Talk:2017 Formula One World Championship

World map

The map of the 2017 championship is incorrect because of Crimea. According to international law, Crimea is a part of Ukraine. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_68/262

Please change an image to this file, edited by me previously - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Formula_1_all_over_the_world-2017_-_2.svg

--Unsigned comment above left by: Vaper (talk|contribs)

Note: This is referring to the image authored by Cherkash on Wikimedia Commons. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 17:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The above-mentioned UN resolution is non-binding and is thus far from representing "international law" as suggested by the single-purpose account (WP:SPA) above. So there is no reason to engage in any dispute here, unless the goal is to discuss controversial subjects in international politics. But since the subject of F1 and of distribution of the Grands Prix around the world is far from international politics, the map simply represents the de-facto status of the territories as it currently stands. The issue raised is a non-issue in the context of the subject this map represents, and this in no way detracts from the main purpose of the map. So apart from engaging in WP:ADVOCACY by the WP:SPA Vaper (talk|contribs), there is no other reason to change the map as it currently stands. cherkash (talk) 05:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2017

Hi there,

Wouldn't it be appropriate to add the free practice drivers from Hungary to make the page as precise as possible?

Source: [1]

Keep up the good work! High-five from Denmark Kasper 217.61.216.164 (talk) 09:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

 Not done. That source details testing which took place after the Hungarian Grand Prix, not free practice. There is a consensus not to add test drivers in the season articles.Tvx1 12:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Order of Toro Rosso drivers

I thought we usually sorted drivers by car number? So shouldn't Gasly be before Kvyat? Joseph2302 (talk) 11:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

No, we have always order them on the rounds column. Drivers who replaced one another are grouped and ordered vertically in chronological order. See this discussion which you contributed to. You even signaled your agreement with the principle.Tvx1 13:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh. I totally remembered the outcome of that discussion wrong. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

As well as your own contributions to it, apparently.Tvx1 19:15, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Reviving this discussion because Palmer is out at Renault. It's expected that Sainz will take his place, allowing Gasly and Kvyat to race in Austin. Assuming that all of this plays out this way, how do we represent it in the table? The way I see it, there are two possibilities:

No.	Name	Rounds
26	Daniil Kvyat	1–14, 17
10	Pierre Gasly	15–17
55	Carlos Sainz Jr.	1–16

Or:

No.	Name	Rounds
26	Daniil Kvyat	1–14, 17
10	Pierre Gasly	15–16
55	Carlos Sainz Jr.	1–16
10	Pierre Gasly	17

The first version is tidier, but the second is more accurate because Gasly replaced Kvyat in Malaysia and Japan, and Sainz in Austin. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

The bottom version is what we always tend to do.Tvx1 12:06, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tvx1 — is it? I can't remember the last time something like this happened. I do it a lot on WRC articles, but that's because of the way points are awarded and it isn't a concern here. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 12:25, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I personally find the first version cleaner and easier to understand as it keeps everything in its own column, whereas the latter is just splitting the same driver into two columns, making it - in my opinion: harder to follow. Abdotorg (talk) 13:59, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

That’s why we have the rounds column. It shows clearly who replaced whom and where. Prisonermonkeys, see Benetton in 1994.Tvx1 14:36, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tvx1 — thanks. It's obviously a pretty rare occurrance, so 1994 slipped my memory. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:36, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

It actually applied to two teams that year, it happened at Lotus as well. Also, HRT in 2011 has sprung to my mind.Tvx1 14:19, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@Tvx1 — you're right. They completely slipped my mind. But I tend to tune out once it becomes obvious that Hamilton or Vettel is going to win the title, which is probably why I forgot. I can't stand either of them. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 05:06, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I find the 1994 and 2011 examples quite weak, because back then, a replacement driver would take over a car with a certain race number, which is not the case anymore. Just something to think about. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Regardless, they still replace a particular driver and the effect on the rounds column is still the same. And we have always given priority to that column instead of the numbers.Tvx1 10:12, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Guys, you are rushing a bit. We need to wait till Gasly will be confirmed for Austin. There is still a big possibility that he will do Super Formula finale. [2] Corvus tristis (talk) 10:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I feel that, without the race numbers, this is just confusing to laymen readers of the article. No one who knows little about Formula 1 will understand why Gasly is listed twice. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Again, the round column serves to explain the information and the order of it. I actually think that listing Gasly just once creates more confusion. As you can see in the above example that leaves both the number column and the rounds column in some unexplained random mumble jumble. The first row has Kvyat entered in rounds 1-14 and 17. Fair enough. But what happened in round 15 and 16? Ah, The second row then has Gasly who apparently replaced him for those rounds, but wait! It has Gasly for round 17 as well, where Kvyat was entered and didn't have to be replaced? What's the point of that? Maybe the third row helps? No, that one just has Sainz from rounds 1-16. But where's round 17? I guess he was replaced and his replacement is underneath. No wait? There is no fourth row?? Who replaced him then? Was it maybe Gasly??? Or Kvyat????. The second table gives a much much clearer picture of who replaced whom and where.Tvx1 16:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Giovinazzi driving for Sauber is mid-season change?

Just noticed that Giovinazzi driving for sauber is included in the driver changes section but is this not *technically* a mid-season change as Wehrlein took part in FP1 and is not part of the permanent driver line-up? Just wanted to get a consensus before making the edit. 83.231.221.26 (talk) 07:28, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd agree with that and don't see any reason why this can't be changed. MetalDylan (talk) 14:52, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done: MetalDylan (talk) 14:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I would not call it a mid-season change at all—especially since it hinges on a technicality that is not immediately obvious to the reader. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

The season started with Wehrlein driving for Sauber in the first practice session, I would propose that the wording should be altered to reflect that as to make it clearer to the reader, for example;

Pascal Wehrlein, who moved from MRT to replace Felipe Nasr at Sauber,[42] withdrew from the opening rounds of the championship as a precaution after an injury at the Race of Champions interrupted his training regime, prompting concerns that he would not be able to cope with the greater physical demands placed on the drivers by the 2017 generation of cars. As such, 2016 GP2 Series runner-up Antonio Giovinazzi drove for Sauber from the second practice of the opening round in Australia.[16][41] Wehrlein returned to competition at the third race, the Bahrain Grand Prix, with Giovinazzi resuming testing and reserve driving duties.[43]

Also stating its not "at all" a mid-season change is ridiculous, the facts are plain to see. MetalDylan (talk) 11:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Prisonermonkeys in fact Wehrlein took part in the entire Friday sessions! MetalDylan (talk) 11:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

It’s not a mid-season change though. It’s an in-season change at best.Tvx1 15:58, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@MetalDylan

"in fact Wehrlein took part in the entire Friday sessions!"

But the wording of the article doesn't address that at all. You're relying on the reader to make a connection based on a premise is not clearly stated. You cannot simply copy and paste one part of an article into another without making changes to it and expect that there are no issues when the sections you are taking that content from and are adding it to deal with completely different things. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I have split the existing text and included in both sections as in reality it contained two stories. I think the wording now is clear to the reader of what happened. MetalDylan (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't think it's really appropriate for an article like this to be discussing which teams were considering a particular driver, simply because the concept of "considering" is vague. Wehrlein's name could have been shot down thirty seconds after it was mentioned or thirty second before he signed the contract, and "considering" would apply equally in the article. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 10:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)