Talk:Max Verstappen

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Max Verstappen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924012244/http://www.fiaf3europe.com/en/news/Max-Verstappen-new-Red-Bull-Junior.html to http://www.fiaf3europe.com/en/news/Max-Verstappen-new-Red-Bull-Junior.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402132459/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?sid=44062358&art_id=155136&con_type=1&pp_cat=19 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?sid=44062358&art_id=155136&con_type=1&pp_cat=19

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Talk page archived

Yeap. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

"whereas"

I fixed a misused preposition. A disruptive user reverted my change three times without bothering to explain why. A second user has now also undone this common sense edit. The relevant text is this:

"His family has a long association with motor sports. His father, Jos Verstappen, is a Dutch former Formula One driver, whereas his Belgian mother, Sophie Kumpen, competed in karting."

"Whereas" would be used if his mother was not involved in motorsport. When the point of that sentence is that both parents were involved in motorsport, "whereas" makes no sense at all. "While" is correct; "and" would also be correct. There is no way of reading this sentence in which "whereas" is correct. Pe19 (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Let's break this down. Firstly, your claim that using 'whereas' in that sentence indicates his mother didn't participate in motor sport is simply wrong. Those are two separate sentences: 1) he is from a motor sport family; 2) his father is famous for one type whereas his mother is famous for another. The first sentence sets the general picture, the second gives the specifics and the contrast between father and mother. Had it been one continuous sentence that said "most of his family are involved in motor sport, whereas his mother isn't" you might have had a point. However, it doesn't and you don't. Secondly, used as a conjunction (not a preposition...) in that sentence, both Merriam Webster and OED give 'whereas' as a definition for 'while'. However, 'while' can also mean 'during the same time', whereas 'whereas' only means... well, whereas. Pyrope 14:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

You are failing to understand so many things.

• I did not say that the sentence indicates that his mother didn't participate in motorsport. I said it would be correct if that was what you wanted to indicate. Saying "person X did thing A, whereas person Y also did thing A" does not make sense. It does not indicate that person Y did not do thing A; it simply doesn't make sense.
• If the preceding sentence was "his parents were involved in different branches of motorsport" it might make sense to use "whereas" to contrast the different branches. But the preceding sentence is "His family has a long association with motor sports". The point is not that one parent was in F1 and the other was in karting. What type of motorsport they did is completely irrelevant. The point is that they were both in motorsports. There is no contrast between father and mother.
• "while" can indeed mean "during the same time". It does not mean that in this context, obviously.

The sentence does not make sense with "whereas". I do not see any evidence yet that you understand what the sentence is even for. Pe19 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to be charitable and assume that you simply misread my reply to you. Have another go and then get back to me. Pyrope 17:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

What lame trolling! Pe19 (talk) 17:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me? This is not trolling, it is a discussion. I ask as you have some huge logic flaws and simple mis-statements in your reply. I'm not quite sure how to respond to someone when they could very well have simply made a mistake. Pyrope 17:42, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

"I'm going to be charitable and assume that you simply misread my reply to you. Have another go and then get back to me" - not trolling? Oh sure. If you were editing in good faith, you would point out the "huge logic flaws". You cannot do that, because a) there aren't any and b) you're not editing in good faith. You've successfully turned the molehill of a simple improvement into a mountain of idiocy with your trolling. Hope you're pleased with yourself. Pe19 (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

This was a simple statement, not trolling. My reply was clear.

Taking your last point first, you state that ""while" can indeed mean "during the same time". It does not mean that in this context, obviously." Yes? Well the two definitions that OED give for the word 'while' used as a conjunction are 1) "During the time that; at the same time as"; and 2) "whereas". As you dismissed the first "in that context", therefore only the second remains. Yet you then go on to claim that 'whereas' simply doesn't make sense, despite it literally being the only other definition that OED offers. That is a glaring logical flaw. Let's call it Flaw #1.

You also state that there is no contrast between father and mother, yet the sentence gives them two different descriptions. Unless you are arguing that F1 and karting are identical – an absurd proposition as otherwise wouldn't they be called the same thing? – that is a contrast. The existence of two descriptions implies a difference in character, i.e. a contrast. That's Flaw #2.

Following that, you make all sorts of twists and turns to make out that F1 (let's call that thing B), karting (thing C), and motorsport (thing A) are synonymous. They aren't. Similar, yes. Two are a type of the third, yes. But they are not the same. Therefore that sentence has never read "person X did thing A, whereas person Y also did thing A" (using 'thing A' as motorsport, as above), yet you claim that it did. Flaw #3.

And now the doozy. You write "I did not say that the sentence indicates that his mother didn't participate in motorsport. I said it would be correct if that was what you wanted to indicate." You do realize that these directly contradict one other, don't you? Words mean what they mean. If you are reading meaning into a sentence that isn't there, it isn't the fault of the sentence it is a fault in your reading comprehension. Judging by your subsequent edits to the page I think I see where you were trying to get to, but the phrasing as it stood simply didn't mean what you had in your head. Flaw #4.

All the way through this I have been acting in good faith. This is why WP:AGF is an important principle. Please do try to adopt it. Pyrope 20:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

And still you troll. I assume incompetence before malice, but no-one could fail so badly to grasp the point of the sentence. Pe19 (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Is there an acceptable wording that would moot this disagreement? Without even trying hard, I can think of two that would be acceptable to me.

His family has a long association with motor sports. His father, Jos Verstappen, is a Dutch former Formula One driver, and his Belgian mother, Sophie Kumpen, competed in karting.

His family has a long association with motor sports. His father, Jos Verstappen, is a Dutch former Formula One driver. His Belgian mother, Sophie Kumpen, competed in karting.

I have just flipped a coin and it came up heads, meaning alternative #1. I would implement that wording and move on. Usually these things matter a lot more to Wikipedia editors than to Wikipedia readers. ―Mandruss ☎ 19:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Ironically, the OP seems to have solved the situation anyway, but thanks for your input. Pyrope 20:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)