Talk:Sunday Silence

From the Originator:
Hopefully this is a good start to making a page for Sunday Silence. What I lament is the exact figures of his progeny, as much of the info out there is years old.

This page has been vandalized by someone currently vandalizing Easy Goer's article with subjective reasoning and bias. Apparently this person has some kind of axe to grind against Sunday Silence due to his success against Easy Goer, and his recognition as 1989 3 year old champion and horse of the year. I will revert the page to to the article prior to this vandalism.

Undid revision due to subjective and rosy terms such as "arguably the greatest of all time", "remarkable", "much touted" and reverted the article back to the Facts, along with removing some repetitive statements that are already in the 1989 U.S. Triple Crown section of the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.74.124 (talk) 03:41, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The word insular, in regards, to Japanese racing is the word used in one of your Thoroughbred Times references. Also, Northern Taste is also considered by most as the greatest sire in Japanese history. Also, Sunday Silence' sons and daughters had their success mainly in Japan only, not in other parts of Asia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Australasia, Australia, New Zealand,etc. And not in Europe or the U.S.A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.216.213 (talk) 03:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, if you don't feel it is important to note that he won and lost many of his races by very narrow margins, I suppose we can differ on the importance of these. I do feel it is important to note the insular, isolated nature of Japan's racing, as your own reference uses this term. I also feel it is important to note that many experts also believe that Northern Taste was the greatest sire in Japanese history. And to also note that Sunday Silence' sons and daughters achieved almost all of their success only in Japan, and not the rest of Asia,Australasia,Europe,North America,etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.216.213 (talk) 04:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your contributions. I think we disagree on two things in the lead. 1. Narrow margins and "grittiness" and 2. the isolated and insular nature of Japanese racing.
 * Narrow margins and "grittiness". I don't think that this should be in the lead, but I can see your point. The "narrow margins" point is fair enough: it's factual and could be of interest. I don't think that you should then say anything about what this shows. Let the reader draw their own conclusions. (I remember a race when the commentator went into raptures about the courage shown by a racehorse only for the jockey to pop his balloon by describing the horse as a "bone idle bugger".) The best solution would be to mention the facts in the lead and then find some quotable sources about SS's attitude to include in the "Racing Career" section.
 * "Isolated" and "insular". Sorry, but I can't let this go in the lead. A source can be reliable on the facts, but that doesn't mean that we have to accept their opinions. The problem here is that if we let that statement stay in the lead it would contradict the factual statements in the "Progeny" section. SS's descendants have won the Melbourne Cup, 1000 Guineas, Dubai Sheema Classic Hong Kong Vase and Dubai World Cup. That's without counting Deep Impact's run in the Arc, Heart's Cry running third in the King George, and Zenno Rob Roy's second place in the International Stakes. That is a global influence. In fact, if we look at the willingness to run top horses overseas, Japanese racing is less "insular" than racing in the United States or Australia. Of course most of his winners have been in Japan, but that's because he stood there. It would seem a bit weird to say that Mr. Prospector's success was mainly resticted to the insular world of American racing, wouldn't it. I think our best bet would be to cut this down to a factual statement: "Sunday Silence was leading sire in Japan on thirteen occasions". Let me know what you think 13:22, 1 January 2012 (UTC

Thanks for your responses. The word insular comes from your own reference in the article, and the definition of insular means "island or isolated", which does define Japan and Japanese racing. Japanese racing is very isolated and insular, meaning that you or I can't run our horses their without getting licensed, which is extremely difficult for anybody, even in Japan. Japan's racing is 100% Government Run, and they don't allow the regular Joe's(or even many big time int'l owners) to run their horses there. Japan only runs a very few races, I believe 4 or so, with int'l participation. Anyhow, I was mainly talking about the fact that Sunday Silence', as a sire, meaning his sons and daughters never won one Grade/Group I race in all of Europe or the USA,and he only sired a few in Honk Kong(2) &Dubai(1), showing this isolation and insular. I suppose when I was talking about progeny, I was referring to his sons and daughters mainly, not his great grand and grand sons and daughters. Once again, insular means "island and isolated" and that is 100% the definition of what Japan. To me, I would not call the USA isolated or an island. Also, whether you want to put it in the lead or not, Northern Taste,11 time leading sire, is thought by many to also be up there with SS as the best sire in Japan's history,and should be probably be noted in this article. As for Mr, Prospector, he was a successful in Europe big time, with Kingmambo, Lycius, Coup de Folie,Damister, Ravinella, Miswaki,Distant View all winning Group 1's,and in Canada as well. Not only Mr. P, but Northern Dancer, Danehill, Sadler's Wells, Danzig,etc all had major success worldwide and out of their home countries, unlike Northern Taste and to a huge part SS(no Group/Grade 1 winning sons or daughters in the USA or Europe). This is due to the insular, island, isolate nature of Japan's racing.24.193.216.213 (talk) 13:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There are actually 22 Japanese Group One races which are open to foreign entries. Snow Fairy has won the Queen Elizabeth II Commemorative Cup for the last two years. Horses like Takeover Target and Silent Witness have won the Sprinters Stakes. The Japan Cup is one of the biggest races in the world and attracts global interest. As I stated, the top Japanese horses (like the best horses from France, England, Ireland, Germany, Italy, Hong Kong, South Africa, Dubai, Hong Kong, Singapore) run in International competition, the best American and Australian horses do not. That is why the United States is a more insular country as far as horse racing is concerned, than Japan is.
 * To summarise: the best Japanese races are open to International entries, and the best Japanese horses compete internationally. You would need to show evidence that both these statements are wrong to justify the use of "isolated" and "insular" in the lead. All the best. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

As for the narrow margins, I suppose you are correct, in only putting the factual margins of a nose and neck, etc. in the lead. I suppose that is correct, because "grittiness" is an adjective, and I guess that wikipedia only really wants facts, not adjectives and rosy terminolgy,etc. I thought showing how many of his wins and losses came down to very narrow margins should be told and important in the article, but using adjectives is probably not what wikipedia wants. It seems you are a better writer than myself, so I will let you try to come up with a way to put it, or the way wikipedia wants it to be put.24.193.216.213 (talk) 14:02, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Trust me if I had control over wp the racing articles would be written in a much more colourful way. The point is that if we want horse racing to be given the same status as other sports we have to abide by the rules, which means that we have to keep to a dry, factual style. I could write lots of purple prose about Desert Orchid, Troy, Ardross etc but I have to be boringly safe. Annoying, but necessary.
 * Please get a proper user name and join WikiProject Thoroughbred racing. Your input would be much appreciated.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I will try to get a username ASAP. "Japan runs 22 G1 races open" to int'l competition?? Well the USA and Europe,etc run thousands and thousands of races open to int'l competition, including every level, G1,G2,G3, ungraded or listed stakes, allowance,claimers,maidens,etc. Japan does NOT! And even if they run a handful of G1 races open, only a few actually get int'l competitors,mainly the Japan Cup,QE II. The vast majority of their whole racing year is restricted, domestic races, at all levels. This is the dramatic difference from that and the rest of the world, and the fact that Japan is the only country in the world that is 100% Government run, where only a very few selected owners can compete in these races, and the vast majority of people cannot, while every other country in the world is open to a democratic racing industry. Also, my point was never that a few Jpn based horses run in Dubai,the Arc, Breeders' Cup(Jpn is 0 for only 5 in the Breeders' Cup) to show the "insular, isolated" racing industry, it was what I wrote previously to show this. And if you want to also state that Australia and the USA is isolated and insular, then go right ahead. As far as the USA goes, the USA has second and third class turf horses and when these American turf horses compete in Dubai,Jpn(Mission Approved,Champ Pegasus,etc) they get destroyed. But when the American dirt horses ran in Dubai on dirt(not synthetic) they had an amazing record(Cigar,Captain Steve,Curlin,Well Armed,Invasor,Pleasantly Perfect,Silver Charm,Roses in May,Benny the Bull,Caller One,Big Jag,Sar.County,Kellys Landing,etc), and even sent quite a few for the Jpn Cup Dirt,but not the top horses,as they ran the BC Classic instead. As for Australia, your point is probably correct, as the So You Think, Starcraft,Choisir, Elvstroem's compete oustide AUS much less frequently.24.193.216.213 (talk) 03:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I just got a username. A few things and questions and comments. How do you put pictures on a horses' article? Also, I did a little research about Japan's racing, and I found some interesting facts. First, prior to only last year,2010, most of the domestic Japanese G1 races were limited to Japanese trained horses only(Sunday Silence died in 2002, 8 years earlier). This opening only started last year in 2010 in Japan, because they joined the Int'l Federation of Horseracing Authorities. Additionaly, I also found on the Godolphin website that up until 2003(Sunday Silence died in 2002, which means only a few of his last crops ran after 2003), only 12 total races in all of Japan were open to int'l competition. So the fact is that for the vast majority of Sunday Silence' stud career, up until the year after he died, the huge majority of his sons and daughters(and Northern Taste' also for that matter) ran in restricted, domestic Japanese races(at all levels, G1,G2 and on down). I think these facts should be told, in regards to Japanese racing, stud records,etc.Peteski132 (talk) 07:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

..................

Anybody considering Sunday Silence's impact at stud should read this recent (May 31, 2012) Bloodhorse article, "Deep Impact Making an Impact": http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/truenicks/archive/2012/05/31/deep-impact-making-an-impact.aspx

"Deep Impact is a son of the Halo stallion Sunday Silence, whose status as not only the greatest Japanese stallion of his era, but arguably the greatest of all time, is well established. His importance, however, goes well beyond such parochial considerations, as Sunday Silence achieved something far more significance than local domination, single-handedly raising the international standing of the Japanese-bred racehorse.

". . . Despite this broadly shared level of success, until recently there has remained a question as to whether Sunday Silence had left a definitive heir. This is a far-from-unique picture, and one can parallel it with the greatest European sire of the recent - or perhaps any other era - Sadler's Wells. And, just as Sadler's Wells had to wait - as far as Europe was concerned for Montjeu, and then Galileo (who arrived in his thirteenth crop) - for a true heir, so it is with Sunday Silence's potential successor, Deep Impact, who was a member of the tenth of his sire's eleven crops. Just as Sunday Silence was the best runner to represent his sire, Halo, Deep Impact was the best runner to represent Sunday Silence. ..

"Deep Impact's first crop are only 4-year-olds of 2012, and that crop has already yielded 10 stakes winners, eight of them group winners. The stars have been Real Impact, who captured the one-mile Yasuda Kinen (gr. I), and Marcellina, successful in the Oka Sho-Japanese 1,000 Guineas (gr. I). The group winners Danon Ballade (second Japanese 2,000 Guineas (gr. I) and Tosen Ra (third Japanese St. Leger (gr. I)) are also classic-placed, and group winner Donau Blue also took second in the Victoria Mile (gr. I). Remarkably, Deep Impact's second crop have already surpassed those efforts. Despite still only being in the spring of their 3-year-old careers, 13 of their number have already captured black-type events. With a view to the future, perhaps the most significant is Beauty Parlour, who took her record to four wins in four starts when following up a victory in the Prix de la Grotte (gr. III) with a triumph in the French 1,000 Guineas (gr. I)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.12.47 (talk) 05:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Solution
Here's a compromise text:


 * "Sunday Silence was Leading sire in Japan on thirteen occasions, surpassing the previous record of ten titles by Northern Taste. Although the relatively insular nature of Japanese racing at the time meant that Sunday Silence's success was initially restricted to his home territory, his descendants have since gone on in recent years to win major races in Australia, Europe, Hong Kong and Dubai."

What do you think? That seems okay with me, the only thing in the sentence I would strongly add is this: "a FEW(I only count a few,correct me if I'm wrong) of his descendants(or grandsons or granddaughters, or progeny, I guess there isn't a word strictly for sons and daughters, or grandsons,etc, progeny and offspring mean the same thing?), have since gone in recent years to win major races in Australia, Europe, Hong Kong(did he?) and Dubai. Or you can say it the way it is stated in your reference article(Reference #2,Thor.Times), it says, "although it is difficult to evaluate his record since most of his offspring have competed in the insular world of Japanese racing." Whichever you think is better, that's fine. Also do you think we need to add to this article that Sunday Silence did not sire a Group/Grade I winner in Europe or the USA? Silent Name,Zenno Rob Roy,Deep Impact,Sundrop,etc all lost in G1's in Eur and the USA. What do you think?Peteski132 (talk) 12:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you say that his descendants won races in x, y and z, then it's a fact. If you say "a few" then it's an interpretation of the facts and so much more likely to get challenged. How many is a "few"? I suggest that the points you have raised would be fine in the section on SSs stud record. There are two ways of looking at the facts: 1. SS was only such a huge success because he was competing in a restricted environment. 2. SS would have been a much bigger global success if he had stayed in USA or stood in Europe. Both are valid opinions. With the lead, however, it's best to stick to the solid, unchallengeable facts. 10:53, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, good point.You can stick with it. I think many people's opinions would be that Northern Taste,SS,Southern Halo(South America),Sir Tristram(Australia/New Zeal.) would not have been anywhere near that dominant in the USA or Europe, but would have been a success anywhere, just no where near the dominance. I mean, Mr. Prospector,Northern Dancer,Storm Cat,A.P Indy,Alydar,Halo,Seattle Slew, etc were only leading sires in countries a few times each. Now Northern Taste,SS,Southern Halo,etc would have been leading sire for over 10 years in the USA and/or Europe if they stood stud there? I highly doubt it, but like you just said, these are "opinions".Peteski132 (talk) 11:34, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Table
I've tried to improve the presentation by putting his major winners into a table and making a separate list for the "Sire of sires" list.  Tigerboy1966  00:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Accounting for injury prior to Preakness
Sunday Silence's injury prior to the Preakness is an important aspect of his career and will be included in the article. Were it not for response from several parties coming together with little time and resources, most likely Sunday Silence would not have recovered and thus not entered the race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifan111111 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

You cannot cite a "blog" as a citation or a reference. Your citations as blogs do not even show up or come up and they do not lead to any reference. The horses rankings in the Bloodhorse are already in the article earlier. Also you cannot make a statement as to why one horse was ranked ahead of another. There are many reasons why a horse can be ranked ahead of another: bias, subjective rankings, head to head is only 1 reasons, career performances(many would say Easy Goer accomplished much more in his career,etc), records, times, major stakes wins(Grade I wins), best performances, best times, and many many more reasons.173.56.254.170 (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no dispute that Sunday Silence was injured prior to the Preakness. It is an important aspect of Sunday Silence's career and is a factual accounting of his training uleading to his victory in the race. I added another citation which furthers its accuracy. Do not remove the paragraph or a request will be made to lock the article.

Additionally, Easy Goer's #34 rank was not previously cited in the article. It is properly placed where comparisons were made between the horses. Bloodhorse rankings are respected throughout the industry and are universally noted in Wikipedia for all great horses. "Many" is a rosy term and means little to nothing in this regard. Subjectivity plays no role in Wikipedia, and the facts should be reflected as such. Do not remove this fact or a request will be made to lock the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifan111111 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Bloodhorse rankings are respected throughout the industry: you are going to need a source for that. I always thought that the rankings were a bit silly: they were supposed to be a ranking of the best horses of the century, but managed to ignore the world outside North America. They were then retconned into an American rating to avoid embarrassment.  Tigerboy1966  15:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Tigerboy, hello how are you? I responded to your thoughts in the other section of this talk page. I regards to the Bloodhorse rankings, I think they can be added to the article, but a person can't put there opinions(career performance,etc) as to why a horse is ranked ahead of another or where they ranked at all. I cited quotes with references in the article about the BH rankings and the arbitrariness of it. You make a good point also, it was basically ONLY American horses. The title should be the "Top 100 American horses."Peteski132 (talk) 15:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me? Request to lock the article is fine with me. You need to get verifiable references and citations to put any injury in any article. You can put the Bloodhorse rankings into an article, but you cannot make a statement as to what you think is the reason why a horse is ranked over another, unless of course you have verifiable references/citations. Head to head matchups is only 1 criteria of many. Hence, why Noor is not ranked ahead of Citation(Noor beat Citation 4 of 5 races) or Beau Purple is not ranked ahead of Kelso(Beau Purple beat Kelso 3 of 4 races), DrFager/Damascus, Skip Away/Formal Gold, Forego/Big Spruce, and many more. Head to head races are only 1 of many criteria in subjective rankings.Peteski132 (talk) 04:49, 21 April 2013

Specifically in regards to the 4 races between the 2 horses: When you add explanations,opinions, injuries,etc in regards to either horse in the 4 races between the 2 horses, there is counter explanations/opinions/injuries,etc in regards to either horse in the 4 races between the 2 horses. I have no problem if you feel it is necessary for this to be put in both horses articles. Also, YOU CANNOT make a statement as to your opinion WHY(unless you have verifiable sources as to specifically why) you think 1 horse is ranked ahead of another(in this case, SS & EG) in rankings. Head to head is 1 criteria. There are many other criteria besides head to head, career performances, wins/losses,etc.Peteski132 (talk) 07:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Balance
I think we should remember that this article is about SS, not SS vs EG. Quite a lot of recent additions would be better placed in the EG article. I think that the "excuses" for SS's defeats belong here, those for EG's (including HoY ballot) belong in his article.  Tigerboy1966  15:03, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Well both horses are linked heavily and seemingly forever, so the explanations behind both horses wins and losses(especially in the 4 races they faced each other) probably belong in Both horses articles. I don't have a problem if both are added to both horses articles. However, if an explanation(s) are made in regards to both horses or 1 or all 4 of the races they ran against one another, then a counter explanation can be put into the article, like I did. To try to make a long story shorter, the 4 races between the 2 horses and explanations on the wins/losses belong in both horses articles because these 4 races were the big races they ran against one another.Peteski132 (talk) 15:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I see your point Peteski. It's hard to find anything about SS which doesn't mention EG and vice-versa. As both articles are easily cross-referenced, I just think we should avoid duplication. I had a similar situation on my hands when I wrote the articles on Persimmon and St. Frusquin: I had to look at the same events from different viewpoints. There is no right answer.  Tigerboy1966  15:32, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, at least the explanation(s) in regards to the 4 actual races these 2 horses ran against 1 another. Not the many other races in their careers, of course. And since this other person decided to put many explanation(s) in regards to these 4 races, there is and has to be the counter explanation(s) in regards to these 4 races,etc. I have no problem if you or anyone else requires this to be in both horses articles. Let me know.Peteski132 (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to point out: in the KD paragraph, EG gets 5 mentions to SS's 3. In the Preakness paragraph it's EG 7, SS 4. The focus seems misplaced.  Tigerboy1966   07:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I just edited both the KD & Preakness paragraphs trying to equal out the focus equally on both horses. Let me know any more suggestions you have on this after reading it. Also, I told the user Wikifan11111, that when he or she adds explanations,opinions,injuries,etc for either horse(in regards to any of the 4 races they ran against 1 another), then counter explanations,opinions,injuries,etc can be added for the other horse. As I said, I did however try to make it as equal as possible in regards to this. I also don't have a problem if anyone requires this to be added to both horses article for balance and equality. Forgot to sign this last post. Peteski132 (talk) 07:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Lead
I have rewritten the first paragraph of the lead. I think that the shorter sentences are preferable in conveying the key facts. I just don't like long meandering sentences.  Tigerboy1966  19:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tigerboy, I don't believe SS ever stood stud at all in the USA.Peteski132 (talk) 19:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops!  Tigerboy1966  21:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

AEI
I've take out the AEI stuff as it's unsourced. What I mean by that is that the sources cited do not support the claims in the text. I think AEI (horse racing), would be a viable article, then we could use the term with a link.  Tigerboy1966  11:53, 22 June 2014 (UTC) Actually AEI needs to be in the article to put earnings into perspective. They should be in the article to compare him to other top stallions worldwide. And the equineline.com is a credible source to show this. So what's the problem? Peteski132 (talk) 12:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC) I just created and started the AEI (horse racing) article with references. Please go to it and edit what you feel necessary. Thanks Peteski132 (talk) 13:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I see no such article yet. Can you link it if it's been created?   And frankly, I agree, I see no proper citation in there anywhere in the earlier edits; the BH source only explained what an AEI is, nothing about any specific horse. I also do not want to see an edit war start here over the question of whether Sunday Silence or Easy Goer was the better horse, and Peteski, I know you are working on and have a POV strongly in favor of the latter, so be aware that I'm watching both articles.  Montanabw (talk)  18:54, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The article for creation is at User:Peteski132/Average Earnings Index (Horse Racing). There are a few issues: any article which refers to earnings in dollars only and refers to Nijinsky as "Nijinsky II" looks awfully Americo-centric. How does AEI take account of earnings in other currencies and fluctuating exchange rates?  Tigerboy1966  19:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Snurge is a classic example of a horse who won prize money in so many currencies that I would like to see anyone to give a full breakdown of his earnings is US$, which would be pretty important in determining the AEI of Ela-Mana-Mou.19:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)  Tigerboy1966  19:14, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Ms. or Mrs. Montana, "beware" (that sounds very strange ma'am) I am watching your articles also Ms or Mrs. Montana. "He came in"- what a great piece of writing you "leave" in an article. And you criticize my writing? Actually, you should criticize professional writers writing, because I mainly copy & paste. You can Criticize me copying and pasting from professionals writing. Go right ahead. Tigerboy- if you go to equineline.com, which was his up to date AEI, you can see his earnings transferred into US dollars($730 million). These earnings need to be put into proper perspective, and AEI is probably the best and fairest way to compare. His career AEI is 2.55. As you probably know, US & European sire lists don't even count earnings in Japan because they would skew everything dramatically. Why don't you feel the equineline web site is credible in up to date info on this? Here is a link to the web site showing this- http://www.equineline.com/Free-5X-Pedigree.cfm?page_state=ORDER_AND_CONFIRM&reference_number=7288680 Just scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see up to the minute (updated daily) stats on AEI, earnings, SW, BW% etc. Also, I used a reference from a book in the AEI article citing the all time highest AEI's for sires. Peteski132 (talk) 03:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have found it now.  Tigerboy1966  05:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Your welcome. You let me know how you want to put it into the article. Or if you want to wait until the AEI (horse racing) article is approved? In the AEI article I started, you can find 4 links with info on AEI. You can use these 4, plus the equineline web site with up to the minute (daily updates) info on the AEI's for all sires. Thanks. Peteski132 (talk) 06:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Um, Peteski, if you "copy and paste" you are violating one of wikipedia's major rules per WP:COPYVIO. You are welcome to comment on anything I write; I am welcome to disagree with you.  And actually, sometimes some professionals don't write particularly well, florid sportswriter prose is not necessarily suitable for an encyclopedia, and has it occurred to you that perhaps I happen to "write professionally" (within my field) almost every day of my working life? As for the AEI issue. I think that creating an article on the concept is a good idea, though I suspect that per Tigerboy's example above, it may be difficult to use its numbers where we have horses in different nations - I don't see how one could compare Black Caviar to Zenyatta, for example?   As for Nijinsky, I am going to give Tigerboy gentle noogies for that one, cause the name change was supposed to avoid confusion!    Montanabw (talk)  22:04, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I should be more accurate in what I meant. I "copy and paste" quotes that I feel are important for articles. If copying and pasting quotes are against wiki policy, let me know. Or if wiki policy doesn't prefer using quotes, let me know. As for others, I try to put it in different wordings and phrases. Sometimes I make mistakes (as we all do) in trying to do this. You, Tigerboy, and anybody else obviously can correct them. As for AEI, I believe the more you research the topic of AEI, you will find that it IS used and respected worldwide. I believe the AEI puts earnings into perspective in all different types of currencies. If you would go to the equineline link I provided, you can look up any sire's info from any country. The way this is done is by going to the equibase site, and entering in a son or daughter of any sire, and there is a link to its pedigree which links to equineline info. Peteski132 (talk) 03:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Read WP:COPYVIO. I had to totally rewrite your AEI draft (which I think is, by the way, salvagable) to remove all the problems with copy and paste. Didn't they teach you in freshman composition about plagiarism? You just don't copy and paste huge chunks of material, even putting quotations around things (which you DID NOT DO)  or including a citation doesn't absolve you of plagiarism. I teach at the college level, if you'd turned in a term paper like this, I'd have given you an F for blatent copying, citations notwithstanding.   If you see what happened when I ran the Easy Goer article through a plagiarism checker here, not only did it (obviously) say it was from wikipedia, but also flagged 13 other articles where there was close paraphrasing. It may be tough to find your own words sometimes, but find them you must.   Montanabw (talk)  23:38, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I understand now. I was going about it the wrong way. I was looking at it from the perspective that there are numerous authors editing numerous articles on wiki, not one author's work. I also am always caught between (confused) sticking with the straight encyclopedic facts (which obviously can be very boring), and mixing in my own words, and mixing in some quotes from the trainers, experts etc. I'd be better off staying away from editing any articles on wiki. Peteski132 (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Everyone has to learn to write and learn to be edited. You won't be able to graduate from college unless you figure this out anyway. WP:BRD.  WP is a tough place, but it's a crucible that will teach you to write well if you grow up and stop pouting.   Montanabw (talk)  05:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I am a 36 year old college grad. Thank you very much. I don't really want to be a writer, nor do I want to learn how to write well in general, or be a writer and write well in wiki terms (wiki policies). I do have an interest in sports, horses, music, etc. I just looked at so many thousands and thousands of wikipedia articles that were just terrible, and supposedly written and edited by good writers, professionals, college grads, professors, etc. I figured I would add some things and edit some articles in my free time. But being that I am not a good writer, I don't feel I am being beneficial to wiki by doing this, even though so many wiki articles are very bad. And no, I am really not pouting about it. I'm actually just telling the truth. For some people, patrolling, editing back and forth, correcting each other, debating, etc is a good thing, but not for all. Peteski132 (talk) 07:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, don't coy and paste, that is plagiarism and will get you sanctioned on Wikipedia. You must not have graduated in the liberal arts, where researched term papers are standard. I agree that articles need to be improved, but just use your own words, don't get too upset if you work gets rewritten, and remember that we are writing an encyclopedia, not a sports column, so just the facts, not the flourishes. And really, everyone should learn to write decently.   Montanabw (talk)  23:52, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I didn't graduate in the liberal arts, but I did graduate nonetheless, thank you very much again. "Agree that wikipedia articles need to be improved" may be the understatement of the year. Good to know that at least you see this. Everyone should learn to write encyclopedic articles decently? I suppose, to each his own. Thanks for the advice. Peteski132 (talk) 04:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I meant that everyone should be able to write decently - wherever you go, you never know when it will be useful - and know the basics of citation, research and how not to plagiarize. I once wrote a newspaper column, for example, also other assorted things.  I have to write now almost every day in my RL job.   Montanabw (talk)  21:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I couldn't find SS's AEI in the cited source so I've removed it. We are now left with a somewhat redundant half paragraph on the AEI's of various North American stallions. If you could find AEI's for other important Japanese stallions it might make sense, otherwise you're comparing apples and oranges.  Tigerboy1966  20:53, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Are you serious? Of course it is in the source. His AEI is right there at the top of this source: http://bloodstock.racingpost.com/stallionbook/stallion.sd?popup=1&horse_id=465637  Peteski132 (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteski132 (talk • contribs) 07:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, if you want my opinion, I think we need to keep the Sunday Silence/Easy Goer rivalry thing OUT of the respective articles. They were both great horses, Sunday Silence did not get the respect he had earned and deserved, but it sucks that a horse as good as Easy Goer did not get credit in his time for his abilities.  We don't need to "knock" either horse -- or their articles -- by subtle slams and dueling stats. Now back to your corners, both of you!    Montanabw (talk) 07:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

A stallion's career AEI can be found by looking up the pedigree of any of their offspring in The Jockey Club's online pedigree database, equineline.com. Sunday Silence's career AEI, according to the Jockey Club's online pedigree database (which includes all career earnings throughout the entire world), equineline.com, is 2.55. Let me repeat that equineline includes ALL CAREER earnings THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. NOT just in Japan through 2002 only in Japanese yen. Sunday Silence's career AEI, according to Racing Post is 2.15. However Racing Post warns details of horses trained outside GB and Ireland may be incomplete. Peteski132 (talk) 02:33, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

New discussion
Do verifiable facts need a "consensus?" Do you dispute the Jockey Club's online pedigree database, equineline.com, as being factual? Is the Jockey Club's online pedigree database, equineline.com, not a trustworthy, valid source? If so, please give evidence as such. Thanks. Peteski132 (talk) 07:48, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You are missing the point, Peteski. This article is about Sunday Silence, not Easy Goer.  Putting too much emphasis on the details of every race and why Easy Goer won or lost is WP:UNDUE weight. So I tossed that part for that reason. As for some of the statistics on AEI, you and  need to sort out that bit, and it's clearly been in dispute for a while.  Montanabw (talk) 21:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

We did "sort it out." The Jockey Club's online pedigree database, equineline.com, includes all of the worldwide earnings for the entire career for the sire, not just in one country for a limited number of years. You can ask him if this is in still "in dispute." The main focus of SS's career was his rivalry with EG, and I put pertinent facts regarding their races into the article, NOT "why Easy Goer won or lost." Much like the rivalries of Dr Fager/Damascus, Affirmed/Alydar, Majestic Prince/Arts and Letters, Swaps/Nashua, Noor/Citation, Seabiscuit/War Admiral, etc., and many of their respective articles. Peteski132 (talk) 23:53, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I’ll leave be the AEI issue, but some of the other content was very biased and at times snarky. The defense details for Easy Goer belong in the Easy Goer article per WP:UNDUE.  The rivalry can be discussed, because it was significant, but the tone was not neutral. Your bias is well-known and what may sound neutral to you is not in fact neutral, so I trimmed things a bit and did some rephrasing.   Montanabw (talk) 06:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Facts are facts are facts; there's no bias in facts, there's no tone regarding facts. I am not biased. I fully acknowledge BOTH horses greatness; and fully admire both. I did not/do not depreciate or denigrate SS at all. I am as biased or as unbiased as is Tigerboy. So you go over to the talk page of someone (who I have no problem with by the way) totally "unbiased" and "neutral," who edits an endless amount of articles everything Japan. Nothing at all against him or Japan. If Tigerboy felt that anything was/is "snarky, biased and not neutral," he would have edited/removed it in an instant. Tigerboy had/has no problem with editing an endless amount of articles, Japanese or not.Peteski132 (talk) 07:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Peteski, you are missing my point. This article put WP:UNDUE weight on the excuses given by Easy Goer's connections. The Easy Goer article already has much of this content, which is where it belongs, if it belongs anywhere. I fixed the phrasing so it is more balanced. I do not see Tigerboy as someone who gets into discussions like these any more than he must.  The article still doesn't have a lot of the positive assessments about Sunday Silence in it even now (mostly just the Blood-Horse ranking and then his sire record in Japan).  But it's a little better.  I like both horses too, but there was a clear tone that had to be addresses and I addressed it. You will note that I haven't touched your Easy Goer article in years.  It's all yours.   Montanabw (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The fact that SS swerved in and bumped Northern Wolf, then swerved out from being whipped in the Derby and again in the Swaps Stakes are not excuses as to why SS won or lost, or why EG or Prized won or lost; they are facts. Ditto for traffic trouble during some races. The fact that EG beat Prized is also not an excuse, just a fact. The facts regarding the time between races and distances are also not excuses, just facts. AEI stats are facts. Whether Tigerboy is someone who gets into "discussions like these" on any subject/topic or not, there is no doubt at all that if Tigerboy felt that anything was/is "snarky, biased, negative and unbalanced," he would have "edited/removed" it immediately. Tigerboy had/has no problem with editing an endless amount of articles. I understand the issue regarding quotes by jockeys, trainers, racing experts, etc.Peteski132 (talk) 21:22, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I took American Pharoah to FAC and didn't have that level of detail on other horses in individual races. Your appeal to authority fails. We can discuss restoring some content, but it needs a different tone. Montanabw (talk) 22:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

"Appeal to authority." Squash your arrogance and egotism. Talk about "tone." I am not "appealing" to any "authority." "Level of detail?" You consider that a very high level of detail? Really? Actually, there is a far higher "level of detail" involving numerous races in the articles of Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, American Pharoah, Justify and the "non-Triple Crown winners" Dr. Fager, Arrogate, Curlin, Gun Runner, Ghostzapper, Wise Dan, Zenyatta and California Chrome, proving that you don't have to be a Triple Crown winner to earn very high "levels of detail" for numerous races in a myriad of articles.Peteski132 (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I really didn't want to get involved again but as both MontanaBW and Peteski have posted on my talk page I thought that I would pop over here to say that Peteski is an enthusiastic, knowledgeable and industrious contributor, but s/he seems incapable of compromise. S/he seems to want to push a single idea: Easy Goer was better than Sunday Silence. Discussing issues with Peteski works like this: find brick wall, headbutt wall, repeat.  Tigerboy1966  17:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Tigerboy - You are the biggest hypocrite and the quintessential POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!! You are totally OBSESSED with EVERYTHING involving Sunday Silence and EVERYTHING involving Japan, even the most trivial and minute. LOL- Now 3-1 "edge" doesn't sound as good as 3 out of 4 without the "edge" - LOL. And you are incapable of compromise wanting to push many ideas: SS was "better" than EG on the track and in the Japanese, American, European and worldwide breeding shed, period. No context or perspective allowed, period; SS is the greatest "worldwide" sire of all-time, much less Japan; Japan has the best horse racing worldwide, period; Anything regarding SS, even the most minute, needs to be reported in a wikipedia article (the ONLY reason why I did the same exact thing regarding EG), period; Anything Japan is the greatest in the world, even the most trivial things, period; if a sumo wrestler in Japan ate something and gained an ounce, it needs to be reported in a wikipedia article, period; if anything happened in Japan, even the most minute, it must be told in a wikipedia article, period; and an infinite, endless amount more of anything a person can think of regarding SS & Japan, must be told in wikipedia articles (the ONLY reason why I did the same exact thing regarding EG). Keio Hai Nisai, Copa Republica Argentina, Swan, Fuchu Himba, Fierement, Daily Hai Nisai, Mainichi Okan, Centaur, Shimbun Hai, Flora, Yayoi, Tulip, Tokai, Nikkei, Keihan, Miyako, Niigata, Sekiya, Ibis, Hakodate, Procyon, Haru Urara, Heian, Silk Road, and an endless amount more. Really Tigerboy??? When people give it right back to you, you don't like it and hypocritically criticize. You'd also like to disregard the Jockey Club's online pedigree database, equineline.com (which is not a trivial source by the way), for all worldwide career earnings for sires. Who's "better" in any way is totally subjective. I fully acknowledge BOTH horses greatness; and fully admire both. I did not/do not depreciate or denigrate SS at all. I am as biased or as unbiased as you are Tigerboy. Discussing anything regarding SS & Japan with tigerboy works like this: find Japanese wall, head-butt Japanese wall, repeat ad infinitum. SS, Japan, SS, Japan, SS, Japan, SS, Japan, SS, Japan, SS, Japan.Peteski132 (talk) 22:16, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Peteski132, please note WP:NPA and WP:AGF. Please refrain from such invective in the future.  Montanabw (talk) 22:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sunday Silence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707223215/http://www.belmontstakes.com/racing/belmontstakes.aspx to http://www.belmontstakes.com/racing/belmontstakes.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016045747/http://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/horses-view.asp?varID=402 to http://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/horses-view.asp?varID=402
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101123174908/http://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/Horses.asp to http://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/Horses.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)