Talk:2016 Formula One World Championship

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2015

Nico Hülkenberg will stay in Force India for 2016. http://f1tothemax.com/f1today-net/hulkenberg-staying-put-at-force-india-for-2016/ Joiozev (talk) 14:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

somebody's already added him, Bazj (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Red Bull-Renault

Please wait until either Red Bull or Renault confirm the use of Renault power units before removing content. The Autosport source used previously to remove Renault is neither, as it doesn't source Red Bull or Renault, nor does it even say that Renault has accepted Red Bull's offer to terminate the contract - only that the request was issued and as stated in the edit summary, it is understood that Renault will accept - which hasn't happened yet. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 21:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Agree. There are to many "it is understood's" and 'sources suggest's" for it to be even remotely usable. It's utter speculation. It really baffles me that such an otherwise high quality publication publishes these utter non-stories from time to time. Tvx1 01:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Manor

I feel the need to bring this up. As it stands, there is a zero tolerance policy on the inclusion of Manor until a driver is signed, but that's kind of a pointless argument - if that be the case, remove Haas. Holdenman05 (talk) 12:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

No not only a driver. Simply something. They haven't even announced a team name. Haas has at the very least announced a power unit supply. We simply can't include Manor Marussia yet, because they haven't signed anything for 2016 yet. Tvx1 15:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120753?source=mostpopular I think this source tells us almost all we need to know (bar drivers). Holdenman05 (talk) 12:37, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Quite on the contrary, it tells us hardly anything. Just that they have some rough plans regarding the next car, without actually confirming that its introduction will be pushed back until 2016. Just that that is what will most likely happen (=speculation). Tvx1 13:45, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

The "zero tolerance" policy you refer to allows the inclusion of new team entries, provided there's a source of their confirmation for the season that they enter, such as Haas in 2016. Manor has no such sources. If they'd like to say they want to keep Will Stevens on for another year, then great, we can add them. But please familiarize yourself with the policy before you criticize it. Also, that source has applications for the 2015 season article, in the section where it states that Manor plans to introduce a new car later in the year. This source can now let us state that those plans have been scrapped. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 04:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Also, there is even further prose underneath the table concerning Haas. We can't have a whole section about a new team being entered (with sources) and then have them excluded on the table they just read. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 04:08, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

So what is the cutoff line to include a new team in the chart? Is it signing a driver, picking an engine provider, or having plans for the upcoming year? What counts as confirmation? GeoJoe1000 (talk) 14:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

They have to have confirmed something specific. Either signing a driver, either a power unit supplier, either the name of the car or at the very least have appeared on the entry list for the season in question (which has yet to be published for 2016). Other than that, a new constructor can be included back with a source confirming when they will enter. In this case it's very simple. We can't tell our readers anything at all about their 2016 entry, so there really isn't any point in including them yet. There are a number of columns in the table. We have to be able to provide something in at least one column other than entrant and constructor when we want to add a team. In Marussia's case we cant even support the team name.Tvx1 14:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

What a daft conclusion. The major teams have been included since the beginning of the article and are every yar despite there being similarly little confirmation of their participation beyond "well of course they will be" speculation. If you must make an issue out of the lack of detail then supply that information as a caveat. Either way the list is more useful to anyone wanting to know about next season if it includes the team. Either that or you must remove the driver listings that are probable (Perez - option for next year but no confirmation, Verstappen - could be at RBR instead of STR until RBR confirm their lineup). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.8.104.65 (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

None of your claims is right. The first time teams were mentioned in this article, they included contracted drivers, a list including a team about which we can't say anything (not even the correct name since they're still in the transition from Marussia to Manor) isn't more useful at all and you still haven't provided any proof of Perez just having an option and Verstappen being considered for Red Bull. Tvx1 14:10, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Renault F1 participated in some form or another for 34 seasons. Your logic that they will be there "just because they are a major and established team" is flawed on that example alone. Further, Manor Marussia is neither of those things. The team's first version was in 2010 and has switched names 4 times since then and flirting with bankruptcy. Hardly established and very very speculative to claim that they will race without a single source saying so. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 04:03, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand where this sudden change of inclusion for teams has come from. We certainly never used to do things this way. In the past we would generally carry forward all information, excluding drivers, under the assumption that things would be the same the next season, instead of becoming too obsessed over exact dates announced to the media. What we are stating right now to our readers is that Manor are not going to be in F1 for 2016, which is likely incorrect as we know teams are meant to be signed up for the length of a Concorde agreement. Just because their drivers and engine supply are not yet publicly known does not imply they will not be here next season - similarly having driver contracts in place does not state that a team will be. I see no problem with adding Manor to the table, with TBAs where certain information is not yet known. QueenCake (talk) 22:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

QueenCake — I think it was done to prevent the creation of future season articles too far on advance. There was a scenario where we would have a handful of articles that were effectively empty except for the teams. They didn't have any new content to differentiate them from previous season articles. The whole idea of "only add a team when they have confirmed something specific" is a countermeasure to that. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, that's a bit of a sledgehammer approach to the problem. At this stage, when we have enough content to fill the article apart from the teams, it doesn't seem necessary to hold to that idea and exclude Manor. We'll be better off trying to find a friendly admin to apply creation protection on the future season pages to combat that problem. QueenCake (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

We are assuming Manor will compete because they are racing in 2015? As I argued in the discussion below, they have confirmed nothing for 2016 aside from "intentions to build a car". Even Haas has stronger ties to the season than Manor. While I agree that Manor would be competing, and I'd be a little surprised if they didn't, this is Wikipedia. We write about what can be proved - not what we believe to be true. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 22:37, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2015

Manor GP is missing. Please add. 37.33.134.159 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article.
Please see the discussion immediately above for the sorts of citations that are needed. - Arjayay (talk) 17:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Manor's participation will be confirmed (at the latest) in November when next year's team roster is announced (the deadline for paying the participation fee). There's talk in the news of them switching to Mercedes engines which indicates that they at least intend to continue next year, but it's definitely not a confirmed announcement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.220.166.128 (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

When (if) that happens in November, then the team can be added. Until then, your statement falls under the very definition of WP:NOTCRYSTAL/WP:RUMOR, specifically this portion of item #5) "Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content." Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 09:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Not including Manor when they are an existing F1 team that have made no indication that they intend to leave F1 is confusing. On the other hand, I understand that only officially confirmed information is included. Maybe we should rephrase the sentence above the table to "The following teams have a license to compete in Formula One in 2016, and the following drivers are confirmed." or something similar which would allow for the inclusion of Manor without including speculation. Pontlieue (talk) 18:40, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Does Manor have a licence to compete in 2016? I have not seen any sources saying they have paid their entry fee and/or that the FIA has accepted it... Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 04:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Of course, participation is always subject to paying the entry fee. You won't find any sources for the other teams either, so it sets quite a double standard if you require it for Manor. But if they hadn't got a license, they'd have to go through an application process like Haas in 2014. If you would apply these standards to all teams, you shouldn't include any teams and drivers section before the official entry list is published. After all, announcing a driver doesn't mean you will take part (see USF1 or Stefan GP). Pontlieue (talk) 07:18, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

The other teams have drivers and various sourced partnerships go work off of. Even Haas has a partnership with Ferrari & Dallara, and it has long been sourced that they are joining the grid in 2016. Manor has nothing. This is Wikipedia - we write about what we can prove, not what we think to be true. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 07:47, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

USF1 and Stefan GP's entries were written about so long as there were sources saying so. When new sources came out that they would be withdrawing their entry, then they were removed. Manor may very well be racing in 2016. In fact, I'd be shocked if they didn't. But we can't include them here without sources just because they raced in 2015. That's crystal-balling. Twirly Pen (Speak ^up) 09:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree with not adding Manor for 2016- there are no sources saying they'll definitely race next season. They might just go bust like they Caterham- this time last year, I'm sure most people expected Caterham to be on the grid for 2015. Until Manor sign a driver for next season, or have a reliable source saying they're definitely racing, then they shouldn't be included. Assuming they will be racing is just crystal ball speculation. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:54, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Grosjean to Haas

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31962.html