Talk:Cheveley Park Stud

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Horse racing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horse racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Horse racing 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.Horse racingWikipedia:WikiProject Horse racingTemplate:WikiProject Horse racingHorse racing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Contested deletion[edit]

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --Horseprev (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a major British horse racing and breeding operation. It has won hundreds of races worldwide.

Group 1 winners[edit]

I'm vacillating between listing these alphabetically and chronologically, and can see arguments both ways. Does anyone else have an opinion? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd list them chronologically to emphasise the history of the place. That seems more natural to me, somehow. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 22:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. That's the conclusion I had come to after sleeping on it. Phil Bridger (talk) 06:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]