User talk:B. Fairbairn

October 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Jack Miller (motorcyclist), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 16:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Not original research. Data straight from Races by year. Shows Jack's form for each Grand Prix e.g. he does well in France, poorly in Italy and is improving over time in San Marino.
B. Fairbairn (talk) 11:29, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Results by Grand Prix tables

Could you please stop adding those? Do we really need them? Can't readers get that information by themselves by reading and scrolling through the "Races by year" table? It's as if you're making the readers illiterate by spoon-feeding them every possible information, which they could read on their own. Also, there's a current discussion at Talk:Jack Miller (motorcyclist), but you keep on adding these tables without even participating there. It's getting disruptive already. There are many issues with those tables that you add.

• WP:OR: "The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist." You said it yourself: you made the table straight from the "races by year" table. No references provided. If you could provide one, then we could remove original research as one of the issues.
• WP:FANCRUFT: "Fancruft is a term sometimes used on Wikipedia to imply that a selection of content is important only to a small population of enthusiastic fans of the subject in question." I could argue that what's important to the average reader is only the "races by year" table, because that includes the championship points and standings in a year, and basically race results per year. There's a reason why Formula 1 don't have these "races by grand prix" tables you know? And here you are, adding those tables to MotoGP articles.
• WP:TRIVIA: Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information. If we accept adding those tables, then in the future, other editors might add "Results by circuit" or "Grands Prix by race finishing position". It would never stop. Let's just stick with the most important info, and that is list every Grand Prix result per year, because that's how readers will intuitively find results, year by year, not Grand Prix by Grand Prix.

I suggest that you please communicate and discuss first before re-adding those tables (if there is a consensus to add them though). Thanks. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 16:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you should leave the new tables alone and eventually someone else will either agree with you or think it's a cracking idea and apply the tables to all MotoGP riders.
Stop taking a new idea as a personal attack.

The wisest action to take (if your ego allows) is to leave the tables as is... for now. Eventually - after maybe a few weeks, maybe a couple of months - I'll get bored and you can go through and delete the tables that offend you with gusto :-) B. Fairbairn (talk) 11:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)