Talk:W. S. Cox Plate

Horse racing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Horse racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Melbourne / Sports Mid‑importance

	Australia portal W. S. Cox Plate 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian sports (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

New Zealand Mid‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Favourites record

Do we really need this? It really isn't an encyclopedic entry and the list is also inserted in reverse order of MOS standards.Cgoodwin (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It also makes the article look strange, when it doesn't have the list of winners, but does have this. The performance of the favourites is significant, but all it needs is a paragraph with up-to-date citations. St Anselm (talk) 09:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above. The included list that is here, is also pushing the MOS standards on CopyViol and lists. There is already a list of winners elsewhere. Cgoodwin (talk) 23:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I added the list of favourites to the article was a perceived need for it. For a number of years during the racing carnivals, I have observed questions and discussions on online racing forums relating to the favourite in a particular year, or the winning percentage of favourites in certain top class races. As Wikipedia is in the business of providing relevant information to the general public, I gathered the data and put it in a sortable table format which provides a number of sort options. As an alternative, it may be possible to include the information in the List of Cox Plate winners if we remove the breeding column from the winners list. Cgoodwin, please provide a Wiki reference to "MOS standards on CopyViol and lists". Cuddy Wifter (talk) 00:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The simple solution would seem to be to add a paragraph on the notable favourites with the citation added so that viewers may check the extended list for themselves. The sites you require are: [[1]] plus [2] and see the MOS for other related material.Cgoodwin (talk) 02:36, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This list of favourites is really confusing when you go to this page - you could easily be forgiven for thinking that it is the list of winners because similar pages, such as the Caulfield Stakes, do in fact begin with a list of winners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.16.212 (talk) 03:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:W. S. Cox Plate/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Hi,

I would like to know why a link to the Racing and Sports website is regarded as "okay", and a link to the Trackdata History charts is regarded as Spam - we both have advertisements on our pages.

Thanks you in anticipation,

Sir Dapper

Substituted at 18:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)