Talk:Glossary of North American horse racing

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

Straightaway[edit]

Could I suggest changing "straightaway" to "straight" or "the straight part of the course". Tigerboy1966  23:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

I recommended a merge with Glossary of Australian and New Zealand punting. Some terms are identical, some are similar, and for those which are different, may I recommend the collegial atmosphere we created at Glossary of equestrian terms? Basically, totally different words cross link both directions, ones close in spelling can be combined with both forms shown, and in the event of a dispute, whoever got their first gets to go first. My suggested title is Glossary of horse racing terms. Discuss? Montanabw(talk) 23:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair suck of the sav, montanabw! Have you been sampling the local hooch? There is no way that these articles should be merged. Consider the following:
  • The very existance of the article Glossary of Australian and New Zealand punting, which contains some 340 terms, 90 % of which only relate to Aus/NZ, would question your inference that there is a worldwide list of common terms for horse racing.
  • The Aus/NZ article is already 46Kb long, which is about the reccommended maximum size for an article. Any addition of terms from the US, Canada, the UK and Ireland would create a bloated article in need of splitting up.
  • The two articles are not based on the same subject. The Aust/NZ article is based on gambling terms, in relation to horse racing, whereas the North American article relates to Thoroughbred horse racing terminology and is only a stub article of some 25 terms.
  • I would welcome the expansion of the North American article to a similar size as the Aus/NZ article, which would give me and many others a better understanding of racing and betting in the US and Canada. A similar article on the UK and Ireland would also be welcome.
  • Horse racing around the world has, until recent years, evolved in geograhical isolation with an inevitable diverse vocabulary - check the Aus/NZ article and see how many of the local colloquialisms you are familiar with. It was this rich local vocablary which I have discovered in my 40 years of living in Australia, and led me to start the article.

More opinions would be welcome. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 06:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we consolidate the discussion here or over there so as to avoid duplication? I vote for over there. Montanabw(talk) 01:30, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BRD[edit]

Per a conversation at my talk, here were the issues with the extensive edits made: 1) Don't remove already cited stuff. 2) Don't change cited stuff without checking the citation to be sure your changes don't exceed it. 3) For these glossaries, cite everything as it's added, because if you don't, someone else has to and it's a huge workload to dump on other people. You made so many changes and so many of them had one of the above three problems, you got reverted. I reviewed these changes and did the following: 1) Restored all deleted definitions. No reason to remove them. 2) Restored all changes that removed citations or that added content that was different from what was cited 3) Restored US Spelling, per WP:ENGVAR and the reality that though this is "North American" horse racing, most definitions are from USA sources. 4) Restored original spellings of linked content so we do not break redirects or other links. But there was some useful content, I (think I) kept the corrections of capitalization (except if a link was involved). I am open to discussing other changes where there are questions of accuracy or sources; tagging is preferable to deletion. Also, it is possible that pages have been changed and we need to add wayback links or find new sources for definitions. Montanabw(talk) 20:27, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't dump even the smallest workload on anyone. I didn't add any definitions. I changed a few to make them match what Equibase says. The ones I removed were falsely cited. There's no WP:ENGVAR issue either; there's a single mention of "colours" being introduced at Newmarket in 1762. The rest of the entry correctly uses "colors". Joefromrandb (talk) 01:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, do not dump cited content. You can use tags such as {{dubious}} or {{failed verification}} to flag problem areas. We also have a fine line of needing to have accurate definitions but not word-for-word plagiarization. Montanabw(talk) 17:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the defs you removed, it does appear that equibase has changed their definitions page since some of the content was created, or else folks adding definitions may not have actually checked the glossary. For each of the definitions you removed, I checked the sources. Blanket finish is verified; circle the field no longer appears in the equibase glossary so I cited it to three different instances of its use in context. Pacemaker is verified, we can discuss inclusion. The others are sourced, if you disagree that a word is "real," then we can add more sources. I also am not going to fight over capitalization, so in the interest of peace I restored your changes there. The rest are minor wording issues that we can discuss. Montanabw(talk) 18:05, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have reviewed the glossary for copyvio concerns and rephrased a number of definitions so that they are not a verbatim copyvio of the source. Montanabw(talk) 18:28, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • A check today of earwig shows a 32.9% rating, mostly common three or four-word constructions. Please do not remove any sourced definitions. If there are close paraphrasing concerns, rephrasing is appropriate. Montanabw(talk) 17:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glossary of North American horse racing. 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:

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) 00:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interference[edit]

Can somebody please put the official definition of "interference" into this glossary? Abductive (reasoning) 18:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glossary_of_North_American_horse_racing&oldid=1199319409"