Talk:Grand Prix motorcycle racing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Motorcycle racing
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorcycle racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of motorcycle 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.
 
WikiProject Motorsport (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Requested move[edit]

  • Grand Prix motorcycle racing → ? —(Discuss)— This article is about the world championship. the FIM calls it Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix I think that's a good title. Grand Prix motorcycle racing is much more than the world championship, a lot of national series that have Grand Prix motorcycle racing classes (usually 125GP) —Chris Ssk talk 10:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Is there a reason why the article wasn't simply called MotoGP? Roguegeek (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
MotoGP is only one of the 3 classes of the Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix. there is also 125cc and 250cc and the article is about all 3. Though the only info on the 125cc and 250cc classes is in the infobox. Chris Ssk talk 01:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Are there good, reliable sources that state "Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix" is some kind of official name? Roguegeek (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I did some further investigating and this is what I found. The name of the championship is called MotoGP. MotoGP consists of three different grand prix catagories; MotoGP, 250, and 125. The way MotoGP officially breaks this down can be found directly on the official site. To me, that's about the best resource you can find out there on a very non-subjective subject. I would suggest changing the name of this article to MotoGP. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 07:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I would like to point out that the categories are now MotoGP, Moto2 and Moto3. What makes this really annoying is that MotoGP is both a class name and the series name. This should be taken into account whenever (re)structuring articles, adding redirects, etc. Someone looking for Moto2 or Moto3 information won't be happy being redirected to a MotoGP series page that has all sorts of MotoGP class specific information with no links to the class they're looking for and where the season information points to MotoGP class seasons with the same problem from which there may or may not be links to the class they're looking for. Pages should be either class or series. Even if they're both, the smaller classes should be prominently displayed and not forgotten or tucked in there as an afterthought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.19.110 (talk) 11:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
The FIM, the governing body of motorcycle racing calls the championship Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix. I think the most reliable source is the championship's rule book (classes are listed in page 13 of the rule book (17 of the pdf)) . Also other press releases about GP [1] (I can't get my search results to show in the link but if you select GP as Subject and search, all the press releases will have "FIM Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix" as a subject). Chris Ssk talk 11:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Chris, I understand that the official FIM documentation says one thing, but universal usage among teams, riders, fans and the official site itself prominently go with "MotoGP". Absolutely no one searching for information about MotoGP is going to Google "Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix". I think this is a case where universal usage trumps an obscure reference, and anyone looking for info about 125 and 250 racing will know to look in MotoGP because those classes are subsets of the whole series, universally known as MotoGP. I realize the number of Google hits is not a final arbiter, but "RRWCGP" gets 727 hits to MotoGP's 13,900,000, about a 20,000-to-1 ratio. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I don't think it should have been changed from Grand Prix motorcycle racing. Being a "generic" name, it encompassed the old racing series' with the new. Season reviews used to be called 1993 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season. You can't say 1993 MotoGP season because it wasn't called MotoGP back then. Now we'll have to differentiate season article syntax depending on what year it was. Not ideal in my opinion. ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Wadems, good point. Ultimately, I'd vote in order of preference to: 1) Change this article title to "MotoGP", and go back and change the relevant seasons (I'm pretty sure 2000 was when the use of "MotoGP" started by Dorna); 2) Change the title back to "Grand Prix motorcycle racing".
Chris, I like that you're going by official documentation, but Dorna's role as owner of commercial rights to the series might also give them a semi-official role in giving the series its public name. The prominent "MotoGP" logo in the article is testament to its recognition. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not the one that made the move I put the request up and it went unopposed so someone else made the move. I didn't request a move to Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix, I only suggested it as a possible title. MotoGP only came to be in the 2000s before that the championship was more commonly known as WGP and because Grand Prix motorcycle racing is more than the world championship. I had the intention of creating a separate Grand Prix motorcycle racing article about the racing discipline. Like there is an article about Motorcycle speedway and another about the Speedway World Championship, Superbike racing and Superbike World Championship, Enduro and World Enduro Championship
Also note that typing MotoGP either in Wikipedia's search or Google, Yahoo!, etc. finds the MotoGP redirect and automatically links to this page so I don't think it makes the page harder to find.Chris Ssk talk 21:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
My experience with looking at the Google results was initially missing the Wikipedia link to the page because it had an unfamiliar name. Especially now that the new official site has been updated and just about ruined, the Wikipedia MotoGP pages are going to be that much more popular.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

My vote is to, at the very least, change it back to Grand Prix motorcycle racing. Looks like enough editors here think it's a decent move. Ultimately, I'd like to see it simply called MotoGP because that's the name everyone knows it as and that's the name people are going to search under when requesting this specific article. So, change it back? Roguegeek (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Seconded, change it back to Grand Prix motorcycle racing, no matter what the FIM calls it, especially in case sponsors are added, as in Bridgestone Presents The Champ Car World Series Powered By Ford.-- Matthead  Discuß   23:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Since we can't move on our own, I just sent in the request to have it moved by an administrator. Roguegeek (talk) 23:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
What about renaming it to Motorcycle Grand Prix? Chris Ssk talk 23:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
If we're going to go to the trouble to rename, I vote going with "MotoGP." It should have been done years ago, really.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The trouble(s) I have with "MotoGP" are (1) there could be confusion between the MotoGP series and the specific class which used to be the 500s until it was changed in 2003. (2) Even if that confusion is overcome, a reader could think it is only about the series since 2003, and not all the way back to the old racing from the 1940s/'50s. I would be less opposed if the article was split; MotoGP for the modern series, Grand Prix motorcycle racing for the historical stuff.
The page should be moved though. The current title is definitely not what most people know the name as (it gets less than 700 hits in Google, compared with 13,000 for "Grand Prix motorcycle racing" and 1.1m for "MotoGP"). We do not use the "official" name, we use the common name. Previous move request was a bad one for an admin to have moved, especially since I cannot find the old discussion. It should have been marked as incomplete/contested. Welly bump fandango (talk) 21:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Rename[edit]

Now that the can of worms is open, let's use this section to vote on: 1) Keeping the name Grand Prix motorcycle racing, or 2) Changing to MotoGP. Let's also give the voting a decent amount of time, and not do anything until a few weeks have passed.

Grand Prix motorcycle racing

  • I feel it should be Grand Prix motorcycle racing; it's more generic since these articles cover GP racing from 1949 and not just the MotoGP era. ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 15:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with your rationale for this and would be fine with this article title as well. Roguegeek (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • As Wadems says, the generic name is better. It may be MotoGP now, but was not always named as such and so an article encompassing the history of the sport should be named accordingly. Cpl Syx (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

MotoGP

  • MotoGP is the proper name if you ask me as well. Roguegeek (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • MotoGP is the official name for the sport. --Amedeo Felix (talk) 13:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix

  • I like Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix as that is the proper name of the championships. Chris Ssk talk 13:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • This is all very useful information, but I'd like to help clarify the name issue with some verifiable facts. Having been involved in motorcycle racing since the early 1960's, both flat-track and road racing, I have fairly decent credentials on the subject.

First of all, the term MotoGP is specific to the Dorna-controlled Grand Prix motorcycle road-racing championships. The name was invented and copyrighted by Dorna. As others have mentioned, MotoGP does not, and can not, legally apply to any other motorcycle road-racing events, either current or historic.

The term Gran(d) Prix or GP, when applied to motorcycle racing, defines motorcycles specifically designed for road-racing, including production motorcycles that have been extensively modified for road-racing, far beyond what would be allowed in production class motorcycle road-racing. A road-racing motorcycle will therefore generally fall under one of two categories; ... Grand Prix classes, or Production classes.

For example, a Norton Manx, while mass-produced, was always considered to be a Grand Prix racer, even though some were later modified by owners to be street legal, since the original intent by the manufacturer was to produce a road-race only bike.

On the other hand, a Norton Commando, also mass-produced, but as a street-bike, could either race in a Production Class, with relatively minor, class-rule-allowed modification, or by being heavily modified with few restrictions, race as a GP bike in that class.

In a nutshell, while Production (non-GP) class road-racing rules attempt to keep the motorcycle close to as produced by the factory specifications, Gran Prix rules are much more open, basically restricting engine type and displacement, overall weight and size, and safety.

In summary, Gran Prix motorcycles covers any and all full-race motorcycle road racing over the years. MotoGP only covers the Gran Prix events sanctioned by Dorna. And road-racing motorcycles covers all of that, plus the non-GP Production classes. - Chuck Lantz 172.11.57.255 (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Tyre v tire[edit]

Now, usually I work out these sorts of arguments based on the location of the subject of the article (UK article, UK spelling etc). Should we have a vote on which spelling we should have, because at the moment the article has both and looks sloppy. Personally, being British I would go for tyre, but I'm not fussed. What we do need is consistency. Ged UK (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I usually like to let Google help us out in these situations to determine which is the more common/popular term.
Both are fine, but in this case I would go with "tire" for consistency sake. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I would vote tire being AmeriCanadian but I think tyre looks cooler. ;-p ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 20:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
While I'm more comfortable looking at "tire", the MOS mentions that "In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic," so I vote for tyre.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 16:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
As per the guidelines, if either is acceptable it should be the case that the first major use is made the standard for the remainder of the article's lifetime, and so I believe it should be tyre. Cpl Syx (talk) 20:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Consistency seems to be something we all agree on. I'm going to make the initial change right now to "tire" for consistency sake, but we can make another change later based on the outcome of this discussion. Roguegeek (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Academically I prefer British English to US English, and so "tyre" please. --Amedeo Felix (talk) 13:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Since MotoGP is predominantly a European sport, I'd happy w tyre... and I'm American. When American road racers (am I showing my age?) graduate to the big time, they go to Europe. DEddy (talk) 15:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

125cc, 250cc or 125 cc, 250 cc[edit]

How should the GP classes be written? according to WP:MOS, values and unit symbols are spaced but these are not just that, they are also names of the classes, the subject did come up in the past but I dont think consensus was ever reached Chris Ssk talk 22:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter to me. I only changed it due to WP:MOS, but I definitely see your side of it. You're claiming "250cc" to be a proper noun. I think if that's the case, it should be "250cc". Roguegeek (talk) 23:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I stand by my original comments: no space. Plus, using the trusty Google method, "500cc" gets 2.84m hits and "500 cc" gets 1.12m hits. Not to mention when you search for "500 cc", the search actually asks you: "Did you mean: 500cc." ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I vote no space.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm good with no spaces as well, but I want to clear up something for Wadems. Google method is good to identify popularity of a term. I'm saying it's good to make this change here because "250cc" is a proper noun as per the MotoGP organization. If it wasn't, there would be no doubt about what to do here as the policy and style guides state it should be shown as "250 cc". Roguegeek (talk) 18:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I was being facetious about Google. Not that I care what the MOS says either. It looks better with no space, regardless. Even if I was referring to volume, I'd still say 50cc because I'm a rebel, man! ;-p ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 18:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
No space please! Ged UK (talk) 19:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
No space is how it is defined by the governing body, as they are not just engine capacities but also the titles of the racing class. According to the MoS there should be a space, but these are in fact proper nouns as used by MotoGP, as Roguegeek said above. As such, no space is what should be used here. Cpl Syx (talk) 13:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Chronology[edit]

I added a selected chronology of milestones in the sport, but I hope that rider achievements are kept out of it, because those are so well covered already in individual rider pages, and they don't represent changes in the sport itself. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps if it was called 'Technological Chronology' that would help? Ged UK (talk) 07:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes maybe, but I think it'd be useful to include regulation changes and events like deaths also. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree, but what would be very good is if anyone can add some references to the items listed as well. Then if it starts looking too big for this page we will be able to move it to a page by itself without it being deleted.Mighty Antar (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely. I hope the list gets expanded by other contributors. I just wanted to get it rolling but not have it swamped by Agostini's/Doohan's/Rossi's/etc. records. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

What are opinions about adding future events to the chronology (eg: Michelin dropping out in '09). While there is official confirmation, would such items require the future motor sport tag? {{future motor sport}} Wouldn't this kind of thing be better off in the page for that future season, rather than the main article? --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the wording of the future tag is pretty clear in it's aim; it's about warning people that the article may change rapidly as an event progresses. There's no rapid changes, Michelin have dropped out, and they aren't suddenly going to come back in again. I've absolutely no problem with future events so long as they're sourced. --Ged UK (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
How about Kawasaki dropping out?--Amedeo Felix (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, i think so; they're a major manufacturer after all. --Ged UK (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh another thing... It's also rather lame that "chronology" starts in 1973! Motorcycle Grand Prix dates more or less as far back as Automobile Grand Prix - i.e. near enough the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century, and there are note worthy items aplenty prior to 1973. How about when MV Agusta started racing or noting their first and last race and championship wins? How about the first 2 stroke bike racing? How about the first Japanese entrant company? How about the last Isle of Man TT to be part of the World Championship? Streamlined bikes? Running starts? I will try to dig up years for things, but if anyone else already happens to know... --Amedeo Felix (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
The best would be to find good and complete sources, and write a separate "History of the world championship" article or something similar! Asendoh (talk) 23:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
ONLY if the "Chronology" section were then to be deleted. If that section were to stay then I still say it should cover the entire history and not start at some random pooint.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 09:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
That's easily done though, just needs a link-through to a History of Motorcycle Racing or whatever it's called. I think it's a great idea. I would volunteer to do it, but i have no books or references to start from, and a long to-do list as it is! --Ged UK (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Quite so. I may do it at some point if need be, but mainly I wated to raise the point in case someone reading this already has the necessary information to hand.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 11:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with AmedeoFelix. I'm also very disappointed that this article only includes the modern era of Grand Prix motorcycle racing, totally ignoring what was the Golden Age of the sport, when Norton, Gilera, MV Agusta and others made it the dominant motorsport in the world, eclipsing even four-wheeled racing in popularity. I hope someone with the time and knowledge will add to this topic. 67.101.39.124 (talk) 16:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC) Chuck Lantz: AFM 144, AMA 49Y & 48C

Hey, well, this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, you could have a go! --GedUK  17:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I miss references and sources to the chronology-section...--Mats33 (talk) 21:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Sponsors[edit]

User Abdul Qayyum Ahmad has recently added a list of MotoGP sponsors. Is this a section we really want? I think not, as it's just a list of companies and it's not a really information about the World Championship and its history. Asendoh (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, I don't think that is needed, its just a list of sponsors that doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than publicity of the sponsors involved. Chris Ssk talk 15:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I did wonder about this when i saw it appear. I can see the logic in having it there, but apart from the logistical difficulty of keeping it up to date, I'm not sure it adds anything. --GedUK  19:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I took it out. Asendoh (talk) 11:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Challenges for the designer section[edit]

The content in this section is very speculative and unlikely to ever be sourced adequately. Would removing it altogether harm the article much? I think it's worse to have weak information than none.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It is littered with fact tags and does feel rather like a personal essay. I don't think any of it is particularly wrong, but like you said, it may well be difficult to source. I'd have no issue with it coming out. GedUK  09:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Power:weight ratio[edit]

Removed statement saying MotoGP had better power-to-weight ratio than F1. MotoGP bikes are about 330 lbs (excluding rider). Hp is about 220. With a 140 lb rider, hp/weight ratio is 330+140/220, or 2.1 lb per hp. By contrast an F1 car weighs 1,334 lb (including driver and fluids). Hp is about 800. Thus F1 hp/weight ratio is 1334/800 or 1.66 lb per hp. Joema (talk) 14:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Points scoring system in 1992[edit]

Almost all of the articles relating to motorcycle Grand Prix racing of the period, such as rider profiles and race reports, list the current points system of 25-20-16-13-11 (etc.) for 1992, and give that year as the date it began. The actual system in 1992 was 20-15-12-10-8-6-4-3-2-1, and the current system began in 1993. There are a lot of articles that need tidying/fixing because of this, but I have started with the main points system article. Volunteers welcome? 91.107.65.171 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a fairly simple job with AWB. Unfortunately, as I've now dumped windows, I don't have AWB anymore. If no-one else is up for it, i'll try and get it done over the christmas break. GedUK  17:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

It seems that the change requested above has not gone through - can anything be done in one action? 137.108.145.10 (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Manufacturers, riders & teams 2010[edit]

At this moment, with various races passed, is strange that the manufacturers, riders and teams who are present in 2010 weren't actualized in the right table on main page - in fact, 250 seems alive as wasn't changed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.91.67.17 (talk) 09:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Criticism[edit]

MotoGP is a shadow of itself without the 500cc 2 strokes. Those took "real" men to ride. Lawson, Rainey, Shenne, Doohan, Schwantz, Mamola, Haslam et. al. ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.192.107.142 (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Kalex?[edit]

Kalex was missing from the list of Moto2 constructors. How is that? The Kalex bike won the Moto2 world championship in 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.22.152.176 (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Factory vs Satellite Teams[edit]

Should there be a section on "factory" vs. "satellite" teams? (Mainly the difference between them) The-Bus (talk) 12:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)