Talk:iRacing

C-Class

Quoting from the Quality_scale on the C-Class criteria:

The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.

More detailed criteria:

The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.

So regarding souces, the difference between Start and C, is that Start ha no reliable sources ( lacks adequate reliable sources ), while C has at least some.--Sum (talk) 21:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Track list

Is there a source for the list of tracks that are not yet available? --Wean0r (talk) 08:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Track/Car List

Reversed the deletion of those due to the special importance such material has for a simulation. What's being modeled is at the heart of what a simulation is and they're not just irrelevant list with no real importance to the reader. unsigned comment

I agree, and have reverted a good-faith deletion. I agree that large tables as we have now seem inappropriate. Most other racing games either list their content in sentences within a paragraph (ie. Live for Speed, rFactor, F1 2010 (video game)), or have a separate article purely for the (generally lengthy) list (ie. List of Gran Turismo courses, List of Forza Motorsport courses, List of Forza Motorsport cars). It seems the car list is short enough to be rewritten as a paragraph, while the track list is large enough to warrant separation (though notability might be an issue for a stand-alone article).

I suggest rewriting the cars paragraph, with one sentence each for the free base-content cars, road cars, oval cars, and upcoming cars. The track list is both important enough to warrant mention, but not consistent enough to be described in a sentence. While other games can simply state, for example, "All 19 circuits on the 2010 F1 calendar are included in the game", iRacing does not have complete schedules for any major series. The simplest way to present the information would be a wikitable as now, the question is how to handle the admittedly large amount of screen real-estate it occupies. Bakkster Man (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Series information

This main iRacing.com article isn't the right place for detailed information about series winners, etc. The article was already getting really bloated, and the situation would only get worse with every new series and season. If a series is notable enough to be covered in secondary sources, it can have its own article on Wikipedia. Currently this only applies to the NASCAR series and perhaps to some degree the road racing world championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavaticovelia (talk • contribs) 13:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I was looking at this as well. Perhaps instead of wholesale removal, these results should be moved to a separate article, as commonly happens for other race series (see 2010 IndyCar Series season or List of NASCAR seasons). The list for IRacing need not be as detailed, but I think the format of separating race and season results from the article on the sanctioning body is worth repeating here. Along with those common formats, #1 racers from each premier series season could be left in this main article. Separate articles for each series can be considered if that article becomes too large, or if the series receives significant attention. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Lists - keep or not, and if so, how can we agree?

Hi

I just restored the lists for two reasons.

1. I believe that "fancruft" is incorrect
2. I like them and feel they add to the article

Firstly, I am fairly neutral about this one, with my opinion moving to and fro in both directions.

I cannot agree to describing it as fancruft, as that really applies to articles as a whole, or to those articles which are mainly comprised the irrelevant or undesired material.

There are other options we can consider, and I would like to propose hiding them in a drop-down, with it defaulting to "hide" on page load.

This will give the option to look if interested, and to hide again once read.

That would satisfy my 50/50 mind, and hopefully both those that may want it in, and those who may think it clutters the article? Chaosdruid (talk) 04:42, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Tracks

I think you're missing the point - we don't actually need to tell people every car and track that's in the game, especially when it's such a long list. This isn't Gamespot. It's simply not notable that a racing game would feature Silverstone and Daytona. Maybe include a handful of the really notable tracks, or ones that aren't available in any other game (ie "track X made it's debut in iRacing"). Or maybe something like "the game features many European and American favourites, such as Monza and the Nurburgring, combined with a selection of Australian and Japanese circuits".

We run the risk of making the article too long - we should focus on stuff like important cars that aren't anywhere else (eg "Car Y is the oldest car to feature in a videogame"). Maybe summarise by giving the numbers (ie "39 oval courses and 46 road courses") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.144.41 (talk) 19:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

* Do we seriously need to tell people in this article that there are 8 road courses at Oulton Park? Where will it end? Mention the handful of notable ones. We MUST cut the long explicit list. Undue weight, not of interest to the casual reader, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.145.187.73 (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

• The article was stable from June 2013 - November 2013 with the lists included.
• Someone removed them, discussion took place (see above,) and the lists were restored.
• The article was stable from December 2013 - April 2015 with the lists included.
• 79.64.25.129 removed them, it was not spotted for three months, then they were restored.
• Stable again from April - September 2015
• 79.64.25.129 removed them again
• I reverted.

So, as per WP:BRD, I have restored the material until after a consensus has been reached.

I agree that there is no need to say how many different layouts Oulton Park has, but it is nice to know that they have the current and the historical layouts - as per Silverstone - and that not all tracks have to be raced as per current specs. Basically, something need to be in there, simply deleting it all is not good enough.

There is no need to remove them either.

So, what are the options? It seems clear that 79.64.25.129 wants them removed, and that the other IP (if not the same person) agrees.

I do not agree to removal, it seems that a couple of others did not either. (see other thread above)

I have suggested a drop down which hides the lists - what other possible objections could there be?

• Page loading times
• accessibility

1. The lists do not noticeably affect the page loading times
2. Once hidden it should not be caught by a screen reader, if it is being, that would need changing

There is also the option of removing them to a new article. Notability would be key, but might be a bit of a problem it seems:

• Local newspaper
• Online magazine
• blogged

As I said, please leave them until we have reached consensus on how best to handle this. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
P.S. If there was a consensus reached to remove it until the discussion is finished ... but having one person revert without discussing will always get reverted until the discussion is over. Chaosdruid (talk) 18:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

It's completely unprecedented for a videogame to have a full list of all of the included tracks. Maybe it didn't do any harm in the old days when games used to have 3 tracks. But with modern games having 30, 40, 50 tracks, it's completely overkill. Furthermore, it adds nothing to the article - why is it important that an American racing game would have Indianapolis? We need to pick out highlights that differentiate this game. But we cannot list them all, for reasons of both article length, not-a-list, and notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.144.92 (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

It's not a matter for talk on this page. It's a matter of wikipedia policy, and IRacing.com is not a special case. / — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.117.143 (talk) 10:03, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

This is not true at all. You can see countless other Wikipedia pages, including some that are very high profile, that have lists that are easily 10 times as large as the one on this page. iRacing is a simulator, and what is being simulated, down to the exact model of each car, is entirely relevant.

Seems the majority of your contributions to Wikipedia are removing lists from established simulator wiki pages, and those pages promptly being reverted to before your vandalism. If I were you I would stop vandalizing these pages. It is clearly an issue that has been discussed on the talk page, so any future reverts or deleting of list will just be considered a clear case of vandalism. I think everyone would be happy to discuss this issue, but vandalism will not be accepted. MordeKyle (talk) 19:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for such massive lists. Even if this is a simulation, that does not mean the general reader needs to know everything. If there are some notable examples, by all means include them, but don't include the exhaustive list again as it will be reverted. See Forza, Gran Turismo, MotoGP 15, etc. Is there anything I can do to help you understand that iRacing is not a special case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.117.143 (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Again, stop removing the list without a consensus being reached in the talk section. This is obvious vandalism. The examples you listed are arcade video games, not simulators. A separate page may be more appropriate for our list, which would be fine. But just deleting everything repeatedly without reaching a consensus here is not the way to go and will just cause your edits to be reverted. If you would like to have a discussion here, that is perfectly fine, as I've stated to you before. It is quite easy to be civil and have an adult conversation here. MordeKyle (talk) 20:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

It's been stated before. unless Wikipedia has changed its policy, this content is not allowed. it doesn't matter which sub-genre this game fits in. Fancruft, undue weight, not encyclopedic, Excessive details, Lists of gameplay items, Cast lists, etc. If you want to give people a flavour of the game's content, then I suggest listing the manufacturers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.226.49.228 (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I created a new page, List of vehicles simulated by iRacing.com to resolve this issue. Creating a new page for the list is a common practice within Wikipedia, as can be seen on many other video game pages. MordeKyle (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Confirm Linux and osx versions are functional.

Can anyone confirm the Linux and OSX versions are actually functional?

I believe both are outdated playonlinux wrappers with many unfixed bugs. Last time I checked the Linux client (~5 months ago) the game was unplayable. There was no force feedback, too many graphical issues to play, and no sound most of the time. Most concerning is that the forums specifically stated Linux was not supported, which makes listing it here seem like incorrect information. Ramma314 (talk) 12:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on IRacing.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080909083511/http://www.iracing.com:80/newsEvents/article.php?id=77 to http://iracing.com/newsEvents/article.php?id=77

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on IRacing.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091208040011/http://www.iracing.com:80/news/oran-park-raceway-and-circuit-zolder-join-iracing/ to http://www.iracing.com/news/oran-park-raceway-and-circuit-zolder-join-iracing/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:02, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Special Events

Could/Should a section be added to cover the larger special events that iRacing is now doing? Such as the 24h of Nurburgring, Indy 500, Italian Grand Prix, Etc.? Some sort of simple list would be nice, where dates, times, and vehicle types could be added. This page should have a complete listing. I feel this is important to iRacng and what the simulator is about. MordeKyle (talk) 19:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Promotional tone, independent sources, and cruft

I've tagged this article for relying too much on iracing.com as a source. We should be citing third parties significantly more, and contet that can only be cited to iracing.com should be attributed to them better. See also WP:SAID for guidance.

I moved a lot of stuff about how you subscribe, how you pay, how you set up your browser, things they did during development, and what the company's marketing goals were out of the 'gameplay' section. Even so, the gameplay section gets very distracted with which stickers you can put on your car and how a racing series tournament is run. What about the gameplay? I.e. driving the actual car. What does the play do 90% of the time when playing this game? Drive? Or something else?

Consider also WP:NOTCATALOG for questions of whether we need lists and tables of all of the game's content. Do third party sources publish this? Or is it all from iracing.com? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:01, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

@Dennis Bratland Y Potentially fixed with my recent overhaul of the article. Please review and let me know. ~XyNq^t_c 08:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of List of vehicles simulated by iRacing.com for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of vehicles simulated by iRacing.com is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of vehicles simulated by iRacing.com until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for input and help

I am trying to do a complete overhaul of this article(let's be honest, it really needs it). I welcome your guys input on some of the changes I have made to this page over on User:MordeKyle/iRacingRedo. I would greatly appreciate some help and/or input.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 01:09, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Article improvement

I have changed the gameplay sections, I still need to add some sources and clean that up a touch. I have also changed the section "Competition, events and championships" to "Competition" to focus more on the official series and how they work. I intend to add a section of the special events (24h of Le Mans, 20h of Nurburgring, 12h of Sebring, etc.) and add a section on the Pro licenses and those series. Any help would be appreciated.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 02:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Marketing and tense

We do not want any article to be nothing but a snapshot of the present state of affairs. Though the marketers would want you to think they were always thus, in fact, companies and products change over time.

The statements, such as their marketing goals, intended customers, etc. should be written to assign at least approximate dates to the assertions. The rivalry that existed c. 2011-12 should be dated to that time, until SimRacing went under. MOS:TENSE uses the present tense for things that haven't changed, but for things that are not longer in existence, like the former situation of iRacing, we write it in the past tense.

This also means arranging the statements in correct order. The second paragraph, about signing deals with partners, describes events c 2009, which is before the Simracing rivalry. The claim that "iRacing has been marketed as both an entertainment service and a training tool for real life racers" doesn't cite a source from 2008, but a self-published source from 2011. I'd rewrite it to say that "IRacing said in 2011 they always were marketing the game as both entertainment and a training tool." That is all we know from that source. If we find a source from 2008, we will know what they intended when the company was founded. If we find an independent, reliable source, then we can give objective credence to these claims, rather than having to attribute them to the company's contrived public image. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Then change it.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 20:33, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Lists of gameplay items is growing again

This has been discussed more than once, but we're seeing lists of tracks and cars again. The policy WP:What Wikipedia is not explains in several places that manuals, directories, sales catalogs, guides, etc do not belong on an encyclcpedia. In particular, under WP:GAMEGUIDE the policy specifically discusses video game content: " An article about a video game should summarize the main actions the player does in the game. But avoid lists of gameplay weapons, items, or concepts, unless these are notable as discussed in secondary sources in their own right in gaming context (such as the BFG9000 from the Doom series). Walk-throughs or detailed coverage of specific point values, achievements, time-limits, levels, types of enemies, character moves, character weight classes, and so on are also considered inappropriate. A concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry. See WP:VGSCOPE."

this is repeated in Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. It's fine to have a concise summary of the tracks or cars sourced to an independent third party. That means you don't name every track and every car. You summarize what independent third party sources have said about the cars and the tracks.

Along the same lines, the WP:NOT policy says we don't list prices except on a case-by-case basis: "an article should not include product pricing or availability information unless there is an independent source and a justified reason for the mention." You need a third party source who gives some reason why a particular price at a particular time and place (like a record-setting auction price, or a low price that experts agreed disrupted an industry), but not every single price of all the things. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

iRacing Peak Antifreeze Series

Would it be worthy of adding a section to this (or creating another page) about the series? It is officially sponsored by NASCAR, and seems to me like other NASCAR series (i.e. the Pinty Series, the Mexico Series, the K&N series, etc, etc) that this NASCAR series also deserves a dedicated page as all of NASCAR's other series have. Plus I would love to create this and lay the ground work for this as I have been taking webpage creation classes, although wikipedia is a bit different many parts of it stays the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nascar Painter (talk • contribs) 15:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

As mentioned above, you should review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of vehicles simulated by iRacing.com to understand previous discussions of this topic. There are also guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I have already read what was discussed above, and have been in messaging with someone from the Teahouse, helping me by explaining some stuff, what is allowed and isnt, I do understand my mistake, and though it was my first I will TRY to make it my last. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nascar Painter (talk • contribs) 14:51, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Free image to use

• via Flickr. Didn't find out much about what event this was at, but saving this for a later update. --Teancum (talk) 23:56, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Article overhaul

I tried to use articles for other sim racing games like Gran Turismo Sport as a guideline here.

Removed a lot of cruft present in the "Content" section (see WP:GAMECRUFT #7). If people wanted to know the cars and tracks included in iRacing, they would go to iRacing's website, not a Wikipedia article. They could even go to the Fandom page for it to find that information. It doesn't belong here.

Fixed a lot of the wording that was present in the Gameplay section. Removed the "Competition" section and merged it into a new section titled "Online play". I added a section "Partnerships" detailing iRacing's various notable partnerships with other organisations.

I tried to find a lot of third party sources to remove the reliance on iRacing.com as a source, but all of the "Online play" section still references the iRacing sporting code. However, I don't think this is an issue.

Further considerations for the article might be a section for discussing the tendency of top level drivers such as Lando Norris and Max Verstappen to drive on the iRacing service, if it's notable enough to do so.

Please notify me of and/or fix any errors you see in my edits. ~XyNq^t_c 04:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• SimRacing Grand Prix - biler på rekke.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)