Jump to content

Talk:Brickyard 400/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

"Allstate - Title double"

The phrase comes from what was used by the Indianapolis Motor Speedway official website, in calling it a "Brickyard/Title...," not an "Allstate/Title..." Calling it Allstate, and acting like that's been its name for the majority of its years, is frankly idiotic. --4.225.20.38 15:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Order of winners

Going from most recent to least recent, even if practice for other NASCAR race pages on wikipedia, is inferior to oldest to newest, because of the way the mind tends to go from first to last when going downward, and the first race was 1994 not 2005. Perhaps no one cares, but hopefully the Indy pages could be made as superlative as possible. --71.156.95.33 16:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

    • I agree with that point, I think ALL races should be listed in top-to-bottom, first-to-last order, as it is the logical way of listing things. Hwoever, the "policy" of the wiki NASCAR people is to list them backwards, so I guess that's the way it will be. In addition, I think eventually the races should be listed in table form, just as all of the college bowl games are. But I'm not going to take that on myself. Doctorindy 18:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I would actually disagree. (OK, I'm not impartial, I'm a member of WP:NASCAR.) The reason that WP:NASCAR (and WP:F1, for that matter) list race winners in reverse chronological order, is the idea, "what have you done lately". My thinking is that most people looking up a race in here will want to know "who won last year" over "who won the first ever race". Upon looking at the talk for both WPs, I don't know as I see a clear consensus, other than there were no objections. If you want, bring it up. -slowpokeiv 21:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
    • That's a fair explanation, except I think it might be the only sports related group of lists that does it that way. No big deal really, just want it to be good. Doctorindy 22:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Fair enough, and to be honest, I agree, no big deal, and I too want what's best/easiest to understand for the average reader. :) If chron, or reverse chron ends up being best, either is OK by me, I mainly want a standard across the articles, and all data represented to be accurate. :) -slowpokeiv 01:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


Table for winners

I'm considering using a table for this, to bring it to the same level as the List of Indianapolis 500 winners and Daytona 500 list of winners. Should not take very long. Doctorindy 12:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice job! -slowpokeiv 15:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
    • I think it is better....for those know notice such things, the first column directs the links to ("Year" in NASCAR, such as 2006 in NASCAR), with the full link disguised. Additional columns could also be appropriate. Doctorindy 16:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Indiana assessment

This article needs to merge the trivia section into the article were applicable and delete the rest, expand its references, and write into prose format rather then a timeline-prose style. -Jahnx (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge

It has been proposed that List of Brickyard 400 broadcasters be merged to this article. Does that make any sense? If not is the right thing to delete the list or just leave it? I'm neutral... Hobit (talk) 00:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

KeepLeave it because over time the graph will become to big for the article. So I say keep. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 00:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Merge for the time being. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 00:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Should not be merged into Brickyard 400 as a list of broadcasters is no more notable to the topic 'Brickyard 400' than a list of track marshals. The broadcasters do not participate in the race, the race is not about them. They are certainly not inherently more notable than print journalists covering the same race and certainly much less notable than the drivers who participated but did not win. If it is not sufficiently notable on its own, it should be deleted. --Falcadore (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I disagree, Broadcasters are notble. If you noticed, all NASCAR race articles had them. It is part of the race. If you want someone else's opinion Royalbroil is a good editior (and administrator) who knows about most series of Motorsport. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, just a question I would like to know. How do you know it is not notable if you are not knowledgeable about the sport? If you are knowledgeable then ignore this question. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:29, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
The point is they are not more notable than the drivers, who actually do all the racing, and who do not get a list. --Falcadore (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Back to the Brickyard 400

This page was moved today back to Brickyard 400, because Allstate quit their sponsorship deal. It's not a huge topic of discussion, but noteworthy, because it required an Administrator request to do the page move. That was needed because it was a page move back to an old page name, and needed to be done that way to preserve the page history and redirect...sounds complicated, but it's done now. Allstate 400 at the Brickyard is now a re-direct page. Doctorindy (talk) 04:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

    • The race has been officially renamed the Crown Royal Your Hero's Name Here 400 at the Brickyard for 2012 and beyond....with a fan contest determining the "Your name" part...which will change ever year. I suggest, however, for the time being, leaving the article as Brickyard 400 (the common name), and creating a re-direct page Crown Royal Your Hero's Name Here 400 at the Brickyard to prevent the need for administrators to move the page back and forth, as had to be done last time. A future assessment can be made at a later date. Doctorindy (talk) 14:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brickyard_400/Archive_1&oldid=1136578848"