Talk:Bowman Gray Stadium

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot (talk) 18:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bowman Gray Stadium/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Nascar9919 (talk · contribs) 04:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 22:59, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Picking this up. There will be a delay while the bot does its thing. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: Just got to all your comments. Sorry it took me so long; university has been keeping me busy. Let me know if you need anything else from my end! Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 19:53, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

No worries. Happy racing! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:02, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

General comments

• I don't know enough about motor sports to comment on the content, except that it looks fine to me.
• Link catch fence, which I had to look up.

•  Done. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 19:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• I always wince seeing the old imperial measurements used with decimals, which is anachronistic.

• Done? Let me know if I addressed this correctly. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 19:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• No spelling errors found.
• When adjusting for inflation, round to the same number of significant figures as the original. eg. $200,000 should be adjusted for inflation to $4,400,000 by |r=-5 not $4,467,612

•  Done. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 19:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Image check

• All images have appropriate licenses.

  File:BowmanGray2.jpg "The U.S. freedom of panorama, found at Sec. 120(a), allows photography and the distribution or public display of resulting images of architectural works that are found in or visible from public spaces." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:10, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Source check

• Sources are reliable.
• Spot checks:

  23, 24, 42, 106, 107 - okay

  fn 29a: "city funding under the agreement that NSS would eventually pay off the paving" Supports city funding but does not say anything about an agreement to pay it off.

• Tweaked. Let me know if you need it tweaked any further. Cheers! Nascar9919 (he/him • t • c) 19:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of Yearly Track Champions Table

I noticed that the yearly Bowman Gray Stadium track champions table was removed from the article sometime after the 2025 NASCAR Clash coverage updates. I wanted to open discussion on potentially restoring that information.

The championship list was one of the few publicly available complete historical records of Bowman Gray season champions across divisions. Bowman Gray Stadium’s official site generally only keeps current points standings and recent race results available, and many outside racing databases only maintain records through the early 2010s. Because of that, the Wikipedia table served as a useful historical reference point for the track.

I understand there may have been concerns about notability since many of the individual champions do not have standalone Wikipedia articles. However, the table itself documented a significant part of the venue’s competitive history rather than serving as biographies of the drivers themselves. Similar championship/history tables exist on pages for other short tracks and racing series.

If there is interest in restoring the table, I can help provide/update the championship information from the point where the previous table was last updated. ImOzunaFromtheBraves (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that there are few publicly available complete historical records. It was removed for being entirely unsourced. Unless it can be referenced using reliable sources, it can't be restored. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:29, 27 May 2026 (UTC)