Talk:Adelaide 500

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 Adelaide 500 is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Adelaide.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian motorsport.
Assessment comments

[edit] Title

Why is this article called "Adelaide 500"? The first year the event was held, it was called the "Sensational Adelaide 500" and every event since has been called the "Clipsal 500". I've never heard it just called the Adelaide 500. GK1 19:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

"Adelaide 500" is like a common name for it and is from the time of the first event. I agree the name is not used regurlarly anymore. This name may have been chosen for the article because of the likelyhood of sponsorship changes over time. See Bathurst 1000, this event hasn't actually ever been called the Bathurst 1000 according to the article but everyone knows the event as the Bathurst 1000. Would most people recognize it as the "Super Cheap Auto 1000" ...maelgwntalk 23:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
My point is that the name of the event when it didn't have a naming rights sponsor was "Sensational Adelaide 500", not "Adelaide 500".
I've moved the article to Clipsal 500 Adelaide as this is actually the official name of the event. GK1 22:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
GK1 actually copied-and-pasted it. I have made the move properly. I'm not quite sure I agree with the new name, but it needed fixing anyway. --Scott Davis Talk 02:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I've moved the talk page to match the article. I also don't agree with the new title. If an argument was to be made for a new name, it should have been on the basis of common usage, in which case Clipsal 500 would have been chosen. I personally prefer Adelaide 500, but Clipsal 500 is at least better than the present title. --cj | talk 19:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
ABC are unlikely to have a commercial reason to choose one name over another. Google over abc.net.au yields:
That makes Adelaide 500 the most common name used by the ABC, as well as a neutral and well-known name independent of sponsors. An interesting thought process would be to consider whether this article should move, or a new one be created if either:
  1. Clipsal is replaced by a different naming sponsor such as Coopers
  2. The "Clipsal 500" were to move to a different circuit such as Mallala Motorsport Park or a street circuit elsewhere either in SA or not.
--Scott Davis Talk 06:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd say move. Any new article on the same event under a different name would simply be a candidate for merger. As for the present case, should it be returned to Adelaide 500, considering those results?--cj | talk 12:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd guess it moves with the sponsor, but not the venue - when the 500 km race before Bathurst was held at Queensland Raceway (1998-99), it was not called the Sandown 500. --Scott Davis Talk 13:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I disagree on this point. Bathurst is the exception to the rule (as well as many others) in this instance, and this was because the sponsor, Armstrong-Siddeley, was also the promotor. The Sandown and Queensland 500's are generally considered to be seperate races that merely had a common race format. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the sponsor is providing financial support in exchange for the naming rights. --Falcadore 08:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that's now 3 people (Maelgwn, cj, me) in favour of moving it back to Adelaide 500. GK1 has not commented since moving it. --Scott Davis Talk 13:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I've gone ahead :). Interestingly, I discovered 2006 Clipsal 500. Is it necessary?--cj | talk 14:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I think there's an article for every NEXTEL Cup, A1 Grand Prix and Formula One race, so it's not unprecedented, but I'm certainly not volunteering to write them. A race report on the final round of 2006 could make compelling reading :-) --Scott Davis Talk 14:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I've moved it to 2006 Adelaide 500.--cj | talk 14:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I based my decision to move it to Clipsal 500 Adelaide because of articles such as AAMI Stadium, Telstra Dome, and Telstra Stadium. All these article titles are the official name now, regardless of the fact it contains a sponsor's name. The main reason I object to the article being called Adelaide 500 is because I've never heard it called that. GK1 20:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
To hear it called "Adelaide 500"", listen to the ABC more (see above). Most of the members of Category:Auto races do not have sponsors in the title. I note that Lexmark Indy 300 conveniently forgets that the race has also been sponsored by Honda and Bartercard, while Sandown 500 and Bathurst 1000 have sections including the history of the race names. I think naming the article without the sponsor is more NPOV where possible. --Scott Davis Talk 09:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I would say that along the same lines that Telstra Dome should be moved to Docklands Staium, Telstra Stadium to Stadium Australia and AAMI Stadium to Football Park. Interesting Wikipedia:WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing has a guideline that says principal naming rights sponsor should go in the title without any real justification given. Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorsport does not have an obvious policy on the topic. The convention seems to be names without sponsors, so i say stick with that.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maelgwn (talk • contribs).

I actually posed this question at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions#Sporting_events.2Fvenues, but as yet nobody has responded. Just out of curiosity, what does the ABC have to do with this? (I would assume most people don't listen to the ABC.) GK1 08:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
I used the ABC website as an example above of references to the race that are not biased by being paid to mention the sponsor, to see if they used the sponsor or not. I would assume most people in Australia do listen to the ABC, or one of it's related networks or read news on their website, at least some of the time. I think your timing at WT:NC was unfortunate, it got overrun by Médecins Sans Frontières only half an hour later. --Scott Davis Talk 14:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Lexmark Indy 300 is about to become a bad example as Premier Peter Beattie is on the hunt for a new naming rights sponsor with Lexmark about to reduce its role to that of a supporting sponsor. --Falcadore 08:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Holdenlogo.png

Image:Holdenlogo.png 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 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 04:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)