Talk:Triple Crown

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

The footnote about the existence of "three crowns" is historically and factually incorrect and should be removed - it is a bit of whimsy. The origin of the term is much more simple and refers to "crowns" only in the symbolic sense - four teams (Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales) compete and the winning team must beat the three others. It refers to a "triple" victory.

What are the events of the "Canadian Triple Crown" of horse racing? What horses won them? Trekphiler 09:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TRHAT to Wikipedia:Triple Crown[edit]

Thread retitled from "WP:SELFREFHAT to Wikipedia:Triple Crown".

The self-referential hatnote to our MMO-style quest award WP:Triple Crown is very childish and should be removed. Editors looking for such things should know to type WP: first, and we should not sully the article with this unprofessional link - it is highly unlikely that a reader who doesn't play the game is looking for WP:Triple Crown and our editors who do should know better than to look in article space for awards to add to their user space.

See discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid#Should we be linking readers (via disambiguation notes, etc.) to the Wikipedia/Help/Manual namespaces from the mainspace? for more. @Montanabw: please consider self-reverting your undo of my removal. –xeno^talk 08:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, this is simply too silly to even waste bandwidth on. No, and looks like you were busted for editing the MOS against consensus. Montanabw ^(talk) 19:12, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editing policies and guidelines to describe common practice is how they (and consensus) are built. The target is implausible, it runs afoul of existing policy: WP:TRHAT –xeno^talk 19:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're both fighting consensus here, actually. --erachima talk 19:41, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather call it building consensus, but to each their own. –xeno^talk 19:44, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I'm kind of disgusted with editors who go in to change a guideline or policy and then go around to a bunch of articles to "enforce" the "policy" that they changed with no consensus. This is the second or third time I've seen this done, and frankly, there clearly is no consensus against appropriate hatnotes to WP guidelines, and the little triple crown award does have a non-intuitive shortcut (WP:CROWN). Montanabw ^(talk) 01:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]