horse article) and I was wondering if someone more experienced here on racehorse articles could look over the infobox and see if everything is in order please? I think additional info is available in the Racing Post source. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good. I've added his record and earnings from the Racing Post, moved the years of his wins to after the races, added his sire's sire, but everything else is fine. Bcp67 (talk) 17:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to join the Derby 150 article development and backlog drive[edit]

WikiProject Louisville		Derby 150 article development and backlog drive
		Help WikiProject Louisville commemorate and celebrate the 150th Kentucky Derby! Join our article development and backlog drive taking place during the period of the Kentucky Derby Festival, April 20 – May 5, 2024. The purpose of this drive is to improve a corner of the Wikipedia related to and timed for this special rare anniversary, as a part of improving the whole encyclopedia. Barnstars will be awarded for participation. Tag your edit summary with `[[WP:DERBY150]]`, both to advertise the event and tally edits for milestone tracking and a possible leaderboard. Interested in helping out? Sign up here. (We're also looking for technical assistance.) Join our festive international Derby party! Mint julep, anyone?

Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 05:31, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]