Talk:Goodwood Festival of Speed

Sussex Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sussex 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.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles 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.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

British Motorsport

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport in the United Kingdom 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.British MotorsportWikipedia:WikiProject British MotorsportTemplate:WikiProject British MotorsportBritish Motorsport articles

NPOV Tag

Somone has recently tagged this article as requiring a re-write in order for the article to meet NPOV. I fail to understand the reasons for this tag, so would like to invite other editors to comment please? According to the guidelines for NPOV, the tags can only be removed when a concensus has been ascertained. So, comments please? Many thanks, δ²_(Talk) 10:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'm confused. I can't think of anything about this that is NPOV. Yeah the article is a bit rambling and could do with tightening up a bit, but NPOV makes zero sense. The paragraph prior to the one regarding the record Nick Heidfeld set is perhaps a little "fluffy" with too many superlatives, but otherwise it looks fine to me. VonBlade (talk) 18:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. I couldn't see what the problem was and neither had anyone else in the six months the tag was there. I often wonder how some people have the time to tag an article, but not say why or make any changes themselves. Kodabar (talk) 20:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Goodwood Festival of Speed. 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/20090416151434/http://judah.co.uk:80/articles/judahs-piece to http://www.judah.co.uk/articles/judahs-piece

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} 00:50, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Central display section

The central display section, removed by Drmies, has a long history in this article. Here's where it got "central display" in the section title for the first time, but it was already present. So I can see why some editors feel it should stay. The thing is, the references all appear to be non-independent (either the Goodwood site or the car company honoured), and the 2017 one is overly long and flowery in its description and has no reference. Can third-party references be found for these? newspaper coverage, maybe even books for some older ones? To my mind, that's what decides whether we should keep the section; and if sources can be found, cut the descriptions to the bare minimum, because otherwise it does look like promotion of the car companies. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't dubious references justify a "citation required" rather than wholesale removal? is anyone suggesting that the installation is not an important part of the festival, or that it isn't something which might be referred to? Ian Dalziel (talk) 02:04, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, Drmies' contention is that it isn't an important part of the festival (edit summaries referring to "chit chat", and we do have to guard agains promotion), and the way to establish that it is an important part of the festival is to supply 3rd-party references. That's also our basic editing guideline when someone removes something that isn't well sourced; it's the responsibility of the editor reinstating it to supply references. It seems to me this might be easy to find sources for (although I have a separate doubt about the images of what is described as artwork). Yngvadottir (talk) 02:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest he brings his contention to talk, then? Deleting large sections of consensus content on a whim is behaviour that would get an IP editor banned. Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for him, obviously, so I'll ping him again: yo, Drmies! I note you have added some third-party references, great; I think we need to have those for every year, if at all possible. At least for every year since that 2002 summing up. I've moved them to the respective years/points and made some prose changes, in particular cutting down the promotional language about Ecclestone. For myself, I still have real doubts about the images of teh artwork. It is my understanding that we aren't allowed to use images of artwork by artists who haven't been dead a long while. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are photographs of artwork erected in a public space, though. Surely we only need the copyright of the photograph? The photograph of the Angel of the North isn't copyright of Antony Gormley. Ian Dalziel (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind a decently verified list, but this is just a gallery full of pictures and wikilinked cars. What is the point of that, besides eye candy/promotion? Most of the comments are just trivial notes, except for the Ecclestone note, which is pompous and non-neutral. I can't answer the question about the artwork and photo licensing, though I do know that "public space" doesn't matter--first of all, it's not a public space, and second, it's still the artist's property. The photos aren't all bad, and the displays sometimes quite impressive, and that should be the saving grace here--the fame of the artist and of the statues, as verified by secondary sources. The first reverted had nothing more to offer than "it's important" which, without secondary sources, translates to "I like it", as far as I'm concerned. So if this were pruned, and had better sourcing, it would be much easier for editors who focus on encyclopedic aspects to accept this kind of content. Drmies (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As Drmies says, it's about the artist's rights. But I see these are hosted on Commons, and several were imported by a bot from Flickr. So I'm going to ask on Commons what the licence situation is. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One reason why the list is of note is that this is not just a stand-alone display - it illustrates the central theme of the festival for that year. When Auto Union was the theme most of the Auto Union Grand Prix cars which are still running took part in the hill climb, for example. I appreciate that the article doesn't really make that clear at the moment. It's not going to be easy to find sources, either. Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find a couple of retrospective articles in the press that say it's an important part of the festival; I think together we've now made it keepable, and it would be great if you could find sources to flesh that out about the theme. I wound up asking about the images in the Commons IRC channel and will now go see if other answers have emerged. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC) After my bothering two people on IRC, the discussion has now wound up here. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:54, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Goodwood Festival of Speed. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More than just a Hill Climb

I updated the opening sentence in the lead section to reflect the fact that this is much more than just a hill climb. Notwithstanding that the hill climb is still one of the highlights (the main one?) of the weekend, a lot more other features & events have been added over the years since this article was started in 2005! 95.150.59.128 (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First event

The prose asserts (cited by various recent-ish websites, eg 1, 2) that the first occasion was 1993.

The Telegraph citation (mentioning an Aston Martin display) for 1993 (appearing as inline number [18] states "So it comes as something of a surprise to glance back through Goodwood's archives and find that in fact the tradition started in 1993...", so not particularly impressive to me, but a welcome admission of source.

I have a 2003 hard copy UK motorcycle magazine (Motorcycle Sport & Leisure, a sister publication - originally founded in 1962 - to Motor Sport (magazine)) which states the first as being in 1994 - with the 2003 event (Friday 11 July to Sunday 13 July) being promoted as "The First Decade. Since it began in 1994, motorcycle enthusiasts have seen and heard an almost endless supply of famous factory racers roar up the hill...".

I find this strange. Hopefully someone may chance upon contemporaneous hard copy, eventually.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:26, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, hope so. A secondary (contemporary) source would be useful. I have no doubt the first event was in 1993, as I was there, but my happy memory is not what Wikipedia would class as a reliable source. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not contemporary, but this mentions that Autocar would have reported on the 1993 FoS, so someone might be able to track down the volume, date and page no. of the Autocar interview with Lord March. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I bought a large batch of magazines very cheaply a few years ago, collect-only from an ebay seller who was closing down his activities. I'll add it to me list, and try to sort through the 1990s for 1993/94. I have been looking for the Finnish motorcycle Grand Prix 1982/83, without success unfortunately. Whereas the last GP is stated on Wiki to be 1982, I thought I'd seen somewhere a 1983 event, perhaps without world championship points.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 22:51, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've now located in the house the September issue with a full-page account of the 2003 meeting. It is headlined "Famous faces grace Goodwood's 10th". This prompted me to recall that there was one TT race year when events were cancelled due to Foot and Mouth precautions (2001). I can't see anything as yet that there was a Festival cancelled due to similar? A quick look showed 2007 United Kingdom foot-and-mouth outbreak was limited to West Sussex, some distance away.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:51, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]