930:(Edit conflict) Let me give you some background. The 1877 dead heat is a tricky subject because of several factors. 1) The boat race is a very high profile and highly antagonistic contest. Partisans of either side are very ready to argue the toss over it and to complain if they were cheated. Certainly the Oxford crew of 1877 felt cheated of a victory. 2) Many of the stories told about the 1877 race are funny. It's amusing to think that the finish judge was drunk under a bush when the race was going on. It's hilarious to think the job of judging the race was given to someone who was actually blind. It's a massive joke to think that the judge actually said something as obviously contradictory as "dead heat to Oxford". The fact that the stories are amusing means no-one's going to like anyone who researches the real story and finds that these stories are fables which have no basis in truth. In fact, if someone does so, that's not going to stop the stories being told - because they're so amusing that the facts barely matter. 3) Not many people are going to bother going back to check the real story when it's just for telling amusing stories about the race's history.
703:
513:
495:
588:
962:
anything reliable that you've provided other than a self-published blog from a self-appointed historian of rowing. The article says "A "dead heat" in the 1877 race (which was reported as a victory to Oxford by several feet in numerous contemporary reports)" which is backed by a couple of reliable sources, and even by your Koch source. I appreciate the lesson on the significance of the 1877 race, but it's really not necessary. There remains little else to discuss.
567:
598:
1143:". But Dodd lets the quotation run on: "Those who had been in such a hurry to be first in the field with their information were evidently engaged on a matter with which they were not thoroughly conversant, for instead of waiting to hear the decision of the judge, which is always necessary in the case of a close finish, they wired off their own version of the affair, and not only misled their readers but caused no end of confusion and suspense."
21:
934:
quote does not appear in print until after the Second World War. I have checked the contemporary newspapers in the BL online archive and none of them mention it, which is not what one would expect if it had actually been said. The obvious conclusion is that it was not said. We also need extraordinary evidence before in any way implying in
Knowledge's voice that the official result recorded for a sporting event was wrong - and that
133:
693:
672:
268:
802:
777:
250:
343:
182:
164:
1179:. I think this is maybe the sixth time I've asked you to do so. Why won't you do that as you continually insist on attempting to include it? Are you being deliberately disruptive? And no, the newspapers weren't "wrong", they just reported the result they saw before it was "officially" announced. You need to really start to get a grip here.
1295:
Herald as "Grand
Challenge Cup for Eight-oared Boats." there are only two entrants, Oxford and Cambridge. historians might not (I don't know) consider it to be part of the official series, but is it not at least worth a mention. for the record, Cantabs broke a thwart and Oxford won easily. source: Morning Herald (London), Wed 18 Jun 1851 p.\ 7
1057:
including the sources you have (such as the self-published blog which you have repeatedly failed to demonstrate as reliable, despite being asked several times) but please make sure remove the references that I added when doing so. I'll just get on with something else, plenty more to fix around here. Cheers.
1197:
The blog isn't the source. The source is an article in the 2014 official programme. The official programme is a reliable source. Because it also happens to be reprinted on a blog, it's an assistance to the reader to give a link. And anyhow, you've removed it. For my part I do hope your own conduct is
1056:
of reliable sources. Oh, and the mini-lecture on the significance of the 1877 race. Thanks for that. And then ask yourself if you'd take that kind of thing personally. You started with no good faith and we are where we are. As I said earlier, feel free to tailor this to your personal preference,
911:
it would be helpful if you could provide reliable sources to dispute those reliable sources, including journalist and author Chris Dodd's book, rather than continue this crusade. Plus, as I asked above, if you can demonstrate how Koch's blog is an RS, that would be very helpful too as there are lots
852:
Look, this will not do. A piece of rubbish placed in the official boat race programme in 2015 is still a piece of rubbish. There are no contemporary reports which mention "dead heat to Oxford". The phrase doesn't appear in print until after the Second World War. The real story of the 1877 dead heat,
1051:
Remind me next time should I have the unpleasant task of having to deal with you and your bile that you started a discussion with an edit summary starting "Rubbish." and a comment on an article talk page starting "Look, this will not do" and a false accusation, followed by edit warring and repeated
1022:
Listen, life's too short for this. I have a reliable source backing that statement 100%, dead heat is in quotes because it's not universally understood and is often published in quotes, you have a self published blog and came in guns blazing making false accusations. Change the text to whatever you
1294:
the results list says that there was no race in 1850 or 1851, but whilst looking for something else I came across an account in a newspaper of an eight-oared boat race between Oxford and
Cambridge in 1851. it was on Tue 17 Jun 1851, the first day of the Henley Regatta, and is listed in the Morning
1216:
Seriously, your approach has been disgraceful. Edit warring, using blogs, ignoring talk page discussions, pushing your OR, lecturing me... And then this revelation: suddenly declaring the "official programme is a reliable source" after stating "A piece of rubbish placed in the official boat race
933:
Given that background, it's very important not to get mislead by the fact that these fables appear even in otherwise reliable sources. It does reinforce the need to look closely at bias, and that an otherwise reliable source is not simply repeating fables. For instance, the "dead heat to Oxford"
961:
I don't understand your point, from a policy perspective. The article makes it clear that the result was documented in Oxford's favour at the time. I have a reliable source that states that. Koch says that the result was erroneously documented in Oxford's favour at the time. I'm not seeing
938:
what your wording does. It is fine to say that Oxford believed they had won; it is true to say that many observers said Oxford had won, but it is not right to say or to imply that they were actually ahead at the finish line. Knowledge's voice should not be used to cast doubt on the official
1005:
I'm afraid I don't agree. The way it's worded at the moment has the words 'dead heat' in quotes, which implies they are opinion, and then immediately casts doubt on it, and reinforces that doubt by referring to the "numerous" reports. That wording implies the official result was incorrect.
1245:
So, for the seventh time of asking, where is the RS for the blog? And next time you start an interaction with someone with "Rubbish", think twice. With your appalling bad faith behaviour and edit warring issues, I'm not surprised you're former Arbcom. Good riddance.
103:
84:
35:
976:
There were other contemporary sources which said the 'dead heat' finding was absolutely right, and they were actually more numerous. Would you accept an amendment to "which was erroneously reported as a victory to Oxford"?
942:
The source that I linked to is to an article specifically commissioned from a rowing historian for the official 2014 programme. It happens also to be online at the author's blog but that is neither here nor there; the
528:, and to standardize and extend the coverage of the University in the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, you can help us by editing the article attached to this notice, or you could visit the
1324:
1364:
1037:
I'm sorry you've taken it personally. I just want to make an accurate, neutral article and in good faith, I think it isn't entirely there yet. I will check other sources when able.
460:
876:
I don't know what you're talking about. I haven't used the 2015 programme. I've used other sources. As for referring to the appalling main Boat Race article, that's just silly.
1359:
654:
644:
1369:
1349:
533:
947:
is an article from a rowing historian in an official programme. I was confused by your referencing earlier because other programmes have included the fables about 1877.
471:
1260:
And, for the record, are articles in the official programme "a piece of rubbish" or "a reliable source"? I'm not clear from what you've said, seemingly using your own
1379:
1354:
749:
620:
529:
520:
500:
436:
611:
572:
1093:
I've reduced the statement to bare fact, much to the detriment of the encyclopedia, but perhaps it will stop you forcing your own way on the article.
1374:
1334:
226:
1161:
I've removed it all. Better that way so it's not contentious in any way. Your awful bad faith and aggressive behaviour has not gone un-noticed.
759:
232:
368:
912:
of interesting things he's written there. By the way, Koch himself acknowledges that contemporary reports stated that Oxford had won.
890:
And please, stop edit warring until we have reached some kind of consensus here. Could you also demonstrate how heartheboatsing.com is a
1339:
702:
449:
1131:
I have now had an opportunity to find a copy of Dodd, and I regret to report that you have misinterpreted it. What Dodd does is quote
808:
782:
1344:
725:
284:
202:
1329:
1139:), which remarks that when the dead heat decision was announced "the unusual circumstance was not readily believed, because
716:
677:
443:
430:
275:
255:
144:
603:
198:
194:
189:
169:
40:
1269:
1251:
1222:
1184:
1166:
1098:
1084:
1062:
1028:
996:
967:
917:
899:
881:
512:
494:
854:
30:
1236:
1207:
1151:
1042:
1011:
982:
952:
866:
525:
132:
20:
1136:
1053:
1303:
1265:
1247:
1218:
1180:
1162:
1094:
1080:
1058:
1024:
992:
963:
913:
895:
877:
401:
150:
44:
532:, where you can join the project, learn more about it, see what needs to be done, or contribute to the
813:
787:
616:
414:
379:
1071:
Still waiting, for the fifth or so time of asking, for evidence that the self-published blog meets
724:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
619:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
283:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1232:
1203:
1147:
1038:
1007:
978:
948:
908:
862:
48:
1298:
1310:
1273:
1255:
1240:
1226:
1211:
1188:
1170:
1155:
1102:
1088:
1066:
1046:
1032:
1015:
1000:
986:
971:
956:
921:
903:
885:
870:
587:
566:
395:
1217:
programme in 2015 is still a piece of rubbish"... incredible. Absolutely astonishing.
387:
358:
342:
280:
1318:
1146:
In other words, the very point being made there is that these newspapers were wrong.
1079:
and forcing your own personal point of view on this article. Disgraceful behaviour.
858:
708:
383:
991:
Considering the official result is a dead heat, I think that's implicitly obvious.
1261:
1176:
1175:
In the meantime, please provide some evidence that Koch's self-published blog is a
1072:
891:
692:
671:
801:
776:
267:
249:
855:
http://heartheboatsing.com/2014/04/17/lies-damned-lies-and-the-1877-boat-race/
698:
593:
181:
163:
1023:
want, remove the sources I have added and then enjoy the rest of your day.
721:
126:
341:
894:? That would be particularly helpful for other articles.
421:
onto all rowing stub articles so we can keep track of them.
201:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
1141:
most of the newspapers had recorded a victory for Oxford
615:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
335:
330:
325:
320:
96:
77:
1325:
Featured lists that have not appeared on the main page
720:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
279:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
231:This article has not yet received a rating on the
1365:FL-Class University of Oxford (colleges) articles
524:, an attempt to improve articles relating to the
811:, a project which is currently considered to be
1231:Takes two sides to have an edit war, m'dear.
1198:looked at in a more favourable way than some
542:Knowledge:WikiProject University of Cambridge
364:Get article relisted to 'good article status'
8:
1360:Low-importance University of Oxford articles
545:Template:WikiProject University of Cambridge
193:, an attempt to structure and organize all
771:
666:
629:Knowledge:WikiProject University of Oxford
561:
489:
367:Put through another round of peer review,
308:
244:
158:
56:
15:
1370:WikiProject University of Oxford articles
1350:FL-Class University of Cambridge articles
853:researched by a real historian, is here:
632:Template:WikiProject University of Oxford
518:This article is within the scope of the
197:. If you wish to help, please visit the
773:
668:
563:
491:
246:
160:
1380:Low-importance London-related articles
1355:FL-Class University of Oxford articles
424:Expand stubs to at least start class.
130:
7:
807:This article is within the scope of
714:This article is within the scope of
609:This article is within the scope of
273:This article is within the scope of
187:This article is within the scope of
521:University of Cambridge WikiProject
463:(see the redlinks in the templates)
149:It is of interest to the following
47:. If you can update or improve it,
823:Knowledge:WikiProject River Thames
14:
826:Template:WikiProject River Thames
1375:FL-Class London-related articles
1335:Unknown-importance List articles
857:This is the one accepted in the
800:
775:
701:
691:
670:
612:WikiProject University of Oxford
596:
586:
565:
548:University of Cambridge articles
511:
493:
266:
248:
180:
162:
131:
19:
754:This article has been rated as
649:This article has been rated as
1:
728:and see a list of open tasks.
635:University of Oxford articles
623:and see a list of open tasks.
472:Document FISA database errors
287:and see a list of open tasks.
27:List of The Boat Race results
734:Knowledge:WikiProject London
373:Nominate for featured status
361:article to featured status.
293:Knowledge:WikiProject Rowing
737:Template:WikiProject London
604:University of Oxford portal
296:Template:WikiProject Rowing
211:Knowledge:WikiProject Lists
1396:
1340:WikiProject Lists articles
760:project's importance scale
655:project's importance scale
233:project's importance scale
214:Template:WikiProject Lists
33:, which means it has been
1290:when is a race not a race
1075:. Please do that before
795:
753:
686:
648:
581:
506:
307:
261:
230:
175:
157:
117:
59:
55:
1345:FL-Class rowing articles
1311:06:55, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
1077:continually edit warring
809:WikiProject River Thames
1274:19:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1256:19:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1241:19:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1227:19:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1212:19:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1189:18:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1171:18:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1156:18:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1103:18:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1089:18:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
1067:18:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
1047:14:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
1033:14:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
1016:13:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
1001:13:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
987:13:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
972:13:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
957:13:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
922:13:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
904:09:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
886:09:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
871:09:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
740:London-related articles
539:University of Cambridge
526:University of Cambridge
501:University of Cambridge
195:list pages on Knowledge
104:Featured list candidate
85:Featured list candidate
1330:FL-Class List articles
1127:On checking the source
461:World Rowing champions
346:
139:This article is rated
1137:Bell's Life in London
829:River Thames articles
345:
626:University of Oxford
617:University of Oxford
573:University of Oxford
380:Henley Royal Regatta
45:Knowledge community
39:as one of the best
848:The 1877 dead heat
717:WikiProject London
351:Featured Articles:
347:
276:WikiProject Rowing
145:content assessment
60:Article milestones
1262:original research
845:
844:
841:
840:
837:
836:
770:
769:
766:
765:
665:
664:
661:
660:
560:
559:
556:
555:
488:
487:
484:
483:
480:
479:
243:
242:
239:
238:
190:WikiProject Lists
125:
124:
113:
112:
1387:
1308:
1306:
1301:
1266:The Rambling Man
1248:The Rambling Man
1219:The Rambling Man
1181:The Rambling Man
1163:The Rambling Man
1095:The Rambling Man
1081:The Rambling Man
1059:The Rambling Man
1025:The Rambling Man
993:The Rambling Man
964:The Rambling Man
914:The Rambling Man
896:The Rambling Man
878:The Rambling Man
831:
830:
827:
824:
821:
804:
797:
796:
791:
779:
772:
742:
741:
738:
735:
732:
711:
706:
705:
695:
688:
687:
682:
674:
667:
637:
636:
633:
630:
627:
606:
601:
600:
599:
590:
583:
582:
577:
569:
562:
550:
549:
546:
543:
540:
515:
508:
507:
497:
490:
444:Article requests
419:
413:
309:
301:
300:
297:
294:
291:
270:
263:
262:
252:
245:
219:
218:
215:
212:
209:
184:
177:
176:
166:
159:
142:
136:
135:
127:
118:Current status:
99:
80:
57:
43:produced by the
23:
16:
1395:
1394:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1315:
1314:
1304:
1299:
1297:
1292:
1129:
850:
828:
825:
822:
819:
818:
785:
739:
736:
733:
730:
729:
707:
700:
680:
634:
631:
628:
625:
624:
602:
597:
595:
575:
547:
544:
541:
538:
537:
459:Write bios for
417:
411:
340:
299:rowing articles
298:
295:
292:
289:
288:
216:
213:
210:
207:
206:
143:on Knowledge's
140:
95:
76:
12:
11:
5:
1393:
1391:
1383:
1382:
1377:
1372:
1367:
1362:
1357:
1352:
1347:
1342:
1337:
1332:
1327:
1317:
1316:
1291:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1192:
1191:
1173:
1128:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1091:
1069:
940:
931:
925:
924:
906:
888:
849:
846:
843:
842:
839:
838:
835:
834:
832:
805:
793:
792:
780:
768:
767:
764:
763:
756:Low-importance
752:
746:
745:
743:
726:the discussion
713:
712:
696:
684:
683:
681:Low‑importance
675:
663:
662:
659:
658:
651:Low-importance
647:
641:
640:
638:
621:the discussion
608:
607:
591:
579:
578:
576:Low‑importance
570:
558:
557:
554:
553:
551:
516:
504:
503:
498:
486:
485:
482:
481:
478:
477:
476:
475:
467:
466:
465:
464:
454:
453:
440:
431:Image requests
426:
425:
422:
406:
405:
391:
390:
388:Steve Redgrave
376:
375:
374:
371:
365:
359:rowing (sport)
354:
353:
339:
338:
333:
328:
323:
317:
314:
313:
305:
304:
302:
285:the discussion
271:
259:
258:
253:
241:
240:
237:
236:
229:
223:
222:
220:
185:
173:
172:
167:
155:
154:
148:
137:
123:
122:
115:
114:
111:
110:
107:
100:
92:
91:
88:
81:
73:
72:
69:
66:
62:
61:
53:
52:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1392:
1381:
1378:
1376:
1373:
1371:
1368:
1366:
1363:
1361:
1358:
1356:
1353:
1351:
1348:
1346:
1343:
1341:
1338:
1336:
1333:
1331:
1328:
1326:
1323:
1322:
1320:
1313:
1312:
1309:
1307:
1302:
1289:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1238:
1234:
1233:Sam Blacketer
1230:
1229:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1204:Sam Blacketer
1201:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1148:Sam Blacketer
1144:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1126:
1104:
1100:
1096:
1092:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1055:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1039:Sam Blacketer
1036:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1008:Sam Blacketer
1004:
1003:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
989:
988:
984:
980:
979:Sam Blacketer
975:
974:
973:
969:
965:
960:
959:
958:
954:
950:
949:Sam Blacketer
946:
941:
937:
932:
929:
928:
927:
926:
923:
919:
915:
910:
909:Sam Blacketer
907:
905:
901:
897:
893:
889:
887:
883:
879:
875:
874:
873:
872:
868:
864:
863:Sam Blacketer
860:
856:
847:
833:
816:
815:
810:
806:
803:
799:
798:
794:
789:
784:
781:
778:
774:
761:
757:
751:
748:
747:
744:
727:
723:
719:
718:
710:
709:London portal
704:
699:
697:
694:
690:
689:
685:
679:
676:
673:
669:
656:
652:
646:
643:
642:
639:
622:
618:
614:
613:
605:
594:
592:
589:
585:
584:
580:
574:
571:
568:
564:
552:
535:
531:
527:
523:
522:
517:
514:
510:
509:
505:
502:
499:
496:
492:
474:
473:
469:
468:
462:
458:
457:
456:
455:
452:
451:
447:
445:
441:
439:
438:
434:
432:
428:
427:
423:
420:
416:
408:
407:
404:
403:
399:
397:
393:
392:
389:
385:
384:The Boat Race
381:
377:
372:
370:
366:
363:
362:
360:
356:
355:
352:
349:
348:
344:
337:
334:
332:
329:
327:
324:
322:
319:
318:
316:
315:
311:
310:
306:
303:
286:
282:
278:
277:
272:
269:
265:
264:
260:
257:
254:
251:
247:
234:
228:
225:
224:
221:
217:List articles
204:
200:
196:
192:
191:
186:
183:
179:
178:
174:
171:
168:
165:
161:
156:
152:
146:
138:
134:
129:
128:
121:
120:Featured list
116:
108:
106:
105:
101:
98:
97:July 12, 2015
94:
93:
89:
87:
86:
82:
79:
75:
74:
70:
67:
64:
63:
58:
54:
50:
46:
42:
38:
37:
32:
31:featured list
28:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1296:
1293:
1199:
1145:
1140:
1132:
1130:
1076:
944:
935:
859:main article
851:
820:River Thames
812:
783:River Thames
755:
715:
650:
610:
530:project page
519:
470:
448:
442:
435:
429:
410:
400:
394:
350:
274:
199:project page
188:
151:WikiProjects
119:
102:
90:Not promoted
83:
49:please do so
34:
26:
1300:Cottonshirt
1135:newspaper (
415:Rowing-stub
312:To-do list:
78:May 5, 2015
1319:Categories
534:discussion
450:see here..
437:see here..
402:see here..
378:Ditto for
357:Raise the
203:discussion
36:identified
1054:ignoring
814:inactive
788:inactive
369:see here
141:FL-class
109:Promoted
939:result.
758:on the
653:on the
326:history
68:Process
945:source
731:London
722:London
678:London
290:Rowing
281:rowing
256:Rowing
147:scale.
71:Result
1200:might
1177:WP:RS
1073:WP:RS
892:WP:RS
396:Stubs
336:purge
331:watch
208:Lists
170:Lists
41:lists
29:is a
1270:talk
1252:talk
1237:talk
1223:talk
1208:talk
1202:do.
1185:talk
1167:talk
1152:talk
1099:talk
1085:talk
1063:talk
1043:talk
1029:talk
1012:talk
997:talk
983:talk
968:talk
953:talk
918:talk
900:talk
882:talk
867:talk
409:Tag
321:edit
65:Date
1264:?
1133:one
750:Low
645:Low
227:???
1321::
1272:)
1254:)
1239:)
1225:)
1210:)
1187:)
1169:)
1154:)
1101:)
1087:)
1065:)
1045:)
1031:)
1014:)
999:)
985:)
970:)
955:)
936:is
920:)
902:)
884:)
869:)
861:.
418:}}
412:{{
386:,
382:,
1305:Ď„
1268:(
1250:(
1235:(
1221:(
1206:(
1183:(
1165:(
1150:(
1097:(
1083:(
1061:(
1041:(
1027:(
1010:(
995:(
981:(
966:(
951:(
916:(
898:(
880:(
865:(
817:.
790:)
786:(
762:.
657:.
536:.
446::
433::
398::
235:.
205:.
153::
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
