Talk:Evernham Motorsports/Archive 1

Archive 1

Tommy Lane

Is he still driving for Evernham? I do believe he is still part of the Drive for Diversity program, but does that mean he is still with Evernham? The website only mentions AJ as a developmental driver for EMS, so I'm really curious here... Captain Spyro 06:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

That's intresting. I'm kind of curious about that myself. --D-Day ^{My fan mail. Click to view my evil userboxes} 23:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

According to DavidSmithMotorsports.com, Tommy Lane is no longer part of the Evernham Development squad. I shall make the correct adjustments. Captain Spyro 05:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

A.J. Foyt IV

http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=231823

According to the 2nd paragraph of this article, Foyt IV is no longer with Evernham. I will make the correct adjustments. Captain Spyro 20:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Ray's personal life

I had to edit out a sentence that mentioned Mayfield being fired on account of Ray's personal affairs with Erin. Really, that rumor has yet to be proven, so I ask that you drop it. I added the bit with Bill Elliott and Mayfield being removed for the race. We do not need angered fans posting such crap here. Captain Spyro 04:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

After the banquet and photos you have to accept what Evernham never denied. The court documents were never refuted. Todd Bodine's NY Times quote was never refuted. I know that you are part of the deliberate plot by certain powerful unnamed people to white wash this information. The jig is up, you can't shut the barn door after the horse has run out and been photographed all over the internet. Mayfield's #19 car history is directly tied to transferring his team to the #9 and to Evernham being angry with him for going public with his extra marital affair with Erin Crocker. A major reason for Mayfield getting the axe was the public embarrassment that Evernham suffered as a result of the Crocker affair becoming known. The court case was settled immediately so that Evernham would not have to address the Crocker affair, which he would not have been able to deny under oath, unless he was willing to lie. Because you are part of this deliberate white wash conspiracy I know that you will not listen to these logical and truthful arguments, but will continue to try and cover-up any mention made of this issue. This will prove to me that Wikipedia is caving into a powerful person/organization that has a vested interest in hiding the truth.68.5.242.136

Read this. WP:CABAL. --D-Day ^{I'm all ears} 22:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I know that you will not listen to these logical and truthful arguments, but will continue to try and cover-up any mention made of this issue. This will prove to me that Wikipedia is caving into a powerful person/organization that has a vested interest in hiding the truth.68.5.242.136

This has gone on far enough. This is an encyclopedic database; not a message forum. As far as I am concerned, I am being fair. To be honest, I would believe that the statement should be deleted as it doesn't pertain directly to the #19 car. However, considering how big the deal actually is, I'm allowing it to stay. That said, I will not allow this to turn into a one-sided debate. We have no idea if the 'affair' is true or not. The article you cite as a source is doing nothing more than reporting accusations. The pictures, themselves, only tell so much. Never forget the quote "A picture is worth a thousand words." As for Bodine's quote, he is only a third party. However, it would be foolish to consider any of it as 'a final truth.' WHat we know is that Ray and his wife are seperated are likley going through a divorce. That is all. So, I ask you, leave the comments as is or edit them into a proper neutral fashion unless proper evidence has surfaced. Thank you. Captain Spyro 23:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You are making it a "one sided" debate by refusing to leave other people's edits. You are following orders to keep this out of the public eye. That's clear.68.5.242.136

I have tried reasoning with you and now I give up. I follow no orders. However, you have forced me to say this. Your contributions are nothing more than speculation; regardless of your sources. Unless we hear from Ray, Erin, or EMS on this issue, it's all speculation. So with that, I leave this. Cease with the specualtive posting or I will have to recommend you for banning by one of the admins. That is all.Captain Spyro 03:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Its not speculation and you know that. You are engaged in a deliberate plot to cover the truth. If I am banned, that is proof that I am correct.To quote George Orwell "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." 68.5.242.136

OK, Mr. Know It All. Where's your evidence that this is a major conspiracy plot? Unless you can find the tapes and conversations of us teaming with Evernham covering this up, your posting is pure speculation. If you had an attitude change, I'd be more than willing to work with you, but I'm sick of this conspiracy crap. Maybe you should talk with the boss to see if there's a conspiracy. Other than that, I'm done with this. One more edit, and you're going straight to the admins. --D-Day ^{I'm all ears} 20:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

On my page you said something about helicopters, I was not talking about helicopters. Maybe you have me confused with some other editor. I was talking about the court documents where Jeremy Mayfield said that the "close personal relationship" was critical to his being fired by Evernham. This is important to the history of the #19 car. THe public revelation that Evernham was having an extra marital affair with Erin Crocker caused embarrassment and was a main reason Evernham fired Mayfield. I sited the documents to back this up. Also the mention was made of Kahne being given Mayfield's old team as a major contributor to this situation. Both are equally relevant and important.68.5.242.136

You don't understand a thing about politics and the court system, do you? Court documents prove nothing except that an accusation was made. Whether it is truthful or not is in question. And considering it's obvious you're a Mayfield fan, read the link at the end of the paragraph. The only reason I mentioned the crew sawp is because it happened. It was made before the 2005 season was over and guess what? Mayfield got a top 10 at Homestead with his 2006 crew. Everyone was happy. Get a grip! None of us knows what goes on behind the doors ar EMS and it's not our place to force our POVs on others. Now, I orginally said that I wouldn't bother with your misinformation, but this blatant misuse of Wikipedia is downright sickening and disgusting. And as for the link, it provide direct quotes from Evernham himself. [1]Captain Spyro 19:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

For what its worth, Mayfield is not my kind of driver, but that is irrelevant. I am not trying to "protect and defend" anyone like you are. I am quoting court documents and you seem to want to cover up the truth. I'm sorry that you find the truth of the matter "sickening and disgusting". Btw, if it makes you feel good and powerful to personally insult me, please continue to do so, I won't run complaining about it to anyone.68.5.242.136

Our mission is WP:NPOV. Citing the court documents violate that policy. We want to preserve the accuracy of biographies of living persons. I suggest you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies, then see why we're doing this. Constantly reverting to support YOUR reality is not helping, in case you hadn't noticed. --D-Day ^{I'm all ears} 21:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Honestly I do understand " why we're doing this". Its clear to me that forces from the outside are determined to silence the truth of this issue. Sorry to hear that the pressure is that great. "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act," George Orwell. 68.5.242.136

For one, I will drop the Mayfield comment. That was out of line on my end. However, the blatant misuse of Wikipedia must stop. As of now, you are in violation of the WP:3RR. If you revert the article one more time, you will again be reported.Captain Spyro 01:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is a truthful and factual( court documents and NY Times quotes) entry misuse? It is misuse to white wash the facts in an attempt to make a situation seem other than what it was, but I am not trying to report any of you or get you blocked. I would not have to keep entering the truthful quotes and situation if you and your friends did not feel that you have to hide the facts.68.5.242.136

Because both of those sources are nothing more than rumors and our opinions on the matter are nothing more conjecture. I have no idea what's going on and even if I thought that there was a relationship scandal going on, I'd have no way to prove it BEYONG A DOUBT unless there was a quote or what not from Evernham or Crocker. Court documents only prove that an accusation was made. It does not prove that the accusation is truthful. How many fallacious court documents do you think have been made throughout the year? As for Bodine's quote, that doesn't help a whole lot either. He's a driver on a different team; not directly involved with EMS. How do we know he's not basing his thoughts on rumor as well? We can't go making such rash assumptions on an encyclopedic database.Captain Spyro 20:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Threats

Captain Spyro, are you threatening me? I quote your comment from the article edit " I watch the article closely, don't forget." This sounds like a threat and an attempt to intimate me from truthfully editing the article.68.5.242.136 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.5.242.136 (talk) 17:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

Ah, no. I do not work like that. The meaning behind that quote was that I watch the article closely to make sure it stays neutral with only facts that can be proven with sources with solid backing. I apologize is that is what you thought, but I would prefer that you not jump to conclusions.Captain Spyro 18:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The facts that I edited are sourced, as you well know, from court records and the New York Times. These sources and quotes have never been disputed by the parties making the comments. I know that you don't like the reality of the situation and have tried to have my comments erased and have me banned. The exact words I am using have been agreed upon and accepted by others like yourself. 68.5.242.136

Just because they're sourced doesn't make them 100% factual. I really don't care about the reality of the situation, whatever that reality is. What I know for sure is that no one knows what is fully going at EMS, except for Ray, Erin, and probably a few others. Unless you know of any other source that actually contains quotes or whatnot from Ray or etc, then as far as I am concerned, I cannot accept it. Court documents only tell of an accusation, not whether it was true or not. And as far as other online sources go, don't believe everything you read, regardless of reputation and especially of sticky stories like these that have no clear evidence. Captain Spyro 02:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Your quote "I really don't care about the reality of the situation" , its nice to hear that you don't care if you are posting the truth. Its clear that you have hoped to preserve a fantasy all along. I will continue to post the facts, the truth.68.5.242.136

You really just don't get it, do you? What I mean is I don't care what Ray/Erin/whatnot are doing. That is not the point here. Unless we have proof, I will continue to revert your edits until true evidence comes out. If there is a relationship that developed between the two, as said in the quote in the affidavits, then I will leave it as is. However, until then, it is nothing more than a fallacious claim in my eyes and it shall be treated as such. I apologize if my works offends you in any way, but I wnat to keep this neutral. Captain Spyro 01:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You just admited that you are not being neutral but rather are choosing to ignore the facts as quoted in court documents and in the New York Times. Quit vandalizing my truthful and supported edits 68.5.242.136

Admitted what? Tell me, please, because I fail to see your point. Please, quit putting words in my mouth and spinning my comments to fit your outlook. This is not a fanboard. Edit wars should be going on like this. This is an encyclopedic database. I am willing to negotiate if you just quit pushing your point of view on others. If you want, we can e-mail each other and converse on it cause this is getting us no where.Captain Spyro 02:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You quote "This is not a fanboard." gets right to the heart of things. Instead of relying on the facts and public record, you are trying to "protect" the object of your fandom from reality. You are trying to project a fantasy world where people never do anything that you don't want them to. This is not a video game or a cartoon, its life. The facts of the court documents and the New York Times stand.68.5.242.136

Unless you know me persoanlly, I would prefer that you do not assume the meaning of my actions. Yes, this is life, which is why you need to learn to research these things deeply and quit relying on these documents as the gospel truth UNLESS they were proven true in a court of law. As for the New York Times, I presume you are refrring to quotes made by Todd Bodine? Captain Spyro 20:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I concede on the grounds that I am waiting for more info. The indication seems to be that they are in a relationship, so I will leave it as is. I apologize for any trouble. Captain Spyro 02:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

This topic has been discussed at length at Crocker's page (here). All of the members of WikiProject NASCAR that weighted in agreed to keep it out of the article. Why does something like that have to appear in the article? What does that situation have to do with running a team? Nothing - it is non-encyclopedic. Non-encylopedic material shouldn't be added even if it is sourced. My opinion is that it shouldn't be added here even if they come out in public, as it has nothing to do with the running of the team. Lots of drivers have their girlfriend help on their team. People get married to their coworkers. Who cares? Wikipedia is not a fan site or a blog. There are plenty of other places on the internet for that stuff. Royalbroil ^T : C 22:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Bill Elliott Racing

I'm thinking of splitting off the part about the team's ownership of the 9 team into its own article, if there are no objections. --D-Day 14:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Verl.gif

Image:Verl.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Current events don't belong in the article

Per the WP:NOTNEWS section, these edits SHOULD wait until the end of the season when they will be more encyclopedia and LESS "newsy". Thanks for your co-operation on this. Whose Your Guy (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

While I appreciate that the fact that you guys are trying to keep incidental news snippets from making the subject non-encyclopedic I think WP:NOTNEWS is being misapplied. That "guideline" states: "routine news reporting on things like announcements ... is not a sufficient basis for inclusion" and "breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information". What that means to me is something like the speculation regarding RPM not having the funding to pay Roush for its Phoenix engines ... should not be put in the lead of the article. How about this: "An event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable" WP:EFFECT ... like Kasey Kane being fired and replaced in the #9 ... those edits are being reverted in this article. I'm sorry that's an event with lasting consequences. Putting an artificial lockdown such as "wait until the end of the season" has no basis in WP:NOTNEWS. Are events like the trouble in Egypt or the shooting of Giffords removed elsewhere in WP? --Hutcher (talk) 01:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Richard Petty Motorsports. 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/20110924133343/http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/misc/avg_med_price.shtml to http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/misc/avg_med_price.shtml

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

GMS Purchase

Today, GMS Racing announced they have purchased a majority of the team including both charters. It is currently unknown how this affects the current ownership structure, or whether the charters will have Petty's name or not, so I have added the {{Current sport-related}} tag. Please add relevant sources and have discussion related to the purchase here. -"Ghost of Dan Gurney" 23:02, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Bob Pockrass on Twitter: [2] "In SEC filing this morning, Medallion Financial said it sold all its shares in RPM controlling company RPAC to Maury Gallagher for $19.1 million. (Petty has a small minority interest in RPM). (RPAC had listed few weeks ago $8 million in borrowings - now Gallagher responsibility)" This says that Medallion/Murstein are OUT; still no word on whether No. 43 charter will run under RPM or GMS banner.

Should GEM be its own "legacy" page? (2021 necromancy for split/rename discussion)

First and foremost, great job to all of you who got the RPM page off the ground - this is great.

I was wondering if GEM should have its own "legacy" page, like how Petty Enterprises does? This would help reduce any confusions and place less weight to GEM's old drivers (i.e. Erin Crocker never was a Petty driver) without losing the information -- Guroadrunner (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Crash Underride 08:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I realize that this is a 12-year old discussion, but there is a split tag on the page and this appears to be the only relevant discussion on it. I think after the events of Dec 1, 2021, it may become feasible to move this article back to Evernham Motorsports as the WP:COMMONNAME of this operation. I can't add it to the article yet, as it's a WP:SYNTH, but based on sources, GMS will be running the 43 charter and the "Richard Petty Motorsports" banner will just be that; a banner. Evernham Motorsports is more than deserving of its own article under GNG. We may also need to make Richard Petty Motorsports a dab page, with links to here, GMS and Petty Enerprises. -"Ghost of Dan Gurney" 20:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)