Talk:Nürburgring

message: Project Gotham Racing 3 for the Xbox 360 has a few variations of the Nürburgring. The "test" track for the game seems to be the F1 circuit, and throughout the game there are at least 3 variations, including a gigantic one that is rated at about 9 minutes at the easiest skill level, so this is probably the full-size version. Pvera 06:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: random talk

message: What is the English translation of the word "Touristenfahrten"? Recury 20:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "tourists' drives". --Matthead 23:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It comes from German printing conventions. --Majin Izlude 15:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Touristenfahrten 

message: What is the name of the Nurburgring castle and where is the wiki page associated with it? --68.207.206.69 05:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The castle is called Nürburg, hence the name Nürburgring (Nürburg Circuit), and has an article only in de:Wiki. The castle itself is relatively unimportant, being located in an area with about as many castles as supermarkets. -84.169.79.24 03:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Castle 

message: Sorry if I'm being too brief, but does this really need a section of it's own? --Phill talk Edits 21:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so. And I'm going to remove it.--BSI 16:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Schumacher S" section 

message: Does anyone know what the paint/chalk writing all over the track is for? Where does it all come from, and what is the point?
Could we possibly have a section on this in the article? --Recoil42 21:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The writings are applied mainly by the spectators camping around the track in the days before the 24 hour race. The messages are about favorite marques, teams, drivers, or simply about the groups of fans hoping to see their slogan on TV. Some graffiti are just for fun, like painting a pedestrian crossing. I have not yet seen a website trying to cover the writings, so I doubt Wikipedia can dedicate a section to it. -- Matthead  DisOuß   04:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing all over the track? 

message: Because the exclusion of the Umlaut mark is nine times out of ten not intentional, I have changed the beginning text of this article from "commonly misspelled" to "alternately spelled". This is because of the extreme difficulty involved in inserting the symbol, especially in or on websites or webpages, or any place that the code for the symbol must be used. This is usually not intentional, this is done out of lack of knowledge. Please see the article on misspelling. (By the way, the list of "famous accidental misspellings" is pretty interesting). Zchris87v 20:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not of "extreme difficulty", as in HTML, the Umlaut ü can be generated with ü ü. En-Wiki offers a table with many characters in the edit windows. If all fails, ue is the proper way to write it. -- Matthead  DisOuß   04:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common misspelling 

message: The caption for the map in the "Nordschleife Map" section makes reference to the "Sketch Grand Prix course". The word "Sketch" isn't used anywhere else in the article. Should it say "Strecke" instead of "Sketch"? DH85868993 15:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it could be refering to either the complete Südschleife, or to the sprint course Lynx Raven Raide 04:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The GP track is, partially, in that yellow area. I've removed the confusing word "Sketch".-- Matthead  DisOuß   03:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sketch Grand Prix course" 

message: I think the information about fatalities and serious injuries is misleading: 
"There are a few deaths and major accidents each year, most of which are during public sessions, although generally accidents on racetracks are rare and not to be expected."
A few deaths? People apparently die, but luckily 'just a few'. And he sentence ends with implying that we shouldn't worry because generally people don't actually die on racetracks...
Should this section be rewritten with more detailed and realistic information (with a bit more of a 'warning' in it)? Or is that not being objective?
:There are some deaths, in racing maybe five or so in the last decade, with various reasons: two of them apparently heart failures, and some freak accidents. In public driving, riders are always at risk, but drivers get killed too, e.g. in a Ferrari that caught fire. Over all, I guess more people get killed travelling to or from football games, but noone attributes this to a stadium. -- Matthead  DisOuß   03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racing is risky 

message: Does this article really need to list the ticket prices (which are subject to change?) Perhaps a link to the relevant section of the track's own website would be preferable? DH85868993 00:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People do frequently ask about the prices for driving one or more laps, in forums etc., so it makes sense to state them. -- Matthead  DisOuß   03:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ticket prices 

message: "Niki Lauda, the reigning world champion and only person ever to lap the full 22835 m Nordschleife in under 7 minutes (6:58.6, 1975)"
* Derek Bell has completed a VIDEO RECORDED lap in 6'41 on a Porsche 956 (from the video 'In Car 956');
* the all time record has been set by Stefan Bellof, in 6'11;
* the Radical SR8 has completed recently (late 2005) the lap in 6'55.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.235.191.170 (talk) 10:03, August 27, 2007 (UTC) 
:And dozens of others - because the Ring was shortened by ca. 2000 meters for 1983.-- Matthead discuß!     O       14:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's wrong. On the 22.8 km Nordschleife Niki Lauda was the only person who finished one lap in a time under 7 minutes (two times on 5/16 in 6:58.2 and 2/8 in 6:58.6 in 1974 - not 1975). The best lap of Stefan Bellof and all others was in 1983 after the track was shorten by 2 km in the winter 1982/1983. The fastest lap of Derek Bell was at 5/29 in 1983 - even after the track was shorten. On the "new" track times between 6:30 and 7:00 are usual for prototypes. The best lap on the new track was 6:07.6, driven by Stefan Bellof in 1984 in Porsche 956, but not during a race/official training and was therefore not considered.79.212.188.245 (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Niki Lauda is NOT the only person who had completed the Ring in under 7 minutes 

message: Could someone familiar with them add a section on what Armco barriers are and why they are specifically used? Are Armco barriers any different from normal guardrails? --Phasmatisnox 07:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are the standards rails used on public roads, except that three (at least two) are mounted atop of each other.-- Matthead  DisOuß   03:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Armco barriers?

message: This is a strong article in itself, but with references it could get to GA status. I classed it as a hesitant Start class for the F1 Wikiproject (I almost want to put it at B-status) Guroadrunner (talk) 08:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: More references and this could well be GA-status

message: In the first paragraph, 28.265km is equated to 14.3 miles.  This is obviously wrong.  I haven't changed it because I presume the 14.3 miles came from somewhere and is in fact the length of one version of the track, but it can't be the length of the Gesamtstrecke.  Also the differing precision in the two measurements is undesirable. 81.154.101.147 (talk) 10:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate conversion

message: Roughly half of the links are companies offering tours or racing packages (you race your car with hotel, ferry ride, and more included). Will (Talk - contribs) 05:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  I visited the sites that appeared to be fine, only to find they were not.  The only valid link appears to be the one that I left.— DædαlusT@lk / Improve 20:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many of the [[WP:EL|external links]] in this article are to commercial sites 

message: Does anyone else experience difficulties when trying to print the printable version of this article? It has frozen Firefox every time I've told it to print on the page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EunuchOmerta (talk • contribs) 15:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Printable version? 

message: As a linguist fluent in English, and studying Japanese and French, among other languages, it comes natuarlly to me to wonder which spelling is correct. I have seen several times two different spellings of this name. One is 'Nordschleife', and the other 'Nordscheife'. The 'l' has been annoying me for quite some time and I must find out. Which is correct? My reason, I think the '-schei-' is a correct possible spelling in German, probably because I have seen other words with that sequence in it. It may not be but w/e... Help please. Mattokunhayashi (talk) 22:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Nordschleife" returns 1,450,000 ghits; "Nordscheife" returns 2,670. I'd say that's a pretty good indication of which is correct. DH85868993 (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct is "schleife", it's a german word means "slip knot" or "loop", "scheife" isn't a german word. --93.193.255.185 (talk) 21:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In the United States' founding document, the Declaration of Independence, the typography of the S often appears like an F. Therefore, in German, Scheife becomes, well, how should I put this politely, a bad word? Arthurblenheim (talk) 20:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What if the people who wrote the word copy-pasted it from a single instance that was a typographical error to begin with? That may explain why the ratio of search instances between schleife and, oh, I can't say that bad word here, is so large. 72.70.60.222 (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nordschleife or Nordscheife? 

message: "On the 30th November 2008, Teenager X broke the record around the Norfschleife, on the racing game, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, he set a record time of 6 Minutes, and 11 Seconds."
- No citation, and what does a videogame record have anything to do with the real 'Ring? Also, according to the GT5P page, there's no Nordschleife there in the first place. I've removed this. MetzMaboo (talk) 18:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to repeat the name and claim here. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I figured out your statement finally. You mean to say that there is no North Loop in GT5 rather than that there is no North Loop in Nuerburgring. I mistook your meaning. Well, how do you expect me to read your meaning when it isn't there in the sentence? I sympathize. GT5 has nothing to do with the real ring. 72.70.60.222 (talk) 00:23, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Gran Turismo Record

message: The Roller coaster is not operational, and will not be working before spring 2010, if ever. It is undue to even mention it in the lead, as this article is about the race track, not about peripheral toys. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roller coaster 

message: The direction at the NGK chicane is incorrect. F1 uses the more angular pass, not the wider pass on the other side high-lightened in the picture. -- Zuxy (talk) 05:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, the german article uses the right chicane.  Regards --Pitlane02 talk 20:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circuit layout 

message: The link seems wrong and useless. Huw Powell (talk) 09:38, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The link is correct in that AK Steel Holding is the company whose predecessor ("Armco") produced the steel safety barriers to which this article refers, however I agree it would be more useful if AK Steel Holding contained some description of/reference to Armco safety barriers. DH85868993 (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Does there have to be a link at all if it does not add anything? --Falcadore (talk) 07:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armco 

message: It seems to me that the prices in the Nordschleife public access section reads like it is trying to sell them to you. I do not feel that listing all of the prices like this is really appropriate as encyclopaedic content. I think a little less information here, just a brief description of the price, and an external link would be much better. Sas1998 (Talk) 19:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prices read like sales material 

message: "The Teffers straight between Adenauer Forst and Metzgesfeld is known for its high number of expensive accidents." This sentence was deleted because firstly none of the official Nürburgring maps shows a section called "Teffers straight" or German "Teffers Gerade". Secondly the claim about the "high number of expensive accidents" is unproven and appears to be hearsay. Recently this statement was reinput by an anonymous user without any reason. Any idea why? Lavoulte (talk) 17:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teffers straight 

message: I realise that the Lap Record at the Nurburgring is one of Motorsport (especially Formula 1's) Holy Grails, so what constitutes the Fastest lap on the Nordschliefe is a touchy subject to some. However, I am given to understand that 'Lap Record,' in F1 parlance at least, means 'Fastest Lap under Race conditions' not the absolute fastest lap ever done, ever. Indeed, there seems to have been a discussion over at the Spa-Francorchamps page on this very issue. But looking at the infobox, the fastest times given for the 'old' Nordschliefe (including the now-demolished pit straight) and the 'current' Nordschliefe (ommitting any part of the modern-day GP track) both give times which I believe were done in practice/qualifying rather than under race conditions. If this page is to be consistent with other F1 World Championship circuits, would the correct Lap Records not be: 7:06.04 for the the 22.8 km version by Clay Regozzoni in the 1975 German GP and 6:25.91 for the current version by Steffan Bellof?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.252.173 (talk) 10:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Lap records in infobox

message: This is the start of the article: "Nürburgring is a 150,000-capacity motorsports complex[.]" All I want to ask is, Nürburgring has a capacity of 150,000 what: race cars on the racing circuit? The Wikipedia article should explain itself to people having a basic university degree without needing a decoder ring. Maybe the sentence could be changed to say this: Nürburgring is a 150,000-visitor motorsports complex, 150,000-attendee complex, 150,000-viewer complex, or whatever the authors want to express, instead of what they say, which apparently does not say what they think it does. I suppose we are talking about people who show up at the race track to view a race, but it could be 150,000 race cars, because it's a big track at 16 miles, North Loop included. To paraphrase an old proverb that uses the race car as a metaphor, a good writer puts his brain into gear before putting his written words into motion. I just wonder how many people read the sentence and wonder, a capacity of 150,000 what? Readers can perhaps guess the meaning, but the art of formal writing is in toning down ambiguities. And here, the ambiguity is in the article's very first sentence--thank you very much. One could wonder, as I do, who writes these things: knuckleheads? While a talk page may be informal, the article must not. And, I tire of articles where not only common-sense thinking skills get passed over, but also that Wikipedia's authors often ignore the web site's own guidelines for writing articles there, leaving integrity to wonderment. Writing articles involves a combination of both knowing and writing--not just knowing information, but being able to state that knowledge, then executing the act. Secondly, it is not a "motorsports complex." It is a motorsport complex. Common English usage deems that nouns used as adjectives for purposes of describing other nouns must be used in the infinitive form--not in plural. It would look like this: Nürburgring is a motorsport complex. This second error, I would feel safely to correct, but I talk about it here in editorial form, because I want Wikipedia's authors who read this to take my criticism with them when they go write other articles, so I can increase Wikipedia's prestige while reducing my own need to correct stuff. Motorsport complex--not motorsports complex! Arthurblenheim (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  English language used in the article 

message: The Nürburgring hosted a Bundeswehr parade celebrating the twentieth anniversary of NATO on 6 June 1969. See :Commons:Category:1969 Nürburgring NATO parade. --21lima (talk) 09:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NATO parade 1969 

message: Doesn't this person have common sense? My dad used to beat the shit out of me for saying hell. The Green Hell is a cuss term 71.94.157.155 (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hell is not a swear word. And even if it was, Wikipedia isn't WP:CENSORED.SSSB (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone reverted my edit after I pointed out that Hell was a swear word 

message: Last night I made a minor edit to the page to add some additional clarifying and referenced information about the ring racer roller coaster. Years ago I installed a chrome plugin called "Cloud to Butt. I study computer science so the occasional laugh I got during discussions about "Butt storage" was quite funny to me. However, I assumed this remained all client-side and I didn't realise that when I edited a wikipedia page the change would come with it, changing all instances of the world "Cloud" to "Butt" on the page. I understand why this was removed for vandalism, but I would like to clarify it was a complete accident and I've now removed the plugin. I will re-make the appropriate edit regarding the roller coaster now and will try not to accidentally vandalise the page in the process.
I hope someone finds this as funny as I did! And thank you to  for fixing the mistake EvanM2015 (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now seen everything... a case of legitimate accidental vandalism! To be honest I didn't even look at the rest of your edit (and the link), just assuming it was spam or something, but I can see it's perfectly fine. Thankyou for your contribution, happy editing! A7V2 (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

text: wow, you're honest. I would have pinned the blame of the chrome plug-in on an imaginary younger brother, to save face. SSSB (talk) 10:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apologies for accidental vandalism 

message: "In 1973 the entrance into the dangerous and bumpy Kallenhard corner was made slower by adding another left-hand corner after the fast Metzgesfeld sweeping corner. Safety was improved again later on by removing the jumps on the long main straight and widening it."
Concerning this passage in the article, I can't find any evidence that the corner was modified. The article doesn't provide a source for that claim. It is either not true or so obscure to warrant a citation needed.
MMichkov (talk) 19:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  1973 Kallenhard entry modifications