Talk:1998 AMP Bathurst 1000

A suggestion. Because there will be, and pretty soon by current pace, a page for all Bathurst 1000s, I'd like to see the sponsor names removed from the page names, mainly for uniformity in linking to other pages. And also so when people are building related pages, forthcoming links can be added with some predictability as to what they will be called, for example the recent move of 2001 V8 Supercar championship to 2001 V8 Supercar season in order to match the other V8Supercar seasons. While I know there were two Bathurst in 1998, it should probably be the V8Supercar race, as the 'rebel' race that should have the different name. --Falcadore 08:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I can see your point but I must say that I disagree. I feel that the official name that was used for the race should be the name that is used for the article. Using anthing else only adds confusion regarding what the race was actually called, eg if we call the 1963 Armstrong 500 the 1963 Bathurst 1000. Standardising is great but not when it rewrites history.

GTHO 11:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If you don't standardise the event names then the linking templates don't work, and more importantly the search engine, Wikipedia's Index, does not work. Type 1983 Bathurst 1000 into Wiki's search engine and see if it finds the page. By refering to a race event by its transitory sponsor name you are depending on the casual Wiki reader knowing who the sponsor was each year to be able to find the page. If you can not find the article in the index does that not defeat the point of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia? By all means refer to the race by its sponsored name in the bold first line of the article, but please not in the name. By way of example as to how Wiki runs its race reports, have a look at the Formula One section of the site, highly organised and no sponsor races refered to in the name of the article. Confusion needs to be minimised. I do not feel this is changing history, its exchanging pedantry for usability. --Falcadore 22:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

If the naming of the “Bathurst” races had always been as simple as the naming of F1 races then I would not have a problem with this. However I feel that changing “2007 ING Australian Grand Prix” to “2007 Australian Grand Prix” is a little different to changing “1972 Hardie Ferodo 500” to “1972 Bathurst 1000”. And what about the Phillip Island races? Surely we are not going to call the “1960 Armstrong 500” the “1960 Bathurst 1000”. We need to draw the line somewhere. I’m sure we could overcome the search engine issue by using the generic title within the article. And couldn’t the linking to preceding & following pages simply be changed manually?

Cheers,

GTHO 09:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not what I was proposing at all. Obviously the Phillip Island races would require different names, although raising the Grand Prix example is an interesting one, as your example works both ways. Some races in the history of the Australian Grand Prix were not called the Australian Grand Prix and it has been known as the 100 Miles Road Race and the South Australian Centenary Grand Prix, much in the same way that the Indianapolis 500 and Daytona 24 Hour are not the races official names either. Mentioning 'Bathurst 1000' in the article does not help with the search engine. As this article prooves, typing 1998 Bathurst 1000 into the search engine does not find this page until the 26th entry - the second page. And that does not fix the linking templates. 1972 Bathurst 500 would obviously substitute for Bathurst 1000. A single redirection links all races back to 1963 where another redirect could add the Phillip Island races. To do it your way in a manner that would work would require 51 redirection pages, one for each race. I do not see it as 'drawing a line', I see it as making the articles work in a manner that is friendly for casual users who may not have the memory capacity to remember over a dozen variations of commerical sponsorship arrangements, and friendly for usage of Wiki-language. After all is not Wikipedia intended to be an enclopedia for casual readers or for the expert? --Falcadore 14:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Redirects are cheap. Whichever title the article has, a redirect from the other title will allow searchers to find it either way. I've created 1998 Bathurst 1000 to show you how. It currently has more incoming links. As I added {{R from alternative name}} in a second edit, it probably needs an admin to move this page over it now (sorry - yell if you need me to do it). Have a look at Wikipedia:Redirect for more info on redirects.

I think my personal preference is a non-sponsor variant of the naming where possible, but otherwise accurate, however I notice the 2007 NASCAR Nextel Cup race articles are all named with sponsors, so the naming to include "AMP" appears to have a precedent. I think there should be a space before "1000" (1998 AMP Bathurst 1000 or 1998 Bathurst 1000 not 1998 AMP Bathurst1000 as it is now) - was that a typo or part of the branding of this particular race? Including sponsor names in the article titles also probably helps for this particular period where there were two 1000 km touring car races, and which one was the "real Bathurst 1000" was a rather emotional debate at the time.

Picking up an example from above. Daytona 24 Hour is presently a red link; Rolex 24 at Daytona is a redirect to 24 Hours of Daytona, but the article about this year's race is called 2007 Rolex 24 At Daytona. It seems like other series have not yet made a consistent set of naming conventions, either. --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

In that event, I concede the point and propose to move all the race reports to their commercial names and install redirects under the generic Bathurst 1000 label. This will allow templates to work while putting the commercial name upfront. Since I instigated the discussion I'll take on the work involved. --Falcadore 02:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)