Talk:Daytona International Speedway/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I'm playing with categories. Does this look appropriate for this page? --Timc 18:07, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Not as good as it would with the table at the top and the category elsewhere, but this is what we have to deal with. Nothing we can really do about it except work around their design choices.

However, perhaps we should not specify the category as NASCAR race tracks... well... I dunno. We are supposed to use the most specific category, but then what do you put, say, Indianapolis Motor Speedway in? Perhaps this category should be more like American race tracks or American car race tracks or something along those lines. --Golbez 18:45, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

You are right, but I thought it would be fine to apply multiple categories for tracks like Indy. So, it would be NASCAR race tracks|IndyCar race tracks ... But, maybe American auto race tracks/circuits/courses would be a better category. Is NASCAR race tracks a sub-category then? I didn't apply the category to all of the race tracks so that we could have a chance to discuss this. That way I wouldn't get a response like when I added the big list of tracks.  :-)

Maybe the best thing to do is have Auto race tracks->NASCAR race tracks->Daytona International Speedway and Auto race tracks->NASCAR race tracks->Indianapolis Motor Speedway and Auto race tracks->IndyCar race tracks->Indianapolis Motor Speedway. But maybe the sub-category isn't necessary. --Timc 19:34, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Another possibility is Auto racing->NASCAR->Daytona International Speedway, Auto racing->NASCAR->Indianapolis Motor Speedway and Auto racing->IndyCar->Indianapolis Motor Speedway. --Timc 19:37, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

A problem you could run into with that is, how many leagues are we going to include? Need to think about this... okay, how's this for an idea:

• Categories go Sports->Auto Racing->NASCAR, and this category includes List of NASCAR race tracks.
• Individual American race tracks can go into Sports->Auto Racing->U.S. car race tracks, AND also have a link to the list of tracks for their proper league, i.e. List of NASCAR race tracks.
• So far as I know, and I could be very wrong, the English don't enjoy using the word "auto" I think, so maybe that too should be changed to Car all around. I don't know, I'm not British. :) Let one of them fix it. ;)

So how does this solution sound? We keep the tracks themselves in a generic "U.S. car race tracks" category, and use the List of X race tracks pages to classify, AND keep the List of X race tracks pages in the categories for their leagues, like NASCAR and IndyCar. Sound good?

So, that's my idea - keep the individual track pages on a generic race track category, and keep the league lists in a league category. And to tie them all together, a generic List of American car race tracks or, hell, List of car race tracks, to tie them all together that would go into the Car race tracks category. (Or auto. I ain't making that choice, someone else do it. ;) Personally, "auto" flows better, but this is an international deal.)

I'm heavily rambling now, so any input you have, I welcome. :) --Golbez 22:55, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Works for me. I'm not British, but neither am I American. Being Canadian, I applaud your ambiguity in using both "auto" and "car" for categories. "Auto racing"/"U.S. car race tracks". --Timc 13:55, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'm curious about the "The World Center of Racing" sub tag - is this a phrase commonly associated with Daytona raceway? kibibu 02:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's the nickname that the track has taken for itself. More of a marketing thing than anything else I think, but most of the NASCAR tracks seem to do it. Recury 03:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Call me crazy, but isn't a track map a better image image for an infobox? I cleaned up an aerial photo pixel by pixel, so it's to scale, and it's hard to find an accurate picture of the motorcycle course.Mustang6172 04:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I took some new photos and uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons - including the new pedestrian bridge, which has "Welcome to Daytona Beach" in large letters. However, the track is so large, it is hard to get the whole thing into a photo. Gamweb (talk) 03:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The infobox says that ground was broken in 1956, but the Course history section says ground was broken in November 1957. Which one is right?Mustang6172 (talk) 07:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

That's not really true at all, the HANS device was developed by the brother of an IMSA GT driver, and the SAFER barriers for Indycar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.117.186 (talk) 03:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Daytona International Speedway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nascarking Daytona 500 19:29, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

• The uses with number conversions you need to abbreviate them but other than that I can't see anything keeping this from passing.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Now that the track surface has been repaved, do we start counting again for lap records? I know generally when the layout is changed, they start again, but is that generally the case with repaved tracks? I ask because in Grand-Am qualifying, the DP qualifying times for the front row were about half a second faster on the road course from last year [1], and the current overall record for the track is the now defunct Can-Am series. Thoughts? Bakkster Man (talk) 15:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure. If it is faster than the fastest speed then add it, but other than that you shouldn't update it. Such as Bill Elliott made a lap around teh oval at 210 mph. That speed will never be broken, and just because they are going faster on the newer surface, but slower than the fastest speed, it doesn't need updating. Nascar1996 16:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

My primary concern was whether the repave would be considered a new 'configuration' of the track, not that the old record likely won't be broken due to new regulations. It is still my assumption that this isn't the case, but I wanted to bring it up. Bakkster Man (talk) 17:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so. Nascar1996 18:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

An image edit is needed. First of all, the bus stop configuration on File:Daytona_International_Speedway_-_Road_Course.svg is out of date, that version of the chicane has not been used in many years. The cars use the same bus stop chicane as can be found in File:Daytona International Speedway - Moto Course.png.

Secondly, with the repaving, this older 'long bus stop' has had its pavement removed, the only configuration remaining is the one shown in the Moto image. In addition, with the recent repaving, a copy of the Bus Stop has been added to the course shortly before it. It is currently unused, but is placed immediately in front of a spectator area and may be used in the future. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I've made the changes. Spyder_Monkey (Talk) 23:54, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! Any idea why the thumb is still outdated? Bakkster Man (talk) 14:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Try bypassing your cache (Ctrl+F5 in most browsers). Spyder_Monkey (Talk) 23:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)