Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing/Archive 5

Jim French
Hello all! I came upon the article Jim French quite on accident. However, after reading this article, I found it needing a lot of work. I cleaned it up and changed the tone as best I could, but I feel that it needs more attention. Thank you, and God bless! --thehappyanole (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

A significant amount of the content is lifted from Haskin's article yet a proper link to the article is oddly absent. Here is it from Nov 2008 Jim French is unquestionably one of those forgotten horses worthy of much praise but also denied it due to the unsavory ownership. As such, aside from that BloodHorse reminder article, never made the leap into being a fan favorite. --Kellsboro Jack (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Truly, Jim French was a gifted horse. What a shame that he never gained the recognition he deserved. Admittedly, I do not know very much about Jim French. However, I notice that the Jim French article states he was out of "Dinner Party", while the Info-box reads that his dam was "Dinner Partner". Does anyone have an idea as to who Jim French's dam was? Thanks, --thehappyanole (talk) 02:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

His dam was "Dinner Partner" (by Tom Fool, out of Bluehaze); It's comfirmed by a couple of source including this path: Jim French sired the mare "South Seas" (GB) who was the broadmare of champion runner "Steinlen" (GB). From Steinlen's history here you can see "Dinner Partner". --Kellsboro Jack (talk) 05:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Article request
Should we create Article request for our project?--Horsemeister (talk) 01:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added a new section to the project page linking to an existing Requested article page. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 22:40, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Unref'd BLPs of interest to your project in danger of immediate deletion
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Equine. Pcap ping  08:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Just as a quick note, there are a LOT of jockeys on the list - way more so than any other discipline. We have started working through the list, but extra help would be appreciated! Dana boomer (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and took care of Fernando Jara since it was the only one I could do by searching google with facts off the top of my head. --Smashvilletalk 20:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Naming of Japanese things
Hello. I am Japanese-Wikipedia writer. Please forgive me that I can not use English well.

I would like to ask you about naming rule of Japanese articles. Should I have to make articles about Japanese with oldie romaji notation despite JRA does not use it?

I made Kyoto Kinen which translated article from ja:京都記念 day before yesterday, and the article was renamed to Kyōto Kinen yesterday.

The notation, using macron for long vowels (ー), is surely right as an example of the Romaji notation. However, it is not a general notation in the present, and also JRA does not use it. On the JRA website, they does not use "ō", but "o". You can refer to official page.

I guess the article should be renamed again. However I do not know about English-Wikipedia's general naming rules. I am confused because some articles use "ō", and others use "o" in Category:Turf races in Japan. Which notation should I use when I write new articles?

Thank you. --by （あ） (talk) 12:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This appears to be the doings of the Japan Wikiproject. I suggest you take it over to them. The Thoroughbred Racing project does not have a manual of style. --Smashvilletalk 14:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for good response and good suggestion. I am going to go there. --by （あ） (talk) 00:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Man o' War's Pedigree
Hello all, I recently edited the article Man o' War. Shortly after the edit, I noticed that the table containing his pedigree seems to be out of sorts. In some spots, the box which should contain a horse's name is instead filled with, , , and other similar letter combinations. All I did was delete links to nonexistent pages; however, if I somehow damaged this page, I am very sorry! --thehappyanole (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. I've reverted your edits to the pedigree chart. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

new categories
I created two categories are Category:Racehorses trained in United Arab Emirates and Category:United Arab Emirati racehorses. Most horse trained Godolphin Racing. I know that all of horses may not trained in UAE. They back to UAE in Dubai International Racing Carnival and Dubai World Cup Night. --Horsemeister (talk) 08:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Open Mind
I happened to come across a web-page which stated that Open Mind won the 1989 Triple Tiara of Thoroughbred Racing. I am not sure if this information is accurate, as I know very little about the Triple Tiara. However, if it is correct, she is the only winner of the Triple Tiara who does not have a WikiPedia article. If any of you are familiar with this horse, do you feel that she accomplished enough to merit an article? Thank you! --thehappyanole (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * We have articles on both the American Triple Tiara of Thoroughbred Racing and Open Mind (horse). The Open Mind article is only a stub article and could do with some expansion if you have more information. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot
Okip  23:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Golden Cygnet needs help
Hello, I've done a bit of cleanup of an article I came across, Golden Cygnet. I've removed quite a few phrases that were completely unencyclopedic in tone, but it still needs a bit of work. I really don't know anything about horses or racing, and I don't want to completely butcher the article, but if anyone's interested in having a look, it has some unsourced claims and quotes that will need citing.-- Beloved Freak  14:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Any "wordsmith" willing to undertake remedial work to Golden Cygnet should also take a look at Noblesse and Flyingbolt by the same author. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 01:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have added an article from The Independent as a ref, as it covers many of the points in the article, but there's way too much unreferenced, unencyclopedic material in there. An unsympathetic admin would rip it to shreds. My guess is that it's a chapter from a book which has been copied out. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 17:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Thoroughbred racing Guideline for use of flag icons
We have been inserting flag icons in the Thoroughbred racehorse Infobox for the country where the horse was foaled almost since the Template was created on July 18, 2006. 

There exists at Wikipedia a guideline, not a mandatory Wikipedia Policy, regarding the use of flag icons. It currently dictates the usage of icons throughout Wikipedia but an examination of each of the contributors to this Guideline shows none have any knowledge of Thoroughbred racing and its international rules and regulations. Accordingly, it is appropriate for those who know the facts on any particular specific category at Wikipedia be consulted on the issue relevant to their work efforts so as to establish the appropriate guideline for flag icon usage.

Background
The overuse of flag icons led to a Manual of Style (icons) being created on November 3, 2006. This was virtually meaningless for several months until User:SMcCandlish became involved on April 24, 2007 and began the process of making it a guideline. 

Currently, under the article subheader Appropriate use, it states: "They (flag icons) are useful in articles about international sporting events to show the representative nationality of players (which may differ from their legal nationalities). Example: List of WPA World Nine-ball champions. It notes the flag icon is useful for easy scanning by a reader.

Facts on mandatory Thoroughbred identification
Every person with even a very basic knowledge of Thoroughbred horse racing knows that showing the representative nationality of horses, which frequently differs from their legal nationalities (foaling), is not just a helpful thing, but is mandatory by all governing bodies worldwide, without exception. Note that the use of flags in the List of WPA World Nine-ball champions is in fact for "information" purposes, as the players participating are not legally representing their country but only themselves or an association versus Thoroughbreds where  the horse's country of foaling is required information on the race entry form of all governing authorities as per this example from Golden Gate Fields 2010 San Francisco Mile Stakes nominations form. Other examples from various countries : European Union Hong Kong, Australia, Japan Racing Association summary of winners by country trained (with flag icon) and country foaled

Addition in compliance with existing Guideline
Inserting a flag icon next to the country of birth of Thoroughbreds makes it very useful for easy scanning by a reader as those seeking such information will almost always recognize the flag due to the limited number of countries worldwide. And, inserting suchg a flag icon precisely meets the aforementioned criteria established in the Manual of Style (icons), Appropriate use section and does not change accepted practice. Hence, in compliance with Policies and guidelines which states: "Policies and guidelines can be edited like any other Wikipedia page, but edits that would imply a change to accepted practice, particularly such edits to a policy page, should usually be discussed in advance to ensure that the change reflects consensus," User:Handicapper added to the next line on the Manual of Style (icons) page the following:


 * "Due to the very limited number of countries involved, they are useful in the biobox for Thoroughbred horses to show the nationality by foaling for breeding reference versus the country they race for."

This addition was removed just minutes after User:Handicapper posted it by User:Garion96 with the snide Edit summary message: (rv, not really). Regretfully, this editor has a history of belittling other editors and arbitrarily reverting them as seen in these Edit summaries with a comment that is not an explanation, but one that targets an editor: (rv, not that again...), (rv, don't over do it.),  (rm tag. excessive.).

Handicapper then stated on the Talk page this issue should be dealt with by people who actually know the facts about Thoroughbred horse racing and wrote that: "I will initiate a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thoroughbred racing to help formulate any appropriate additions to this guideline..."

But, this was followed up by a Talk page comment by User:Andrwsc who asserted: "I looked at several of the articles in Category:Thoroughbred racehorses, and I think they are a textbook case of inappropriate icons."

Therefore, I am suggesting members of the WikiProject Thoroughbred racing give their input with a simple '''"yes" or "no" answer to the following, with the vote to be closed one week forward. Given the number of Project members who have been unable to vote and considering the interference and attempt to obfucate the facts by non-Project members, I am extending my submission here for another week to ednd at midnight, May 10, 2010. Handicapper (talk) 21:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure have a other year, it won't make any difference Gnevin (talk) 22:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you in favor of the continued use of flag icon in the "Foaled" line in the Thoroughbred racehorse Infobox?'''


 * YES - Handicapper (talk) 15:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh goodie. I belittle other editors and arbitrarily reverting them as seen in these Edit summaries with a comment that is not an explanation. :) Garion96 (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
No: There is nothing in the infobox template which requires a flag icon to be shown. The assertion that We have been inserting flag icons....since the Template was created is incorrect. As a contributor to many Thoroughbred articles I have avoided using flag icons, and on numerous ocassions have removed them, quoting the MOS guidelines. There is no special case for using flag icons on Thoroughbred horse articles. The foaling country is shown in the infobox and the flag icon is superfluous. Indeed one could argue that it can be confusing: Which of these   is New Zealand and which is Australia? And can you identify Singaore from Chile  and Poland.

The facts on mandatory Thoroughbred identification are wrong. Thoroughbreds do not represent a country. The requirement is that a horse which is racing in a country other than its foaling country, be identified by the addition of a suffix to its name to show its foaling country (eg. Dark Islander (IRE)). This information is shown in the infobox and does not require a flag icon.

I agree with User:Andrwsc that articles in Category:Thoroughbred racehorses are a textbook case of inappropriate icons.

This is a discussion forum and I reject User:Handicappers suggestion of a simple "yes" or "no" vote, especially after he has made a two page post which contains many errors. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 05:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * So, what you are saying is that fans of the game of pool (List of WPA World Nine-ball champions) can identify them, but fans of Thoroughbred racing can't. Handicapper (talk) 18:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You are missing the point again. See my response below. Icons are useful navigational aids on lists and tables where there is a national representation for each item. Icons are not useful as singular decorative images in infoboxes. There is a clear difference, and consensus at MOSICON reflects this. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Handicapper, please read my post. I am saying that I agree with the MOS Guidlines and that flag icons are not necessary, and can be confusing. Your reference to pool is a red herring. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Dear Cuddy Wifter - A simple Yes or No vote does not prevent discussion. It avoids the possibility of a confusing mess. You might simply have created a sandbox for discussion or set up a section as I will now do. Your comments are certainly valued but let me suggest you read what I posted aleady and point out the absurdity that one can identify a massive number of flags for pool players, but not for a single horse. And, as I said above concerning compliance with the existing Guideline, please note the fact that Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons) - Section: Accompany flags with country names states: "The name of a flag's country (or province, etc.) should appear adjacent to the first use of the flag icon."


 * Also, kindly do not make unsubstantiated claims that "he [Handicapper] has made a two page post which contains many errors." I'm not sure why you chose to try to discredit me but please state exactly what are my "many errors."  If not, then please remove your claim. Thanx. Handicapper (talk) 15:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Once again, Handicapper, please read my post. I am not trying to discredit you, but wish to point out some inaccuracies in your post. Your enormous contribution to this project is greatly appreciated. But sometimes you get things wrong.
 * You began this whole section with the word We, thus implying that there was some sort of consensus among the members of this project on flag icons. This is incorrect as there has never been a discussion on the use of flag icons.
 * Your section Facts on mandatory Thoroughbred identification is wrong. There is no mandatory requirement by all governing bodies worldwide, without exception to show which country a horse represents. The requirement is for the foaling country. But this is just another red herring with nothing to do with flag icons. Kind regards.Cuddy Wifter (talk) 02:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * This discussion here maybe of interest Gnevin (talk) 11:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * None of the examples you show outside wikipedia uses flags, so why do wikipedia need them. Also, the guideline says Accompany flags with country names, and not "accompany country names with flags". An important distinction. And please don't say that WP:MOSFLAG allows flag use like this. The consensus at WT:MOSFLAG was that the use was in violation of the guideline. Rettetast (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Your point makes no sense, Rettast. You want the flag icon first for horses? Okay. Note, they do use flags to identify the horse as shown in my many examples. However, you have given approval of flag icons for Pool players etc, so please show us where WPA World Nine-ball champions has a list with flags. Handicapper (talk) 18:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * There are places where flag icons are useful and appropriate on Wikipedia, and places where they are not. With respect to MOSFLAG, the consensus is that singular icons that denote nationality in an infobox do not serve any navigational purpose for the reader.  Putting an icon next to "United States" applies undue weight to the importance of the "Country" infobox field for that horse.  It is also poor from a WP:Accessibility perspective, as a screen reader would say "United States United States".  A section or two above, User:Handicapper showed some external sources that show country abbreviations after horse names.  But those examples are precisely the situations for which there is consensus for icons as navigational aids!  If you wanted to add flags to the list on 2009 Melbourne Cup, that would be perfectly appropriate, and I would defend that. But there is no good reason to put a New Zealand flag in the infobox of C'est La Guerre, for example.  I hope the difference is clear. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * "Undue weight" is exactly what is wanted as to where the horse was foaled. As Cuddy Wifter pointed out, it is mandatory for every country worldwide (I called it representative, meaning "of birth") and, as an owner of Thoroughbreds, and as everyone who follows racing knows, that is very, very important in the world of breeding (every magazine article refers to it) and the very first thing an industry person referring to Wikipedia for horse info looks for. The reason "pool" players have flag icons is for ease of scanning, yet no publication I have ever seen shows a flag icon, nor does any governing body make a participants country of birth a requirent on their stat sheet. So, why the massive clutter of incomprehensible flags on List of WPA World Nine-ball champions plus the "location country,", but not a single flag next to Thorougbred name for something helpful for scanning on a matter to horsemen that is mandatory and of vital interest? Handicapper (talk) 18:45, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

User Andrwsc: Please show courtesy and respect for the process and do not attempt to answer a question addressed to User:Cuddy Wifter that is a response to his statement. Just for the record, your following statement is not an answer, and is irrelevant to the statement made by Cuddy Wifter. Thanx. Handicapper (talk) 20:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Handicapper your edits here are borderline vandalism, please stop moving comment and creating subsectionsGnevin (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * @Handicapper: you show an astonishing lack of good-faith here. You introduced a pool article into this discussion, and you accuse me of obfuscation?  You also fail to answer any question I have asked of you.  — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

No - icons should not be used, for the reasons listed above. Cgoodwin (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No. I personally don't think flag icons add anything to either horse articles or any other article, be it a race article or a sports article in general or for any other type of article. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Reminder. A few things here. Obviously, keep this discussion civil. Secondly, Wikipedia works on consensus, not on voting. Third, any one is welcome to respond to anyone else's comments. This is a public, open forum. Lastly, removing other people's comments because you don't agree with them is a quick way to find yourself blocked. --Smashvilletalk 14:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No - I came here after seeing the discussion on WT:MOSICON. After reading through all the discussion at both places I see no compelling reason to add flag icons to the individual horse articles. I can see where the flags are helpful on a list such as the Pool list mentioned above. If someone is scanning for winners from a specific country it makes them stand out. This would be comparable to adding flags to the Australian Derby article so it would be easy to see what country the winners are from. I also looked at a random selection of the individual articles of some of the people on the Pool list. A couple of the articles did have flag icons in infoboxes desgnating where they are from, that just like this proposal does not improve the encyclopedia or make it easier for people to use. IMO the flag icons do not belong in articles for individual athletes or horses.  GB fan  talk 14:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

No. I was asked to come and vote via a note on my talk page. Not really into voting, more into sensible discussion. I've recognised a couple of names from a similar-ish discussion on the Rugby Union project (you'll know!) and I have to say that the debate there was a much more civil and respectful discussion than this looks to have been. Anyway, for what its worth I'm not a particular fan of flags and I'd be happy not to see any on these articles.--Bcp67 (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. There is no valid reason for this project to ignore WP:MOSFLAG. The fact that the nominator does not appear to recognize the difference between a list of international participants and an infobox is no reason to ignore consensus. It's even specifically referenced in the guideline, "Do not use flags to indicate locations of birth and death". --Smashvilletalk 13:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment. I think consensus is pretty clear here. --Smashvilletalk 20:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Related :Horse icon
Anyone think File:Flat_racing_clipart.svg should go? Gnevin (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sort of indifferent on that one. The actual format of infoboxes are one thing that are not remotely uniform on Wikipedia...it seems to be serving as a placeholder if there is no image for the event. I wouldn't cry if we lost it. --Smashvilletalk 14:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

American Jockey entry
I took a stab at creating the page for the female jockey Mary Bacon - which only seems to link if I use the lowercase b for Bacon: Mary bacon. I know its needs cleaning up and there is a fair amount of material omitted but this was a first pass. Such as her being stalked and shot by another one-time jockey. If anyone wants to add to it have at it. She is an interesting character albeit more of a one-time novelty and clearly a bit of a sad like not entirely of her own making. --Kellsboro Jack (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Assessment
I've added assessment parameters to the Project Banner and I have begun creating the related categories. I think assessment is a great way to focus the energies of the project and to help coordination for improvement of articles. I've begun assessing articles within the project, and I though it might be helpful for me to lay out my working standards for article importance: Let me know if anyone has any different ideas, and feel free to modify my initial assessments. Hopefully some more folks will get involved in assessment! Verkhovensky (talk) 19:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Top Importance: The major races that form the foundation of the sport like the Kentucky Derby, etc.
 * High Importance: Articles on the individual year by year races themselves. Also famous horses and jockeys.
 * Mid Importance:Lesser known races, horses, and jockeys.
 * Low Importance:Articles that are of interest mainly to those very interested in the sport, trivia.
 * Thanks for starting the Assessments for Thoroughbred racing, Verkhovensky. Using the criteria of the probability of the average reader needing to look up the topic, may I suggest that articles on the individual year by year races fall into the Low importance category. Checking a few of the past individual Epsom Derbies show a monthly viewing of 100-300 hits whereas, the Epsom Derby itself  shows 10,000 - 20,000 hits per month, thus Top rated.


 * A check of a number of other WikiProjects reveals that assessments of importance breaks down to approximately: 1%=Top, 3%=High, 18%=Mid and the remainder (78%)=Low. On the basis of about 5,000 articles in Thoroughbred racing this would suggest about 50 Top articles, 150 High, 900 Mid and the rest (3900) as Low importance articles. I hope to add more comments in the next few days. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 05:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Many thanks to Cuddy Wifter for your insightful comments and helpful research. I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestions, and I really appreciate the statistical guidelines.  Thanks again!  Verkhovensky (talk) 06:36, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A to the project banner has depopulated four quality categories (Category, File, Project and Template), moving all the talk pages into Category:NA-Class Thoroughbred racing articles. The question is: was this acceptable, or do we want those four split out again? If the latter, then the banner change should be undone and WikiProject Thoroughbred racing/Assessment must have six more rows added (the four I already mentioned, plus Disambig and Portal). In case there are other considerations I've left a note here -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I am mainly interested in the split of articles by importance, so the Standard Quality scale would be sufficient for me. But I have no objection to the Extended scale. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 04:32, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Update: if we return to the Extended scale, there are now articles ready to populate Disambig-Class. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Update II: as above, plus Portal-Class. That means that all six now have potential members. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Assessment stats
We now have a table of statistics tallying quality versus importance, it is User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Thoroughbred racing and is updated on last day of every month. I've added it to WikiProject Thoroughbred racing/Assessment. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Red rose64, you are awesome!  Verkhovensky (talk) 17:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It was auto-generated without any of us consciously requesting it (I believe that may have triggered it): I just hunted it down and linked it in. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not quite the full story. On July 28 I put in a request for the project to be added to the list using . I was unaware of the link you found. I thought it would not generate any stats until the end of the month. Well done. Incidentally it will update every 3 days. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 23:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks to Cuddy Wifter then too! Verkhovensky (talk) 23:21, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, fine. Knowing that several others definitely do update in the early hours (UTC) of the last day of each month, yesterday I went searching for User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Thoroughbred racing and found it under that exact name, with its last update being that very morning. I thus assumed that it was on the normal end-of-month cycle. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

American vs European
Hello everyone, this is Horsemeister. I see American and European jockey have a big different. For Example in European jockey will put winning race in a paragraph, but in American jockey articles, I see winning race in a infobox. Should we to unify they? Sorry for my poor English.--Horsemeister (talk) 12:54, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Example:Corey Nakatani and Ryan L. Moore.--Horsemeister (talk) 14:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. To me, Ryan L. Moore needs an infobox, whatever we decide to put in it. As for Corey Nakatani, the infobox should show only the major wins. Lesser wins should go in the main text as should the major wins: the infobox should be a summary. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

For example: Breeders' Cup, Classic race, Dubai World Cup and other major Group /Grade one race can use the infobox. We should discuss to make a consensus.--08:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Horsemeister (talk • contribs)

Another problem is American race show the recent year in top and European race show the recent race in the bottom. --Horsemeister (talk) 15:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Lists of Australian race winners also show the most recent winners at the top. The reason for this was the assumption that most enquirers about the winner of a particular race are more likely to be interested in the most recent race. This avoids having to "page down" an article to get the information. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 02:00, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * See Stand-alone lists for the chronology criteria of these lists.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Portal
Hey there. I just started a portal for horse racing. Anyone interested feel free to stop by and help or make suggestions. Thanx  Joe   I  00:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for starting the horse racing portal. Assuming you have some experience in portal building, could you recommend any other portals which are good examples to look at, or follow? Cuddy Wifter (talk) 01:39, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, just look at my userpage. I've been the main contributer on 15 portals, most of them I believe I started.  And I believe 9 of them are featured. That should give a rough idea of the finished product, tho I try to personalize each portal as much as possible.   Joe   I  02:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've the portal to the project banner. If I was wrong to do so, please revert and note it here. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thoroughbred racing articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Thoroughbred racing articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Thoroughbred racing to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at WikiProject Thoroughbred racing/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 01:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing
I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts on an article name
Members of this wikiproject are invited to Talk:The_Chair_(Grand_National), about moving an article that's just avoided doom at Articles for deletion/The Chair. If this is the wrong place for such a notification please let me know and move accordingly. Thanks, Bigger digger (talk) 22:36, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Problematic edits
Hello to the members of this project. If any of you have the time you might take a look at the edits history by User:Zenyattathegreat. Being a fan of this racehorse is great but this persons edits include changing the order of the Thoroughbred Champions: Top 100 Racehorses of the 20th Century By Inc Staff Blood-Horse which clearly shows here (on page five) that they named Man o' War #1 and Secretariat #2. They also created what looks to be a vanity list here Top Racehorses In History which probably needs an AFD. thanks for your time in looking into this. MarnetteD | Talk 04:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like this has been taken care of. It would still be good for any members of this project that are still around to keep an eye out for any future edits by this person. MarnetteD | Talk 19:37, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Flat race need to update
Since Zafonic left Wikipedia, some of European flat race and jump race have not update. Please help us to complete it.--Horsemeister (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * This is a List of French flat horse races which require updating with the winner for 2010.


 * You can find the winners by using the Advanced Results Search box at.


 * Please strike through the race after updating the article, as with Prix du Muguet.

- Thanks for helping. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 06:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


 * This is a good effort by the project. Zafonic was excellent at keeping the results up to date and after he left I tried to keep an eye it but haven't always been able to keep up with them. There are also Irish, French and German races which need doing too although German races seem to suffer from frequent name changes which sometimes make it difficult to be sure exactly which race is which. Is it worth listing the oustanding races there too for anyone to update?--Bcp67 (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, I found some of French flat race had not updated:

G1:


 * Critérium International (horse race)

G2:


 * Prix du Muguet
 * Prix Greffulhe
 * Prix Kergorlay
 * Grand Prix de Deauville
 * Prix Niel
 * Prix Foy
 * Prix Chaudenay
 * Prix de Royallieu
 * Prix Daniel Wildenstein
 * Prix Dollar
 * Prix du Conseil de Paris
 * Critérium de Maisons-Laffitte

G3:
 * Prix Cléopâtre
 * Prix de Guiche
 * Prix de Barbeville
 * Prix Vanteaux
 * Prix Allez France
 * Prix de Lieurey
 * Prix de Meautry
 * Prix La Rochette
 * Prix du Pin
 * Prix de Lutèce
 * Prix du Petit Couvert
 * Prix d'Arenberg
 * Prix d'Aumale
 * Prix du Prince d'Orange
 * Prix des Chênes
 * La Coupe de Maisons-Laffitte
 * Prix Thomas Bryon
 * Prix Eclipse
 * Prix de Condé
 * Prix des Réservoirs
 * Prix André Baboin
 * Prix de Flore (horse race)
 * Prix Perth
 * Prix de Seine-et-Oise
 * Prix Miesque

Other:
 * Prix Matchem
 * Prix La Flèche
 * Prix Yacowlef
 * Prix Herod
 * Prix Isonomy

Keep going.--Horsemeister (talk) 02:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

2010 World Thoroughbred Rankings
Who want like to create it?--Horsemeister (talk) 14:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Created page, but there are still many horses to add to complete the list. Froggerlaura (talk) 19:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources
All Breed Pedigree Database and Pedigree Query are databases whose content is user-generated and they are not checked for accuracy. See the error pages on these sites and there are many, many more errors in all aspects of these records. As such these sites would not meet WP criteria for reliable sources. See: Identifying_reliable_sources .Cgoodwin (talk) 02:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What are the URLs of these "error pages" which you mention? -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:42, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The URLs are: and . The Australian Stud Book: http://www.studbook.org.au/, Thoroughbred Bloodlines at http://www.bloodlines.net/TB/, Thoroughbred Heritage: http://www.tbheritage.com/index.html and a Japanese one are much more reliable. Some other sites have good info, too. At the first 2 sites it is quite possible to say that the kids pony won the Derby last week and the add the ref to WP. Some of the data is no better than this with sires born after their foals and incorrect breeding etc.Cgoodwin (talk) 03:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * URLs to errors and duplicates: http://www.pedigreequery.com/index.php?query_type=errors and http://www.pedigreequery.com/index.php?query_type=duplicate Cgoodwin (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Black Caviar requested move
Hi, members of this project may be interested in a requested move happening at Talk:Black Caviar (horse). Feel free to voice your opinion there if you wish. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 03:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Potential GA candidate?
There has been some good work done on the 1993 Grand National article recently, especially by User:TBM10, and I would be interested to know if it would stand a chance as a good article candidate? Are there any FA/A/GA articles about a particular horse race to compare it to? Bob talk 22:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Considering that we have over 6,300 articles in this Project, and only 10 at GA or above, maybe we should be looking at concentrating on elevating more articles to GA+ Quality. For your information this is a List of the top 50 Thoroughbred articles by Quality Cuddy Wifter (talk) 00:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I had a look through the list, although I couldn't really see any high-quality articles about one particular horse race. I had a look at another type of racing (!), and it's not a million miles away from something like 1995 Japanese Grand Prix in terms of structure, etc, so I might give GA a go, perhaps. Bob talk 14:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The article was passed as a GA today, so that's good news. Bob talk 16:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge request
Diadem Stakes -> British Champions Sprint Stakes.

The reason to merge is according International Federation of Horseracing Authorities, British Champions Sprint Stakes is stilling have Group two lever, so I considering is the same race. Also, according Racing Post, Jockey Club Cup should be moved to British Champions Long Distance Cup and Pride Stakes should moved to British Champions Fillies & Mares Stakes.--Horsemeister (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Totally agree, all three races are continuations of the established events under new names - the Diadem Stakes should be merged with the British Champions Sprint Stakes and the other two races moved.--Bcp67 (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If there is no oppose, I will merge it.--Horsemeister (talk) 01:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the merge is completed.--Horsemeister (talk) 13:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Sainfoin
One would presume that winners of the Epsom Derby would be notable enough to sustain a stand-alone article. The 1890 winner was Sainfoin, which later had a ship named after her. Maybe a member of this WP would like to create an article. I'd suggest that access to The Times online archive may be of benefit in researching this particular horse. Mjroots (talk) 12:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Stub page now exists here, Sainfoin. Froggerlaura (talk) 18:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Not bad for a stub! You might want to pinch the ref from the ship article that the ship was named after the horse. HMS Sainfoin was not the only ship named after a racehorse either.
 * Another thing this WP might consider, is placing names of horses in italics. I'm not saying that not having them in italics is wrong, but over at WP:SHIPS, we use italics for all ship names. IMHO, it looks better that way, and makes an article easier to read. Just a suggestion for consideration by this WP which you are free to discuss or ignore as you wish. Mjroots (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)


 * There is no support in the secondary sources on horses for putting horse names in italics, however, so there is no basis for doing so. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Ealdgyth. Ships' names are always italicized or underlined if italicizing is not available. I used to volunteer creating web pages at the USN Library. Don't know when the practice of italicizing ship's names began, but there's no precedent for italicizing horse's names. FrancisDane (talk) 16:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Eclipse
The article says nothing about his heart being enlarged which is claimed in the horse circulatory system article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.27.158.134 (talk) 02:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Shackleford (horse)
I know very little about horse, but about 4 hours after the Preakness, no article existed for Shackleford (horse), so I created one. Please come by and help clean it up and expand it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Pedigree experiment at Shackleford (horse)
At Shackleford (horse), I have experimented with the Pedigree. My thinking is this presents a horses genes and what matters about those genes is not their personal victories and awards, but their ability to pass those genes on to their progeny. I have added brief notes after notably successful sires to indicate such. It is my personal opinion on what might help the reader. Adding anything else about horse's victories and championships would clutter the table without telling the reader whether his ancestors pass on good genes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Belmont Stakes winners redlinks
I thought I would call everyone's attention to the fact that 3 21st century Belmont Stakes champions are redlinks including 2 of the last 4 and the defending champion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Haskell Invitational
The Haskell article is incorrect in its title and text. The race is not a handicap, and hasn't been since the 2006 running, when the handicap was dropped. According to the official charts and Monmouth Park condition book, horses are assigned "122 lbs. Non-winners of a triple crown race allowed 2 lbs; Non-winners of a Grade I at a mile or over in 2011 allowed 4 lbs." As for the bonus (which is blank on the Wikipedia page), "The owner and trainer of any Triple Crown race victor which starts in the Haskell receives a $25,000 bonus per Triple Crown race victory. A $10,000 trainer's bonus will be awarded to each horse starting in the Haskell that is a Grade 1 winner and has not won a leg of the Triple Crown." The race is known as The Haskell Invitational Stakes, or more usually, The Haskell Invitational.

I changed this information, but my changes were dropped.

71.172.222.164 (talk) 16:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have looked at Haskell Invitational Handicap. Your are all still there. Please note that article edits do not become visible to unregistered users (such as yourself) immediately; but if you create an account, ensure that you are logged in, and view the page again, you will see that the information that you added is all present.
 * Also, when making changes like these it's best if you add sources so that others may verify it: see referencing for beginners. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories by country
I notice that for many countries, Category:Racehorses has three separate sub-categories. I can see that there could be a justification for "Racehorses trained in Foo" as well as "Racehorses bred in Foo", but is there also a need for the third category "Fooian racehorses"? In most cases, no explanation has been added, but I found that Category:American racehorses has a stated purpose: "Category for horses born in the United States or racing there". The first part of that is identical in scope to Category:Racehorses bred in the United States (which has some well-developed sub-categories by state); as for the second part "or racing there", it seems to me that in most cases it would be an overlap with the first, and for visiting horses it would be temporary, non-defining and therefore overcategorisation.

Perhaps that category definition is just poorly stated, and should refer to "Racehorses owned by Americans". Is the extent of cross-border purchasing of racehorses sufficient to justify a separate category for nationality (of owners)?

After writing the above, I found that this was discussed back in 2006, at Category talk:Racehorses, before this WikiProject was set up. There seemed to be consensus there that two categories are desirable (bred and trained). I propose to nominate all the vague "Fooian racehorses" categories to be merged into the corresponding "Racehorses bred in Foo".

Alternatively, I could restructure the "Fooian racehorses" categories so that they are parent categories for the other two, as Category:Australian racehorses is currently used. In that case I would add a template stating that they should only contain sub-categories, and any articles should be moved down into those sub-categories. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I would support any attempt to merge or remove the "Fooian racehorses" cat. It's too broad. I don't tend to use it when writing articles. The "trained in..." and "bred in..." cats are enough, and they are specific. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 14:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with that too. As you say, those cats are specific - "Fooian racehorses" doesn't really mean anything - it's not as if racehorses have a "nationality" like humans do. They are bred somewhere and trained somewhere and that defines them.--Bcp67 (talk) 20:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

New Articles need looking at/ assessing
Over the last few weeks I have written a number of articles for prominent recent European horses who were appearing as redlinks on various pages and re-writing a couple of others. I have been re-writing them all after getting a NPOV template on Storming Home. The full list is on my userpage. I would like some more assessments and opinions, so please take a look. You could start with New Approach which I have just re-written from scratch. I think it's the best I've done so far. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

GA nomination Fantastic Light
I am going to put Fantastic Light forward for GA assessment in the next few days. If anyone can take a look at it I would be v grateful, as I would like to deal with any issues before nominating.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 10:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Passed! Just... Thanks for all the help!Tigerboy1966 (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Sortable Tables
As you may have noticed, most of our sortable tables stopped being sortable a while back. I have re-formatted the table at Epsom Derby (basically I replaced "|" with "!" at the start of the header rows). It now sorts perfectly for all the columns except the winning time column, which is annoying. Perhaps someone could take a look at it and see what's wrong.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 01:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't know! I made the same change to Chartwell Fillies' Stakes, doing exactly what you did, and that works fine, but all the times there are consistent, to the hundredth. It must be something to do with the way that the times for the Derby are formatted. It is a bit annoying as you say, but not sure how to fix it.--Bcp67 (talk) 05:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The recent rollout of MediaWiki 1.18 made it necessary for the entire header row of sortable tables to be declared using header cells, ie the  markup (which generates  elements) not   markup (which has always generated  elements). Anyway; the table on Epsom Derby  as regards sorting the times. I do have observations on other columns: the sorting isn't brilliant for the Jockey, Trainer and Owner columns. These may be fixed by use of the  template - that is, enter the first row as


 * 1780
 * Diomed
 * Sam Arnull
 * R. Teasdale
 * Sir Charles Bunbury
 * Sir Charles Bunbury
 * and similarly for the other rows, which produces:


 * I have omitted the Dist. and Time columns for brevity. If the redlinks are undesirable, they may be suppressed by means of the 1 parameter, as I did for the second instance of Sam Arnull. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help Redrose. My technical expertise tells me that this is what we specialists call "something funny going on" as I have no probs with the sorting on the jockey, trainer, owner columns, so different users are obviously seeing different things.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I should have been more explicit: it sorts, but it sorts in the wrong order, i.e. the Jockey column sorts as Alan Munro/Alfred Day/Anthony Wheatley/Bernard Dillon/etc. but should sort as Tom Aldcroft/Fred Allsopp/Fred Archer (x5)/Bill Arnull (x3)/John Arnull (x5)/Sam Arnull (x4)/etc. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clearing that up. Not sure I fancy the job of slogging through all those names!Tigerboy1966 (talk) 15:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Australian Awards Updates
Can one of our Australian members update the list at Australian Champion Three Year Old and related lists. The Horse of the Year one has been done already. I have looked for some news stories but no luck. I assume that So You Think won the 3yo award for 2009-10 as it's mentioned in his infobox. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 15:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Straight Deal and Straight Deal II
Having started the article for Straight Deal, the 1943 New Derby winner, I have changed all the references I could find to the American mare of the mid 1960s from Straight Deal to Straight Deal II. I think that's correct according to the archived discussion. I'm not a big fan of this as no-one ever called her Straight Deal II, but it seems like the least bad option. As the mare in question won a shed-load of future Graded stakes and an Eclipse Award, maybe one of our North American members could have a go at starting an article. I really don't have the knowledge of US racing to do a proper job. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Straight Deal (mare) could also be an option. Since she was never officially called Straight Deal II, it's probably more confusing to the reader. Froggerlaura (talk) 16:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's true that the Roman numerals are not part of the horse's official name; but this method of disambiguation seems to be normal practice. Examples: Ajax (horse)/Ajax II; Bold Lad/Bold Lad II; Peter Pan I/Peter Pan III; Nimbus II/Nimbus V; and list at Blue Peter (disambiguation). -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:50, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Those horses are all male, making the Roman numerals necessary (can't do Ajax (horse 1), Ajax (horse 2), etc.). Froggerlaura (talk) 18:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The industry practice in Europe is to disambiguate where possible by a national suffix according to place of birth eg Bold Lad (USA)/ Bold Lad (IRE) or Straight Deal (GB)/ Straight Deal (USA). This would solve all the above and have the advantage of adding some useful information. In pedigrees the suffixes are almost always used whether there's an issue or not. I have always thought that Nimbus V was just silly. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Racing colours
I have added images of racing colours to articles on racehorses where pic of the horse is freely available. In the last couple of days User:Redrose64 has been removing these images with the edit summary "rm image; this is not the horse xxxxxx". The images were all clearly captioned as "racing colours of (owner name)". Articles on sports teams regularly include the team colours or badge instead of a photograph, so I'm a bit puzzled. Any thoughts. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 18:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You will notice that in every single instance that before I removed the silks from the horses' pages, I added them to the relevant owners' pages. See, for example, Aga Khan IV; Ballymacoll Stud; Godolphin Racing. Articles on sporting teams (e.g. Manchester United F.C.) show the badge and colours because these are much more constant than the players, which can change every week. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your prompt reply, although I'm still not sure about this. Do you object to the presence of the colours in the article or is it just that you don't like them in the infobox? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 19:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox, primarily - the silks are not necessarily the same for every race that the horse is entered for. My main task was to fixup infobox images which were using the "thumb" option, giving rise to about three frames for the image, ; infobox images are better specified using either a size only, or by using the image_name parameter, . -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * fixed infoboxes on Cyllene, Grand Parade, Windsor Lad, Airborne in the way you suggest. I will do the same with any others I spot. Still not sure about the distinction you are making between racing colours and fottball shirts. Would it be OK to use the colours if a horse did carry them in all its races? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Old Age Home for horses?
On Articles for deletion/Retraining of Racehorses is a discussion about alternatives for deletion of the article Retraining of Racehorses. Can somebody take a look at it? Night of the Big Wind talk  15:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * will doTigerboy1966 (talk) 23:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)