Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One

Dubious list

Some of you may be interested in (or horrified by) this: List of achievements by Ayrton Senna. Is this something that should exist? Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

So is this fine or what do we do when someone writes one for Schumi or Fangio? Frankly this is the kind of hagiography I've been afraid of for a while and I didn't think it was the business we were in. Britmax (talk) 20:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I think it should be nipped in the bud before similar lists appear for Vettel, Hamilton and all the rest of them. Some of those "achievements" are incredibly obscure. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't like it, but it's better in its own article than cluttering up the driver article. If someone can be bothered to set them up, if the information's properly sourced, why shouldn't there be one for every driver? Gives a reason for automatically removing cruft from elsewhere. --Ian Dalziel (talk) 20:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

A quick read-through tells me that it does need a good clean-up; and some things such as 26th all time in career starts is going to need to be updated somewhat frequently. I have improved it so the terms used are not too dodgy. One argument is to say that other sports (such as Tennis and Cricket) use these sort of pages too (this argument, however, may violate WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), and since some of the information is notable, then why not? I feel, however, that it is too in-depth. Is the number of times he has lead the most laps of all drivers in a season notable, for example. I don't think so. I think it is appropriate for the F1 Wiki I am admin of, but not here. —Gyaro–Maguus— 01:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think this is appropriate for a general purpose encyclopedia and will undoubtedly lead to the creation of similar articles for other drivers. DH85868993 (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

What qualifies a driver to get their own page of achievements? There's no way this could ever work. Just add the most important achievements to Senna's page. GeoJoe1000 (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. What makes Senna eligible and not any other world champion, or race winner, or any other driver? We could end up with dozens of these, which nobody wants to update. If any of this stuff is worth having on Wikipedia, it should be in the driver's article. If it's not important enough for that, then it's not important at all. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Keep the important stuff on Senna's page - easier to stop it growing like the proverbial if it's there. 4u1e (talk) 01:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Formula One race reports

Category:Formula One race reports, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Formula One races. The nomination also proposes a similar renaming for the 64 subcategories: YYYY Formula One race reports → YYYY Formula One races.

If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This change has now occurred. Note that Category:2000 Formula One race reports was accidentally omitted from the CfD, so I have requested that it be speedily renamed to bring it into line with all the other categories. DH85868993 (talk) 22:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Season article importance scale

Hello folks. Just noticed that we have a blank row in our Importance Scale guidelines relating to season articles. I'm wondering whether we want to populate this or not. If so, I propose the following:

• Top: 1950 Formula One season and current season only. I think in the context of F1 there are very few seasons that are crucial for a novice to understand. This should be a very limited category.
• High: Seasons following major rule changes (e.g. 1952, 1954, 1961, 1966, 1989, 2006, 2014 eventually...), important for telling the story of an evolving sport.
• Mid: Those seasons where, for some reason, the entire season (and not just an incident or two) was notable. Major events that affected the season as a whole (e.g. 1970, Rindt's posthumous championship; 1994, Senna's death and safety response; 1958, introduction of the WCC) are the key, not just that something important happened that year. These seasons add some meat to the skeleton that the 'major changes' seasons have formed.
• Low: The vast majority of normal seasons, should be by far the largest group.

Anyway, if anyone has a burning desire to be heard let it be now. Of course, as I intimated above, I am perfectly happy for this line to be struck entirely and leave all season articles up for individual discussion, but I find that without some structure the importance ratings do tend to creep upward over time. Pyrope 22:13, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• I'd stick "Mid" to all of them. It's unfair to distinguish seasons by importance. --NaBUru38 (talk) 23:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfair on who? Some seasons are (in my opinion) clearly more important than others. I broadly agree with Pyrope's comments, except that I'd say 1994 might be "high". Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

'Unfair' is an odd choice of words; I'm sure that none of them mind. Remember that we aren't talking about how important the season was, we are talking about how important the article is for an uninitiated reader if they want to get a good understanding of the topic. A few seasons are certainly more important than others in that context (i.e. Top and Mid), and many can be safely ignored completely until someone has a very thorough grasp on the sport's history (i.e. Low). Pyrope 23:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Saying that all seasons are equally important to understand the sport is foolish. This proposal seems logical. GeoJoe1000 (talk)12:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Seems fair. Provided 1982 can have a high rating. :) 4u1e (talk) 01:09, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds decent to me SAS1998―Talk 19:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Request peer review of 2004 Belgian Grand Prix

I have slaved away at this article for two days. I need a second opinion on it. Spa-Franks (talk) 23:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Phantom entries

Hi, I'm currently undertaking the mammoth (and possibly foolhardy) task of standardising race reports. So far I've done 3. Only 878 to go! Anyway, I've come across the 1950 Swiss Grand Prix, which has an "entry list" table as well as the qualifying and race classification tables. However, in the entry list table are 4 drivers who didn't even attempt to qualify - Peter Whitehead, Franco Rol, Reg Parnell and Rudi Fischer. This race isn't counted as an entry on any of their own pages, however on Parnell's and Fischer's, there's a "DNA", presumably standing for "did not attend". There's no source for the entry list, and the only other entry list I've found (on Chicane F1) doesn't have those 4 drivers. So basically I'm asking what we do to clarify it - do we remove them from the entry list, find the source that User:Piniricc65 used to add the table in April 2006, or just add DNA to the other two drivers' pages (for consistency)? Also in that case we should probably add them to the qualifying classification table as DNAs. Allypap81 (talk) 11:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Full and accurate entry lists are difficult to find. Many sources just flat-out get it wrong. Many other sources don't feel the need to mention drivers who entered but did not run for whatever reason. All those four drivers were entered for this race; I don't know what happened to Parnell and Fischer, but Rol was injured in the previous race, and was not fit. Whitehead was waiting for his car to be fitted with a new engine, and it wasn't ready in time. I'd say all were DNAs. The race report articles are sometimes more detailed than the driver articles, so some DNAs are not shown in the driver's results tables. They probably should be. I'll try and find out what happened to Parnell and Fischer. Here's a source in the meantime – silhouet is a good source [1]. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Another good source: [2] Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Fischer's SVA car was apparently unfit to race. He'd entered it for three F1 races, starting with the 1950 San Remo Grand Prix where it died on the first lap, and he didn't bother with the other two F1 races he'd entered, including the Swiss GP. I don't know why Parnell missed this race, but he turned up later in the season with the same Maserati. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Rightyo, I'll add the DNAs into the classification then, and thanks for those sources, I'll use them to check subsequent reports. Allypap81 (talk) 22:25, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I've been working on that job intermittently for over a year, concentrating on a decent lead and transposing Notes into sentences. Perhaps we should co-ordinate to avoid double-handling? --Falcadore (talk) 01:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure, "intermittently" is a perfect way to describe my work as well! I've basically just started from the start, I'm in about mid-1951 at the mo. I'm probably taking longer than it actually takes, but I'm quite enjoying reading around the stuff as well, it's really interesting! Allypap81 (talk) 08:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Hungarian Grand Prix

Has anyone noticed that the Hungarian Grand Prix article does not have a lead? --Falcadore (talk) 01:23, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I've added one. It could probably use improvement, but at least there's one there now. DH85868993 (talk) 02:49, 25 April 2013 (UTC)