Talk:W. S. Cox Plate

Favourites record
Do we really need this? It really isn't an encyclopedic entry and the list is also inserted in reverse order of MOS standards.Cgoodwin (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It also makes the article look strange, when it doesn't have the list of winners, but does have this. The performance of the favourites is significant, but all it needs is a paragraph with up-to-date citations. StAnselm (talk) 09:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above. The included list that is here, is also pushing the MOS standards on CopyViol and lists. There is already a list of winners elsewhere. Cgoodwin (talk) 23:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The reason I added the list of favourites to the article was a perceived need for it. For a number of years during the racing carnivals, I have observed questions and discussions on online racing forums relating to the favourite in a particular year, or the winning percentage of favourites in certain top class races. As Wikipedia is in the business of providing relevant information to the general public, I gathered the data and put it in a sortable table format which provides a number of sort options. As an alternative, it may be possible to include the information in the List of Cox Plate winners if we remove the breeding column from the winners list. Cgoodwin, please provide a Wiki reference to "MOS standards on CopyViol and lists". Cuddy Wifter (talk) 00:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The simple solution would seem to be to add a paragraph on the notable favourites with the citation added so that viewers may check the extended list for themselves. The sites you require are: [] plus and see the MOS for other related material.Cgoodwin (talk) 02:36, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

This list of favourites is really confusing when you go to this page - you could easily be forgiven for thinking that it is the list of winners because similar pages, such as the Caulfield Stakes, do in fact begin with a list of winners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.16.212 (talk) 03:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 18:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)