User talk:Prisonermonkeys/Archive5

For later

Attention any administrator who happens to be reading this section: I cannot locate my sandbox, so I am posting this here for a time when my block is lifted. This is NOT an attempt to influence the direction of any article, so if anybody happens to see this and add it yo that article, then they do so of their own volition, and I am not responsible for it.

The car was updated to include a brand-new gearbox and revised hydraulic system, a larger rear wing to generate more downforce, and substantial weight reduction, with over seventy-five percent of the car having been developed during the off-season. Ogier and Latvala contested the entire season with the updated Polo, while Mikkelsen started the season with a car built to 2014 specifications before switching to the 2015 build ahead of the Rally of Portugal.

Would you like me to add this to your sandbox? Tvx1 (talk) 21:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Tvx1, thank you, but it's probably better here for now.

Can you do me a favour? Given that I have just had the block extended again, this time on the assumption that I must be guilty of something and that I will be guilty in the future because I was guilty of an unrelated issue in the past, I suspect that I will be getting an indefinite block soon, unless the reviewing admin can see that the admin who extended the block went too far. If that happens, can you please keep an eye on Volkswagen Polo R WRC? I would really like to see it become a featured article one day, but if I get an indefinite block, I won't be around to keep working on it. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:05, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I would love to, but I'm afraid I have to decline your request. The simple reason is that Rally is not one my main fields of editting interests. Therefore it would be unwise to commit to something I cannot guarantee I can maintain my commitment for. I'm sure there are other editors that are interested in Rally and the WRC and are willing to commit to your request. Tvx1 (talk) 01:15, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it until your block expires, but if you should get indefblocked, I'll have to hand it over to someone else. Tvx1 (talk) 22:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Number changes

@Tvx1, @GyaroMaguus - there have been a few recent changes to the 2015 season page describing which drivers (Vettel and Hamilton) will change their numbers and why. Is that really necessary? It seems like an excessive level of detail to me. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

This is discussed at length in the sporting regulation section of last season's article, as well as reliably sourced in the table. So, I noted this in the revision summary and removed the extra content. Twirlypen (talk) 00:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

@Twirlypen - I can understand why the editor made the change; I just think it was too much detail. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I understand too. Maybe if it can be reworded better, it can be reflected. But it was basically explaining a 2014 sporting change in the 2015 article. Twirlypen (talk) 00:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Its placement didn't seem right either. Plus, would we then have to include it in every subsequent season article? "Last season's defending champion Paul Olsen will return to #72, while the season champion Dennis Greenberg will opt to use #1, which is reserved for the champion."

Like I said, it seems a bit much since numbers and sources are included in the drivers table, but I wouldn't oppose a written statement if it can be worded appropriately. Twirlypen (talk) 00:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Maybe a footnote next to the driver name, but it's ultimately an inconsequential detail. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I had my doubts as well about the way, and especially the placement by which, this was included in the article. I didn't remove it because if have no problem with this information being presented at all in the article and I hadn't made my mind up yet how to include this. There is one interesting point this made me aware of: we put the number 44 for Hamilton, but there is no explanation or means of verification why in the article. So I wouldn't have a problem with including this in the article someway as long as it isn't give to much attention.

By the way, Prisonermonkeys, I don't know what went wrong but your ping didn't come through. I didn't receive any notification. Tvx1 (talk) 04:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I could be completely wrong on this, but I don't think he can ping users while blocked. The only reason I can think of that I saw my ping was because I posted here first. Twirlypen (talk) 04:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

My 6,933 byte message

I asked for a reply (or a few) to the message I wrote that was quite long, because honestly, I wanted clarification that you had taken my words on board. I'm trying to help you not get blocked again and so far you appeared to have ignored my help. —Gyaro–Maguus— 04:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. I will get around to it, I promise. I just saw that the page was 173,000kB, which was causing slow-down problems. It seems that the critical mass issue that affects individual sections can also affect entire articles, if they're big enough. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 04:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

PM, I'm not one to tell someone how to do things, but when I'm not at work, I too edit almost exclusively by mobile. My device is nearly 2 years old (Samsung galaxy s4), and I very rarely have had my browser crash, by that I mean it may have happened once or twice while editing and likely had nothing to do with the text. I'm not saying that's not the case for you, but if you can't upgrade, try clearing your device's cache and/or the browser's saved data - mind you that the latter will restore the browser application to default, and saved passwords and the like will be lost. Twirlypen (talk) 05:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Tried it. Repeatedly. Mine's an old HTC OneXL. My contract expires in a few months, at which case I'm going to upgrade. Until then, I make do. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, I was hoping that those were the reasons. —Gyaro–Maguus— 12:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Also, GyaroMaguus, it might be a couple of days before I get around to it. I'm moving apartments over the next few days, so I figure that now might be a good time to take a bit of a break from Wikipedia. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

However long you need. It the final week of term for me for most of my responses will either be slow or written when drunk (like this one, though you can't tell). —Gyaro–Maguus— 02:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Forza Rossa

Hey Tvx1 or Twirlypen (or anyone else who might be reading this), do you mind taking a look at the 2016 season article? Someone just added Forza Rossa into the table, and I am not convinced that it should be there. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 21:34, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Done. The user had copied the Haas entry and altered the first two columns, keeping Haas' references, neither of which mention Forza Rossa. Since, when you think about, Forza Rossa neither were ever fully confirmed or have announced a start year, I don't think we can include them. —Gyaro–Maguus— 22:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

GyaroMaguus - I started an AfD on the Forza Rossa article the other day. I think the page was created prematurely; I cannot find any evidence that the team exists beyond paper. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I had looked at that, but I didn't say anything, because I'm not 100% convinced that they either fail or pass the notability guidelines. —Gyaro–Maguus— 22:14, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Your ping didn't work again. Tvx1 (talk) 23:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Tvx1, I wasn't pinged either. Like I said, unless you previously post in a discussion, I don't think PM can ping users while blocked. Twirlypen (talk) 23:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

When he pinged me in this discussion, I received the notification. I think for this it will just be easier for us to check our watchlists often. —Gyaro–Maguus— 00:31, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe that's because you had previously posted in this discussion. It was the same for me in a previous discussion here. I posted when you and Tvx1 were pinged. PM then pinged me and I received it. Regardless, if none of us can be initially pinged in a new discussion, it's best to keep an eye on our watch lists as you said. Twirlypen (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I have had a few issues with pinging in the past myself. I just figured it was another mobile issue, but didn't think much of it. Anyway, GyaroMaguus, Twirlypen and Tvx1, I'll keep pinging the three of you as need be, just it case it's not always working.

On that note, Template:Formula One teams needs to be updated. "Manor-TBA" should read "Manor-Ferrari", and Felipe Nasr is #12. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 05:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Done. Also, I uppercased "One" because lowercase was redlinked. Twirlypen (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Race map

Why did you remove my sentence regarding the impending removal of the German Grand Prix, which quotes the Formula One CEO, on the grounds of CRYSTAL while simultaneously ignoring the countless sources indicating its inclusion on the calendar is in significant jeopardy by including it on a map? Twirlypen (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Especially going so far as to indicate the Nurburgring will host it...? For the record, noting that the Formula One CEO states in a published quote that the event will be dropped if it's not resolved by a certain date is in fact NOT crystal. Twirlypen (talk) 20:24, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I removed it because it contains no new information. Of course there is a deadline - the race has a date, even if it doesn't have a venue. It's like the elaborate paragraph on everything Manor did to save their team, which ultimately told nothing new except "we're trying to save the team". Prisonermonkeys (talk) 02:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 14 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2015 Australian Grand Prix page, your edit caused an empty citation error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Tables

I know tables, specifically on mobile browsers, has been a thing lately, but I have never really paid attention. I've been viewing Wiki on my cellphone (using Android Chrome), although doing very little editing, but I have yet to have a problem with tables in such a way that I'd recommend changing them. Obviously I know that some table cells get bumped onto two lines because of browser resolution, but it's never been anything that has bothered me.

However specifically on the 2015 FIA World Endurance Championship season alterations you made, I have been looking back at the old Wikitable format and I realize that, for the bulk of the charts (schedule, LMP2, LMGTE Pro, and LMGTE Am), my mobile browser does not have any problem fitting these tables. The only one that gets out of wack is LMP1 because of the location of the secondary key chart. But the alterations you've made now make the chart out of whack on my desktop browser, Firefox. The Nissan engine is on two lines, and the table looks horrible with a light gray outer border but black cell borders. The Wikitable version was uniform and easier to read. I also notice that there is almost no difference in overall width of the two LMP1 tables, and only the key has been drastically shrunk.

My main concern though is usability in terms of editing. There is a lot of additional parameters here, and a ton of cobbled together blank space and no wraps to try and get things to fit your browser, but these tables are not finite and there will definitely be the possibility of drivers with longer names appearing, and I quite frankly do not know how to edit these tables to fix your mobile browser. And mind you, I will have roughly 14 tables to deal with once the season starts, not the 3 that F1 has, so there are plenty of tables yet to appear that will be of varying lengths. I am not a coder and these tables need to be usable for me and the few who participate in the article to be able to edit.

Would any of this be improved by moving the location of the key? The³5₉ (Talk) 07:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The359 — the biggest problem with reformatting tables is that they all appear differently on various browsers. To be honest, we haven't solved the problem 100% just yet, and I have my doubts as to whether or not we ever will. Even now, the key is a problem that I have not run into before; it's used on Formula 1 season articles, but I don't touch the matrices since markup is time-consuming on a desktop PC, much less a mobile.

There is no uniform way of formatting them, so at this point, perhaps the best way forward is to keep them in a format that suits the regular editors of a page first. I do try and get involved when I remember to, but that's not always the case. Since you edit that article the most frequently, it might be better if I follow your lead here. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I know that this mobile compatability has been spearheaded by you, so I don't want to simply nix it because I know you're limited on your access to Wikipedia. That's simply why I was curious as to how you're seeing the article from your mobile browser as, as I mentioned before, I don't have spacing issues on any of the tables except the LMP1/Key problem. Hence my suggestion, if I moved the key to the top of the tables, would you still have a spacing issue with the article in general? I realize that from my desktop I have tons of empty space to fill, which is why I put the key where it is now, but it's easily rearranged. The³5₉ (Talk) 23:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The359 — the spacing issue isn't really a problem. I have to scroll across to see the full width of 95% of tables on Wikipedia. The markup I added to the very top of the tables is simply there to make the cell borders clearer, and the nowraps and nbsps are to stop the cell contents overlapping the cell borders. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

On taking a second look on my phone's Chrome browser, it seems that the browser does adjust the width of the window to fit the widest table (LMP1/Key), but it does not adjust the text accordingly. The prose of the article, and in fact the very right hand border of Wikipedia itself fits within 90% of the screen, but the table expands out into the remaining empty 10%. Since I know the formatting worked before on my phone, I am going to revert the tables per your suggestion until a better solution can be found. The³5₉ (Talk) 01:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

2014 Russian Grand Prix

I see you've gone and delete the RGP attendance figures again. I find that fairly poor faith behavior after what went on before. --Falcadore (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Falcadore — I think that a sufficient time period has passed to warrant reconsidering it. The attendance figures that were given were vague, and there has been no attempt since that dispute to supply an actual figure for the event. The attendance figures are applied inconsistently across race reports, WikiProject does not even have a clear definition of what that field should include; sometime the figure given is for the race itself, sometimes it is cumulative across the three days of a Grand Prix, sometimes it is based on ticket sales while other times it is the number of people who pass through the gates (a point I was on my way to raising at the WikiProject when I got the notification of your message). Seeing as how I would like to nominate that article for GA—and maybe even FA—status, I feel that the figure and the reference given are insufficient for what that field is trying to do to the point where it will compromise the nomination. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:29, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm aware of your reasons, I just remember what happenned before and when Haken Arizona notices the reversion wars will begin again and we'll have the same debate again to the same conclusion. --Falcadore (talk) 03:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Dential_and_User:Prisonermonkeys_reported_by_User:Tvx1_.28Result:.29 regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.Tvx1 15:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of three months for edit warring, as you did at 2014 Russian Grand Prix. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Bbb23 (talk) 23:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

• Your accusations of sock puppetry at WP:AN3 are unsupported by any evidence. I see a fairly clear behavioral relationship between User:Darrandarra and User:Tvx11, but I see no behavioral relationship to User:Dential. I have no opinion as to whether Dential is indeed a sock puppet of whatever account, but that misses the point. You are using the sock puppetry allegations as a justification for your reverts when your reverts have no policy justification. This is not only not the first time you've been blocked for edit-warring, it is also a repeat of previous reverts about estimated attendance issues.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Bbb23 — I am not making up the allegation about Dential, and I would thank you for recognising as much. As I said at 3RR, his very first edit caught my attention, as it included the edit summary "to keep the peace!" within twelve hours of my edit being made in an article that had been largely inactive for months. That caught my attention, because it suggested that he is familiar with both the WikiProject and the people involved, and that was the common denominator between Tvx11 and Darrandarra. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

For Falcadore

@Falcadore — Thanks for the heads-up. It's obviously not me, but what I find troubling is that this is the second time in as many months that someone has created an imitation account for an F1 editor; Tvx1 had an evil twin running around not too long ago. Whoever this person is, they're clearly a lurker, since they know us and know the events on the WikiProject. Which is actually pretty creepy. But if they've imitated Tvx1 and now they're impersonating me, I would keep an eye out for any others. I'm sure they'll show themselves pretty quickly. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm just going to tag Liz here to say thank you for taking care of this issue. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, @Liz, this edit makes it pretty clear that Darrandarra is a sock of the same account. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 12:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Nor problem, Prisonermonkeys, I was just responding to a complaint on a noticeboard. Since these fake accounts are quickly blocked, I'm not sure whether a sock investigation will be launched. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 12:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

@Liz — thank you anyway. This is not the first time that this has happened; there was another account impersonating Tvx1 a few weeks ago. Whoever it is, it's clear that they are familiar with the WikiProject as they refer to events from months ago. The Prisonernonkeys account was made a month ago, and the editor's comments on the 2015 season talk page and in the article reference discussions from around the same time. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 12:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

RA615H

Technical insight: Honda's radical Formula 1 engine for McLaren

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/118626

Craig Scarborough, 21 April.

Tables

Hey, Tvx1, just so you know, someone is going around deleting the new table format. I noticed it at McLaren MP4-30, among others. It's making Wikipedia very difficult to read on mobile browsers. I can't fix it for obvious reasons. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm tempted to leave it like that for the moment. I'd prefer to make the wikitable style (recommended by MOS:TABLE) uniform on desktop and on mobile, rather than making this local fixes. I'm going to propose this on the relevant location. Tvx1 19:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

And I have. Tvx1 19:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I guess your block must have been expired by now, so just to keep you up to date, the problems with the tables you have been reporting are currently being discussed here and here. Tvx1 00:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Volkswagen Polo R WRC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Škoda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Teams and drivers

I agree wholeheartedly with your stance that only drivers who have taken part should be listed in that table and should only be included once they start to do so. This implicates as well that we should not anymore include a TBA-TBA-TBA replacement driver like was done for Marussia after Bianchi's accident last season. Tvx1 00:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Tvx1 — I think that the problem is this insane obsession with the idea that because the FIA says it, we have to include it. It's like the table saga when someone suggested that we were obligated to perfectly recreate the entry list published by the FIA, even though there was no apparent organisation to it except the order in which the teams submitted their entries. And now we have wound up in a situation where the article is hinging on a document published before the event took place that said Manor would compete, when in reality they never did, and there are plenty of sources to support it which are apparently completely invalid because they contradict an "official" document.

I'm willing to accept that, in cases like this and Bianchi and the Chilton-Rossi scenario at Spa last year, there is no real historical precedent that we can refer to in order to resolve the problem and that we are establishing case history so that we know what to do if it happens again in future. But the obsession with "the FIA is official, end of story" has to end. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 08:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

It's only Bretonbanquet really. There are argument is even pretty hypocritical if you ask me. Every time there is a disagreement over a result between Forix and F1.com&FIA, they argue that is not right to stick with the official sources just because they're official and now they argue we must obey the entry list because it is official. This is just the German flag argument all over and over again where Breton kept dragging it on and on despite EIghtball being the one creating all the drama. I'm mean we even implemented compromises and it's still not enough for Bretonbanquet. Tvx1 16:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

What amused me the most about this little exchange is how Tvx1 accuses anyone of dragging things out. Incidentally, the article isn't hingeing on anything, because you guys have just carried on your own merry way, as usual. The inconsistencies in your arguments here are just as stark as they are on the discussion page. Incidentally, being wrong and/or misleading will never be enough for me, FYI. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Gf edit - 2015 Formula One season

PM, Bretonbanquet has very loudly voiced displeasure over a footnote in the table at the top of the article clarifying a clearly confusing situation being placed all the way at the bottom of the page. As far as what issues you're saying it causes, the only thing I can see is that it causes the footnotes in the table to be not displayed at the bottom. All other footnotes in the article beyond the first "{{reflist|group=N}}" still show up in the last tag at the bottom of the page. That is hardly an wiki-wide issue, and more of a personal preference. Twirlypen (talk) 06:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

No, the issue I have is the way you click on the footnote with the results matrices—the one explaining the count-back system—and the browser doesn't know which section to show. Kind of like when you have two sub-sections with the sane name on one page. It might be a by-product of the recent software updates. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 06:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited World RX of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Per-Gunnar Andersson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Legal troubles in 2015

Hi. I separated that content because both were affected, albeit limited as you said, via Sauber being unable to practice in Australia due to an impending judgement, while Lotus could not practice in Hungary and had their entire collection held in Belgium for 4 days following the GP. Being somewhat similar in impact (former drivers suing team, threats of seizure, etc), I felt it would be better if these contents were together.

Although, as they have yet to impact the Championship, I didn't think that within the championship summary was the best location for them. I am indifferent on it however, because I can see both sides pretty evenly. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 00:07, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spectre (2015 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Wade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain ‎

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 Gamaliel (talk) 00:24, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Marussia F1 2016 season

For 2016 season, Marussia will switch to Dallara-designed chassis. 2402:6B00:23ED:6280:318A:2BFD:BE02:9810 (talk) 06:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Then you need a reliable source to back that up. In fact, you need two: one to confirm the change to Dallara, and one to confirm the name. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2014 Russian Grand Prix

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2014 Russian Grand Prix you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zwerg Nase -- Zwerg Nase (talk) 17:41, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2014 Russian Grand Prix

The article 2014 Russian Grand Prix you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2014 Russian Grand Prix for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zwerg Nase -- Zwerg Nase (talk) 20:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2016 Formula One season page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FIA Global Pathway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European Formula 3 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Re:Page move

There is no obligation to source to be English. And you know it. But if you are too blind to see the logo in the reference or too lazy to find the English one, so here it is [1]. Corvus tristis (talk) 09:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Spectre - TropicAces edits

Hey there,

I saw you reverted/edited out tropicaces edits on the page and claimed it was unhelpful. Looking at the edit comparison I noticed some of the edits you removed were actually helpful, such as the update of Box Office Mojo gross to 550 million, which BOM now clearly says. Wikipedia should and is used to be up-to-date as possible such as TropicAces tried to do.

Because of this and you editing out this important updated information it would be highly appreciated if you could add the relevant, clearly updated stuff back in, and next time be more careful when reverting or changing another editors work.

Thank you kindly! Charlr6 (talk) 13:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Charlr6 — sorry about that. I tried to revert his edits, but it didn't work. He went through and changed titles to "THE REAL TITLE GOES HERE" (or some such), which was pretty much vandalism. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 14:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey that's fine. I saw that in comparison and was strange as editor clearly was trying to help. So that deletion is obviously acceptable :) Charlr6 (talk) 15:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't really vandalism, by the looks of it. The user correctly spotted that a considerable number of refs provided the name of the magazine in the "title" parameter instead of the actual title of the cited article within the magazine, but didn't really solve the issue in a correct, helpful manner. The refs still need fixing though. Tvx1 17:26, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Australian Formula 4 season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Launceston (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

F1 2017

Hi,

I see that you reverted some edits including mine. Can you explain the reason of listing Azerbaijani GP twice? – Sabbatino (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

It was an IP editor screwing around with the article. They added a speculative calendar; when it was removed, they removed all of the races without a contract in retaliation. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 09:19, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I was the one that removed Azerbaijani GP, but I see that you already re-added my edit. Thought it was strange that the same GP is listed twice... – Sabbatino (talk) 10:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

You offered no source to say that it had a 2017 contract, so I have no idea why you saw fit to list it as having one. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:55, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

You're confusing mine edit with someone else's. I removed Azerbaijani GP from Grands Prix contracted or may provisionally be scheduled for 2017 section, because there's no source that says anything about its contract after 2016. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

While you were bickering with each other, both of you overlooked removing the other duplicates. Germany, Italy and Bahrain were all in there twice. Anyway, I have simply restored the pre-vandalism version which is what should have been done in the first place. Additionally, I don't think there was an IP retaliating for being reverted. I can clearly see two utterly different IP's making the edits in the page history. Tvx1 17:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Renault

While the car manufacturer might be French, we cannot assume that the F1 constructor will be French as well. After despite Caterham being a British car manufacturer, the F1 constructor was Malaysian. Please stop adding identity changes for that team into the article until they have actually confirmed them. Bear Renault's takeover of Benetton in mind before jumping to conclusions. There's no rush to change it, so be patient. Tvx1 23:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Speedy Question Mark#Renault nationality. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Calling another editor an idiot is completely unacceptable an unnecessary. Tvx1 23:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I take it you have seen some of his previous edits? He has a history of making consistently low-quality edits to articles. Maybe he needs a good, sharp shock to the system because he doesn't contribute much otherwise. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)