Talk:Epsom Derby

message: Forgive me for asking, but how do you know what odds were being offered in the Nineteenth Century?  Surely that depended upon who you were betting with, especially as off-course betting was illegal in the UK before the mid 1960s.  A penny takes a quid that the odds quoted for the earliest races listed cannot be proved with any great veracity, not enough for an encyclopaedia anyway.
Sweetalkinguy 22:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Odds

message: This graph is a bit misleading - for instance the cluster of fast times in the 1940s may have something to do with the Derby being held at a different racecourse (Newmarket) during World War II. The winning time can be affected by many diverse factors - ground conditions, wind strength/direction, race tactics etc. And how accurate are the early timings? - Zafonic 11:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Winning Times and Creationism Debate

message: So, what first race was in 1661? --P64 01:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: The winning margin is at least as important as the time. Please could someone add a column to the table and include this information (note how often it is mentioned in articles about Shergar (ten lengths 1981) and how one of the points mentioned when discussing this year's winner  Authorized (2007) is his winning margin was the largest since Slip Anchor (seven lengths 1985)).
I noticed that there are individual tables from the 1988 Epsom Derby so all someone has to do is go through them (sigh!) to extract the information. But perhaps someone else has a complete table (hopefully). --Philip Baird Shearer 11:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the winning margin column. There were no explanation given for its removal. -- PBS (talk) 11:48, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winning margin 

message: Straight Deal, trained by Walter Nightingall of South Hatch, Epsom, won the race at Newmarket in 1943 (see list of winners). Unless you don't count those races, this is a more recent Epsom-trained winner than April the Fifth, which won at Epsom in 1932.
212.84.103.57 (talk) 10:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most recent Epsom-trained winner 

message: I have placed the image of North Light in his article.Cgoodwin (talk) 21:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: I changed the pronunciation in Britain from Dar-bee to Dah-bee. This is because British English is mainly non-rhotic: we generally don't pronounce the "r" sound after vowels. A non Br Eng speaker seeing Dar-bee could be misled about the exact British pronunciation.  Tigerboy1966  14:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's highly WP:Controversial as I am no 'fan' of Cornish to Herefordshire and Irish accents but nor am I their enemy and by having one phoneme /ar/ rather than /a/ and /r/ is the IPA:English alphabet means to allow for both varieties of British English. But as the race is so far to the south-east which dominates in population and broadcasting merely stating facts, your editing can stay, based on the wikipedia consensus elsewhere (as it stands). Those provinces sharing in the American 'r' might hold sway when English further standardizes!- Adam37 Talk 16:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: At time of writing the article has six inline citations and various "references".  Sections (e.g., the lead and history sections) are presented with no (or minimal) inline citations. Twice today i have tagged the article with the maintenance tag with template: more footnotes, which explanatory prose states "this article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations.  Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations."
Twice the tag has been removed.  perhaps the editor removing it fails to comprehend the distinction between template:more footnotes (some inline citations; some broad references possibly covering assertions with no inline citations), template:refimprove (more citations needed) and template:no footnotes.  The removing editor requested that this topic be brought to the talk page; here it is.  The article is failing in inline citations...short and sweeet.   regards.  --96.232.126.27 (talk) 20:38, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I am the editor referred to above. With 31,000+ edits I do not need lectures on referencing policy from an IP editor who joined the project 3 weeks ago and has less than 100 edits. The "problem" appears to be that there are no reliable sources to back up the facts that the Derby is run in June over a distance of one and a half miles. Gosh, that's a tough challenge. Give me a minute and I'll get back.  Tigerboy1966  21:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

text: There you go. What's next? Want a reference for the fact that grass is green?  Tigerboy1966  22:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say: "at this writing", "what is source for the balance" etc. I'm guessing that English is not your first language. You will need to take more time to express your ideas with greater clarity and precision if I am to engage with you in a meaningful and productive way.  Tigerboy1966  22:44, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

text: I apologise for the unnecessarily aggressive and pompous tone of the above comments. Tigerboy1966  08:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of sufficient inline citations

message: This was recently moved from Epsom Derby to The Derby Stakes without any approved consensus. This title is wrong. The race is not called The Derby Stakes, instead it is called The Derby, or Derby Stakes. Please either move this article back, or move it to The Derby, or to Derby Stakes. Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoarse Horse (talk • contribs) 12:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The name was discussed in August 2010 (point 7 above), no consensus at that point. Needs a proper discussion again prior to moving, as does the Epsom Oaks article. Also, we don't usually see the definite article used in horse race titles. Will mention this move at the Horse Racing project for discussion. --Bcp67 (talk) 15:28, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored it to Epsom Derby pending further discussion per WP:BRD. Status quo previals until a new consensus is reached unless there is some pressing emergency.  I take no position on actual titling, I shall leave that to you Brits and reliable sources. That said, we Yanks are familiar with it as the Epsom Derby, just saying... if you rename it to the Derby, you'll need to add a hatnote to the Kentucky Derby for US readers (acknowledging the historical precedence of this one, of course) Montanabw(talk) 00:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This  from 1859 shows that "Epsom Derby" has a long history as a term for the race. There are literally hundreds of uses of the phrase in the 1870's and 80's. I could probably find earlier references but this seems sufficient. Tigerboy1966  18:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  My point being that the race was being called the Epsom Derby several years before the Kentucky Derby was founded. Tigerboy1966  18:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Epsom Derby is common in use in the UK nowadays as well, a recent story from the BBC  uses the phrase and the Independent newspaper coverage is headed Epsom Derby .  No doubt that the race's official name is the Derby Stakes, but its commonly called the Epsom Derby, much as the Gold Cup is inevitably called the Ascot Gold Cup.  My preference is to retain the names Epsom Derby and Epsom Oaks for the two Classics. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  This is not the only race where the "unofficial" name is better known than the "official" name.  right now the Kentucky Derby is the "Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands" and I will rot in hell before I would let the WP article title reflect such a travesty of greed and commercialism. Just saying I defer to the UK horse racing crowd, but you folks seem to have it under control here, so just adding my !vote to the dogpile.  Montanabw(talk) 23:56, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Epsom Derby page move

message: Colours are wrong for 1988 - Kahyasi won in the Aga Khan's alternative colours, chocolate and green hoops - originally the colours of Aga Khan III. --Bcp67 (talk) 21:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colours 

message: These link to an RAF officer from World War I & II.
--JustSawThis (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Now repointed to an appropriate redlink --Bcp67 (talk) 09:01, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trainer Frank Neale links in Winners list 

message: The Derby has been run for some 230 years with no break and was formerly a day of great celebration. Until the late Victorian period Parliament used to adjourn so they could watch the racing. Until the '70s local school children (including me) used to get the day off for the great race. It's history was everywhere from names of pubs, to street names and to local celebrity trainers. It was never ever referred to as The Epsom Derby but then the Kentucky Derby meant nothing to us anyway. Times change and the guardians of this site continue to argue over the name  ignoring the fact that the history of this important national race is largely missing for this poorly written and frankly boring entry. Where for example is a bibliography? Where is mention of the scandals of Bentinck? where is mention of Augustus Egg's famous image of Derby Day etc? where is the mention of the royal connections from Edward VII onwards., Under the heading Popular Culture we have one line.... yes one line. I would write something but no doubt the righteous wiki guardians would tell me I was wrong. Thanks for reading this.dorkinglad (talk) Reassigned heading dorkinglad (talk)
: If you have the sources, by all means add. I expect it will be hard to know where to stop. For example, Murder Must Advertise starts with a bit about the office drawing for names for a Derby pool - a clever way to introduce a bunch of names. "Must be in on the jolly old sweep, what?" Jlvsclrk (talk) 19:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You will find a lot of information on the personalities and scandals in the articles on the individual Derby winners.81.174.162.70 (talk) 08:44, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs rewriting 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Epsom Derby. 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  tag to http://uk.news.yahoo.com/investec-sponsor-epsom-derby-decade-152149734.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120126063340/http://www.fathom.com:80/course/10701040/session2.html to http://www.fathom.com/course/10701040/session2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:17, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: why isn't 1941 the fastest winner?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.199.231.18 (talk) 09:34, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a wartime substitute race run on the July Course at Newmarket. The record time is for the traditional Epsom course. --Bcp67 (talk) 19:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  time 

message: Putting this here for now.
*1812, 1822 "half a neck" I've rendered this as a "head"
*1815 "half a head" = short head
*1837 "a head, a neck or half a length" = neck
*1853 "short half length" = half a length
Other non-standard distances to be added. Tigerboy1966  07:14, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winning distances 

message: The following text has recently been added to the lead. Having being reverted, it has been re-added.
At best this is WP:SYNTHESIS of the source provided (), but realistically it simply does not support a single word of this paragraph. The paragraph is also misleading, in that "Epsom Derby" is very widely used in the UK, and somewhat repeats the preceding paragraph.
In addition, this concept is now WP:UNDUE in the lead (only about 50% is now about the race itself) and is already discussed within the lead and History section, which I think is probably sufficient (if also unsourced). If necessary, expansion should not be in the lead. Thoughts please. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:34, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: A discussion which crops up from time to time - could do with its own section I think and shifting out of the lead.  A quick look in news media in the UK sees varieties of uses; the  BBC goes for Epsom Derby, Epsom Derby: Serpentine stuns rivals to give Aidan O'Brien record eighth victory, the Guardian prefers the Derby Jockeys under fire after Serpentine pulls off shock with all-the-way win in Derby while the Racing Post seems to use Investec Derby mostly, but as the racing game's trade paper it would be more natural to include the sponsor's name.--Bcp67 (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions re "official name"