Talk:2022 Formula One World Championship

US states listed- inconsistent?

On the calendar table, for the two US Grands Prix, we have the circuit locations listed as Miami International Autodrome, Miami Gardens, Florida, and Circuit of the Americas, Austin, Texas (US states Florida and Texas listed). To me, this seems inconsistent, as for the other 21 non-US races, we don't list the state/province/county of the circuit e.g. we don't list the state Styria for Austrian GP, the county Northamptonshire for British GP, the state Victoria for Australian GP etc.) Surely for consistency we therefore don't need the US state names? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I would argue the opposite (in the sense that it is consistent, with common practice). It is standard/convention to mention the state for US place names, but this is not the case for the rest of the world (with the possible exceptions of Australia). SSSB (talk) 12:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. It is common practice to include the state when referencing a location in the US. The relevancy of a state or province differs greatly between nations. In the case of Australia I do suppose Victoria could be relevant, but as a foreigner to both nations I hear American states included much more frequently. This has to do with America being a federation, the size of the federation (Texas itself is bigger than many other countries on the calendar), and culture. Counties, like Miami-Dade County and Travis County in the case of Miami Gardens and Austin, is of course not included. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 13:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

It should have been better to delete the state description in the second part of the US Grand Prix. That is the same as injustice to other countries. Because other countries have territories, only the American series has the state description written on the calendar KusumaSPMTickford (talk) 23:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Incidently, there are multiple Austins in the USA, so we need the "Texas" to disambiguate. SSSB (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Likewise there are multiple Miamis. That’s why the states need to be there.Tvx1 16:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I'm sorry, countries have no right to "justice" on Wikipedia, and we're not gonna make an article less clear because of some misunderstood feeling of "injustice" in what is a purely practical question. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Melbourne has also multiple, there called Greater Melbourne. Albert Park is located in the suburbs of St. Kilda, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. The state in Australia is actually 2x the size on the Australian continent than the United States

KusumaSPMTickford (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

No, there is one Melbourne is Australia (according to Melbourne (disambiguation)), even if "Melbourne" can refer to any one of several overlapping regions depending on context. SSSB (talk) 00:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

There's multiple Spielbergs (Spielberg (disambiguation) has more than one place listed), multiple Le Castellets and multiple Suzukas. So if that's the reason for adding the US state, surely we should add the state/province for these three as well for consistency? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

There is one Suzuka listed. There is only one Spielberg in Austria, so disambiguation is already provided in that cases by the country. Secondly, the disambiguation is a secondary reason to the common convention argument. Thirdly, I would support the addition of "Var" to disambigaute Le Castellet within France. SSSB (talk) 12:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Sprint qualifying

The format name has been changed in merely "sprint". Points now are awarded for the first eight drivers, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1. Pole position for the Grand Prix matches with the fastest driver on normal qualifying, no longer for the winner of the sprint. This content should be mentioned in the page.--Island92 (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done.--Island92 (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

On the subject of changes to the points systems in confused by what the article currently says on the new regulations regarding points for races that didn't have its full scheduled distance completed. It currently says no points if less than two laps are completed, points for the top five if more than two laps are completed. But what happens then if exactly two laps are completed, like in Francorchamps last year? There's a gap there.Tvx1 20:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

My interpretation is that there can not be "exactly" two laps completed. 2 and a half laps is "more than two". 2 and 1/1000 lap is also more than two. If this is the right interpretation, "2 or more" is a valid alternative. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

On the contrary, officially (at least last year) there was no such things as completing fractions of a lap. If you crash at the final corner on lap 5, you are credited with completing 4 laps, not 4.95 (as a random example). The same would be true of a safety car/VSC, because F1 documents only documument whole laps.

They could spilt the track into sub-sections (e.g. the first sector may be equivilant to 30% of the lap, or the start-finish straight might be 8%) to overcome this but it is simply impossible to split it into the infinetly many sections required for "can not be "exactly" two laps completed" of a lap you propose, at best they could do every 10m or so. This still leaves the same problem.

I've just updated the article to match the wording of the source, that is no points if less thanunless a minimum of two laps are completed. Unfortuantly, two laps (or 2≤x<3 because of the way FIA's documents work) However, I suggest we wait to see the sporting regs in the flesh, rather than rely on poor wording from a journalist, mixed with out interpretation. SSSB (talk) 00:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

2022 Russian GP

Obankston added info that the Russian GP may be in doubt, but was reverted by Island92.

IMvHO, Obankston's edit was a good one. It was reliably sourced and there are many calls for the 2022 Russian GP to be axed, including from Sebastien Vettel and Max Verstappen. To avoid an edit war, I'd rather this issue was thrashed out here on the talk page. Mjroots (talk) 20:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Each race may be in doubt regarding Covid global pandemic. I suggest waiting final decisions made by FIA rather than adding Notes, prose, drivers' opinions and many others. How much is sure that the Russian Grand Prix could be replaced by the Turkish Grand Prix? It's speculation, like the case I read today Qatar could replace Russian Grand Prix from another site. Personally, I'd rather not read an entire paragraph of what could happen in the future, unless we have an official statement by the Federation.--Island92 (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Island92: - the bit about a possible replacement can probably be omitted. This is part of the discussion here, to try to reach a consensus. What is more important is that there are calls for the Russian GP to be cancelled, and pressure is being put on the FIA to act sooner rather than later. Mjroots (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Calls from outside parties to cancel it does not mean it is in doubt. The race is scheduled for 7 months from now. That's a long time from now, during which a lot can happen. As long as no party directly involved in the contract for the race comments that it is in doubt, we should not report that it is.Tvx1 20:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

FIA knows when it's time to make a crucial decision, according to what happen now, in the next hours, or in the next weeks. FIA, the governing body of international motorsport, sets the calendar. IMO, it isn't important how much pressure is coming from external calls to have this GP ruled out from the calendar. Haas have already decided to remove Uralkali sponsor from car livery for tomorrow test. That means we don't necessarily have to remove Uralkali next to "Haas F1 Team" into Entries table, unless the entry list source is updated differently. And the entry list is updated by FIA.--Island92 (talk) 20:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Until the FIA confirm anything, it's just WP:SPECULATION. And is therefore not needed on a factual, encyclopedic article- our calendar matches the FIA calendar, in that the official calendar still includes Russia currently. If/when the FIA change the calendar, then and only then should Wikipedia make any changes to it. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

It may be relevant and reliable if there are a large number of stakeholders calling on the FIA to make a change, without having to say that there is a possible change. The former would not be speculation, the later would be. I have no idea if there are reliable sources calling for such call to action, though. Just noting that if there is, that's how I would include it. Singularity42 (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Don't think anyone is suggesting changing the calendar here. The discussion deals with the removal of a paragraph, claiming the race to be in doubt, that someone had added earlier. Even that was inappropriate, since no involved party has announced replacement of the race actually bein considered.Tvx1 21:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Like others have concluded, I don't believe "The Russian Grand Prix is uncertain because of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine" is an appropriate addition to the article, as it is a clear case of WP:SPECULATION about the "certainty" of an officially scheduled – and thus certain – event. Rather, I believe the appropriate discussion to have is whether or not drivers pulling out of the event and/or calling for the event to be cancelled, is in fact of encyclopedic value. If this information can be verified through WP:RELIABLE sources, I absolutely believe drivers boycotting an event is relevant. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Saying it in doubt is silly, because all races are in some level of doubt, and there is zero indication that any cancellation is even being discussed (by those who make these decisions). However, I think it would be appropriate to mention that there are calls from drivers/teams/media to cancel the race, and that some drivers/teams/media are also considering a boycott. SSSB (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but the thing is no one is boycotting anything right now. I find it strange that this discussion acts as if we're dealing with a race that is supposed to take place in the next couple of weeks. In reality, it's a race not scheduled to happen for another SEVEN months. An immense amount of things can happen in such a time. For all I know, the international community might rebuff the Russian forces, their current government might be overthrown and replaced by a peaceful one and Putin could end being eliminated in all of those months. There is so much that can happen in that many months, so why is there such a rush to report on event not expected to happen for many months?Tvx1 00:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Information on Wikipedia is updated as time moves on. If a driver decides to boycott an event seven months in advance though, that's on them, the decision to boycott is just as relevant regardless of when the decision was made (unless you believe boycotts aren't relevant, of course). If things develop in the opposite direction before then, those drivers might change their decision, and then we'll have to update our information as well. Until then, I treat information about a confirmed, future boycott of an event from a driver the same way I treat information about the confirmed, future event itself, however uncertain it might actually be. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 08:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Tvx1, I'm sorry but your basis for not including this information is that the basis for the boycott might no longer apply. That sounds like speculation to me. SSSB (talk) 09:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

But there is no official boycott at the moment, that's the point. There is one statement from one driver including many conditionals. His statement directly conveys that he would participate if there is no more war, that's not speculation. Those ar his words. At least now though, the sport has officially put the race in doubt.Tvx1 12:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Cancellation statement?

Russian Grand Prix was just cancelled. https://twitter.com/F1Media/status/1497179625625055232 https://www.racefans.net/2022/02/25/formula-1-confirms-it-will-not-race-in-russia-this-year/ Manvswow (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

https://corp.formula1.com/formula-1-statement-on-the-russian-grand-prix/ Manvswow (talk) 12:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that statement supports cancellation. It's simply saying that if this situation hasn't changed by the time we get to the Russian Grand Prix it will be cancelled. Of course, this is my WP:OR analysis and if secondary sources are reporting this as a cancellation so must we, but I don't think that's what the statment is saying. SSSB (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Page restored. It isn't an official cancellation.--Island92 (talk) 12:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's not a very clear statement to me either. Seems to me that it has been suspended from the calendar, but could be reinstated should circumstances change.Tvx1 12:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Metro reporting that the Russian GP has been cancelled. Am on my phone so can't post a link. Mjroots2 (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm watching Al Jazeera right now and they have said this amounts to a cancellation. Is it ambiguous? Perhaps. I think it has been cancelled, but it will have to be clarified soon enough anyway. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Every source I have seen is calling it a cancellation. Can we think of a way to strike a balance between "not officially cancelled", and "secondary sourced consider statement to amount to cancellation" without going into WP:OR? SSSB (talk) 13:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The only good enough source is this, coming from FIA, who sets the calendar. It's a statement regarding current impossible condition to hold the race, not that race has been definitely called off for 2022.--Island92 (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

May we suggest adding an asterisk indicating something in the lines of "event to be confirmed regarding the consequences of the Russian invasion of Ukraine", or any similar sentence, and placing the FIA statement as source? Sjælefred Herm (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I would actually go as far as putting a sentence in the "calendar changes" section (or whatever it's called} together with an {{efn}}. The former or both explaining that the statement, the general interpreation by sources (that it's cancelled), whilst noting that the cancellation isn't official). SSSB (talk) 13:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

There should very much be something. It has been officially downgraded to a conditional status.Tvx1 13:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

How about something along the lines of, "On 25 February, following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the FIA released a statement saying that "it is impossible to hold the [2022] Russian Grand Prix in the current circumstances." This was interpreted as a cancellation of the event.[ref]"? SSSB (talk) 13:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I support SSSB's statement as a footnote in the calendar changes section alongside Island92's note which has already been added.Sjælefred Herm (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Just added a Note to clarify what it's happening.--Island92 (talk) 13:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The note seems sensible to me. Sources are assuming it's cancelled, but I agree that the statement from FIA is ambiguous (as the event is 7 months away, they could change their mind many times before then). The note covers both scenarios, so seems like best solution to me. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:57, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think Island92's note is enough (it's a start, but not enough), as proven by this edit. That edit is the constant war we will be fighting, for the next however many months. SSSB (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok, but we added a Note following a FIA statement. For the next one, we will act again, basing on what FIA decides to do (to call it off definitely for example).--Island92 (talk) 14:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Something should be added to the changes section.Tvx1 14:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

We had a separate table for suspended/postponed/cancelled GPs that were in the original calendars for 2020 and 2021; what's stopping us from doing the same here? Sceptre (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Because the FIA statement doesn't conclusively cancel it, as per the rest of the discussion in this section. It says the race cannot go ahead in these circumstances, but doesn't explicitly say "it is cancelled". Joseph2302 (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

It is an ongoin fight of edits. In order not make things worse, I propose to leave the race as "cancelled".--Island92 (talk) 14:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

That the situation is very different. Previous seasons had calendars that were changed extensively while the season was ongoing. This is one isolated race and having an entire table for that would be overkill.Tvx1 14:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Additionally, the tables for the 2020 and 2021 season was because multiple rounds were suspended/postponed/cancelled. I beleive that we had previously reached a consensus that a table would be unjustified for seasons which saw only one change. SSSB (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

2022 Russian Grand Prix removed from the calendar. What should we do now?--Island92 (talk) 20:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Page updated. I think now is more relevant that the Grand Prix is no longer listed, which means it was dropped from the calendar.--Island92 (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Apparently the race’s contract has been suspended, but the promoter claims it could still take place.Tvx1 21:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This calendar which is more important, on FIA.com, still includes the Russian race. Page updated.--Island92 (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I think it's unrealistic for us to expect FIA.com or F1.com to be updated instantly... SSSB (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Why would that calendar on the FIA site more important? That sort of webpage is always late on being updated.Tvx1 09:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

If it gets unsuspended before September.... SSSB (talk) 23:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit notice

*Admin's hat on*

If we can agree on what wording / end notes are to be used, I can create an edit notice saying not to change such wording without first gaining consensus at talk, subject to gaining consensus here to have an edit notice, of course. An alternative would be a temporary increase in protection to EC level, but I'd rather not go that way. Mjroots (talk) 05:37, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

seems wise to me. SSSB (talk) 12:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

The current listing as a separate entry under the main calendar is, to me, a good solution. Can we agree that this is the best way to cover the situation? Mjroots (talk) 13:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree, until FIA shares more information status for this affected Grand Prix. Island92 (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. SSSB (talk) 17:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Race cancelled.--Island92 (talk) 19:55, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

And with that it looks like we won't be needing an edit notice, although it remains an optio should it be required.Mjroots (talk) 20:12, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I think that it isn't worth keeping a table for just one Grand Prix called off. Had we had multiple races called off (as 2020 and 2021) a table would have been suitable. Prose below is sufficient to explain why this determined Grand Prix was called off.--Island92 (talk) 22:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Agree. The MOS says that prose should be used rather than tables. So have 1 bullet point in the calendar changes section rather than a table of 1 item. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Haas to drop Uralkali sponsorship on livery at Barcelona Testing

As you are very well aware, The current administration of Russia has become very unpopular over the last 48 hours, and that is putting it very lightly. Due to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, HAAS has dropped all Uralkali logos from their liveries and is running a plain white livery for their cars. I just wanted to see if this would warrant a mention on this page, or the page for the VF-22, whenever that is created.

Source: https://www.espn.com/f1/story/_/id/33362478/haas-removes-uralkali-branding-final-day-f1-testing OrlandoApollosFan69 (talk) 03:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• It is relevant for both. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 05:32, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
  • I don't think it is relevant here. We don't mention Alpine taking on BWT as a sponser, so I don't see why we should cover Uralkali being dropped. As far as I'm concerned its relevance is limited to Haas F1 Team and possibly Haas VF-22 SSSB (talk) 08:58, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Sorry, my bad, I didn't realise what article this comment was on. The Haas and VF-22 articles are the appropriate places. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks, just making sure where the information should go. OrlandoApollosFan69 (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

russian grand prix

shouldn't the russian grand prix be removed from the list, they have confirmed it is impossible to host the russian grand prix due to the invasion. TTTTRZON (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

A long talk about is just above.--Island92 (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, they have stated they couldn’t host it NOW, but it wasn’t supposed to take place NOW anyway.Tvx1 17:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

How F1 has stated about running the Russian Grand Prix is very vague. They haven't 'Cancelled' the event, they stated that it's "Impossible to hold the Russian Grand Prix in the current circumstances", which means that it could go ahead, if the situation dies down between now and September. Hiflex480 (talk) 22:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, in wikipedia terms literally nothing has changed, the Grand Prix is on the official calendar so it should stay on this one. Equally the entry list still shows Haas entered as Uralkali so that should really be what it says on the page too Duds 2k (talk) 10:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Mazepin's flag (centralized discussion)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Per the FIA's statement, it looks like Mazepin will be running as a neutral competitor under the FIA flag until further notice, as opposed to under the RAF's flag from last season.

I've edited the article, but I'm aware that it was a quick edit and for the purposes of other articles (e.g. GP articles, the WEC articles for Kyvat), we should agree on a consensus wording for the footnotes. How's this for a start?

“ Nikita Mazepin is a Russian driver, who is taking part in the championship as a neutral competitor, due to the FIA's ban on Russian emblems in response to the Russo-Ukrainian War.[cite] ”

Sceptre (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good, but I'd use this as the reference, rather than the tweet. Mjroots (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Sounds really good to me, really sensible.--Island92 (talk) 21:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Added a similar sentence based on 2021 style. Island92 (talk) 23:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

My issue is here that we‘re stating that Mazepin IS taking part as a neutral competitor, even though we only have a general FIA statement offering Russians and Belarussians the option to compete as neutrals. We have nothing from Mazepin confirming he‘ll use that option. He could also simply request a different nationality.Tvx1 14:34, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Basically, Mazepin is Russian. FIA states Russian driver can compete under FIA flag. Island92 (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH.Tvx1 15:35, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Sentence fixed. Island92 (talk) 15:40, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

But the FIA does not state that he does. He has other options.Tvx1 17:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Good point, Tvx1. I've tweaked the wording of the endnote to say that he "can compete under the FIA flag". Mjroots (talk) 18:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Although, realistically, if he could compete under another flag, he would've done so last year when the RAF doping ban was in effect (like how Albon was speculated to be racing under the British flag this year if the TAF got a doping ban).

In any case, the news coverage of the FIA's restrictions on Russian (and Belorussian) drivers has been almost entirely focused on Mazepin—especially due to his father's links with the Kremlin—so the SYNTH violation would be de minimis (indeed, nearly all sources are taking it as a fait accompli that if he races this season, it will be under the FIA flag). Sceptre (talk) 23:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

He could still apply for citizenship of a different country now, if he didn’t have one already, if he wishes to sever his ties with Russia entirely.Tvx1 07:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Out of necessity I think we need to wait until the entry list is updated or the next test (whichever comes first) to assess how Mazepin's nationality will be treated. I would also like to point out that our current FIA flag graphic appears to be inaccurate. Also, as discussed elsewhere, it is fairly likely this entire discussion will be a moot point if Haas drop Mazepin as a result of losing Uralkali's support. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:09, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I seem to recall last year where someone tried to argue that we should use a white flag for Mazepin, when in fact the FIA graphics didn't have a flag for him at all, and it was just a blank space where the flag goes. We did have that flag as an image, but it was deleted yesterday/this morning as a copyright violation. SSSB (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

If you're referring to me last year, I argued we should use the RAF graphic (which I created) because it was exactly what the FIA used, instead of being a blank white square which is what some editors preferred (despite no official source using a blank square). The flag used previously was blue on white rather than white on blue, but either way I'm just pointing out I don't think we should be changing the flag before it's updated on the entry list. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 11:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

We don’t know exactly what the «FIA flag» will look like, and a render of a physical flag used in an article is not necessarily a good source. It’s safe to assume it will be the FIA logo on a canvas though, but because the FIA logo is above the threshold of originality for copyright protection, we can not use it everywhere we’d like to. When the logo can be considered replacable, meaning we can find alternative solutions like what I’ve done with the current graphic (only using the text of the logo), that’s what we’re supposed to do per copyright guidelines. If the flag used turns out to be e.g. white on blue rather than blue on white, it can be updated to better match. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 10:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree, my point was more that we've gone and tried to predict the FIA's flag custom rather than wait for the entry list to be updated. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 11:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree that we should wait and see what the FIA do. Having something as a placeholder is okay for now, but when we get to the first race (and assuming Mazepin is driving), then we can see what flag or non-flag they use to represent him. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn’t call it «trying to predict the future». It’s an interim solution, considering the decision is confirmed and thus there are no other options at this time with both the Russian flag and RAF flag being out of the question. If there comes a graphic that’s in official use, we’ll either update the file or (if it’s copyright protected), try to match it as best as we can. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. I was suggesting we should have remained with the RAF flag until the entry list was updated, but given how clear the FIA has been I agree that keeping it there would be inappropriate. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 14:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Mazepin's flag could be seen after Bahrein first day testing on 10 March. Example after Spanish test second day testing.--Island92 (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Mazepin's RAF flag from testing is the same flag he raced under last year, but it is no longer permitted. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I know. Until Spanish test he used that flag. From Bahrain test onwards he's due to use another flag, unless he's replaced.--Island92 (talk) 18:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

That's what we're talking about, that other flag would be the FIA flag, which we have a version of in the article currently but don't know exactly what will look like. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 18:32, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

For this reason I posted that message before. Not until Bahrain first day running test results are published can we see the new flag close to Nikita Mazepin's name.--Island92 (talk) 18:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

If we want a placeholder flag, there's ([[File:Flag of None.svg|22px]]). Mjroots (talk) 19:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't feel need to put it for the time being. Anyway, as we kept Albon "without" flag there was {{flagicon image|Flag of None.svg}}. Island92 (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

We should have done so. We clearly jumped the gun here. He was never entered under the FIA flag and his contract has been terminated now.Tvx1 09:18, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Russian drivers banned from competing in the UK

Mazepin isn’t competing in 2022
The following discussion has been closed by Tvx1. Please do not modify it.
Motorsport UK has announced that it will not recognise Russian or Belarusian driving licences following the Russian invasion of Ukraine (per BBC), which would preclude Mazepin from competing at Silverstone. How should we cover this? HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 12:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC) We should wait, as the British Grand Prix is over 4 months away, and so the situation could well change again before then. If/when Mazepin cannot compete at Grands Prix and has to be substituted, it should be added to a "Mid-season changes" section like we do for any other mid-season changes. But right now, Mazepin hasn't raced at all, and it's 4 months until a race he may be banned from. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Assuming Mazepin is not replaced by the Haas team for this season entirely (which seems increasingly likely), I would suggest handling it the same way as we would when any driver is unable to drive in a specific round and they are substituted for another driver. For example, when the Kimster got COVID Kubica drove in his stead. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2022 (UTC) We should wait and be patient. Things may change rapidly in base on what's happening in UKR.--Island92 (talk) 12:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC) The FIA have decided that drivers with Russian or Belarussian licences won‘t compete with them anyway, but rather as neutral conpetitor. So this doesn‘t make much difference for Mazepin.Tvx1 13:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC) I concur with the previous comments. A lot can change in 4 months. To say that Mazepin won't be allowed to race is WP:CRYSTAL and to say that he might not be able to race is WP:UNDUE at this time, because it is 4 months away. SSSB (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2022 (UTC) It's not just about which country's competition licence is used though. There is also the question of which country's passport an individual holds. A ban on holders of Russian and Belarusian passport holders from entering the UK would not be beyond the realms of possibility. Mjroots (talk) 15:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC) This is just about the license. Banning Russian citizens from entering the UK is both highly unlikely and, regardless, just WP:SPECULATION. Wikipedia talk pages are not a forum for discussing what might or might not happen in the future. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2022 (UTC) I realise this may be a bit forum-y, but this issue may well be decided imminently and independent of what is happening with the British GP. It has been suggested that Haas is poised to drop Uralkali sponsorship, which pays for Mazepin's ride. Such a decision would likely be made well in advance of the season opener, so I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that Mazepin is dropped in favour of Pietro Fittipaldi. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC) Looks like Mazepin is out and Fittipaldi is in. Obviously we need to wait for the official announcement before the article can be updated. Mjroots (talk) 12:09, 3 March 2022 (UTC) I don't need to mention that Wikipedia is not a forum, nor that speculation on Twitter has no encyclopedic value regardless of what user it comes from; but even by those standards, the user you're linking to is highly unreliable, meaning pure guessing would be as good of a source for what looks to be happening. The reality is we simply don't know. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 12:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC) An FIA accredited journalist "highly unreliable"? Unusable for Wikipedia purposes yes, but that accreditation does carry weight. Like I said above, we do need to wait for an official announcement by Haas though. Mjroots (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Only sources coming from FIA, Formula 1 and, in this case, Haas F1 Team, are trusy. For something else we cannot rely on. Island92 (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Why are you attacking Mjroots. He acknowleged that the tweet is not good enough to use as a citation. SSSB (talk) 14:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC) I'm sorry if you considered it to be an attack. It wasn't my intention, and never had it been intended. Just to clarify those sources linked to FIA, Formula 1 and, in this case, Haas F1 Team, have a better reputation than Twitter (usually).--Island92 (talk) 16:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC) That doesn't mean we can't discuss information coming from other sources here, even if they are not useable in the article. Mjroots (talk) 19:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC) What purpose would that serve beyond WP:FORUM? Ved havet ≈ (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Latest from Sky Sports Germany (in German). Mjroots (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC) We may discuss whatever you want regarding current Mazepin's status, but this is an encyclopedia, isn't it? As well as the fact you might provide as many sources as you can (maybe we should call them rumors instead, suppositions, things going to happen soon...) but it doesn't make a difference because they are not official basically. Would you like to make us aware of them? Ok, I will be enjoying reading them. And this is not an attack, but a simply consideration. This latest source coming from Sky GER was added this afternoon but the edit was reverted by Jestal50 as it is not confirmed by the team. Island92 (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC) Once again, what purpose does posting links to unusable sources on talk pages serve? I'm also not looking to "attack", but I'm suggesting you take this to a Discord server or some other platform rather than keep posting these links here. Article talk pages is not your source of speculation until the news isn't speculation anymore, WP:SPECULATION has no place on Wikipedia talk pages either. Please be advised on WP:TALKNO and WP:FORUM. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 22:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC) @Ved havet: Sky GER meets WP:RS and is a secondary source. HAAS are a WP:PRIMARY source, as are the FIA. I was hoping that a sensible discussion could have been had about using that source and inserting the information into the article. I did not do so myself as my German is not good enough to be able to extract the info without the use of an online translation website. I was unaware that the info had already been added and then removed by Jestal50. Mjroots (talk) 05:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC) You’re mixing up Primary with dependent.Tvx1 06:59, 4 March 2022 (UTC) No, in terms of who will be racing for Haas this year, Fittipaldi (stating he will drive), Haas (and their staff involved in making the decision), FIA (the entry list, not necessarily their news articles), Mazepin (stating he won't drive) are all primary sources, as well as dependent ones. Posting links that are not suitable as citations serves to prepare us that new/inexpirenced editors may request/make changes based on these unsuitable sources. It acts as an early warning system of potential vandalism/speculation that may be added to the article in the near future. SSSB (talk) 12:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC) I read nothing to suggest that to have been the intention. Mjroots requested a sensible discussion on using the information from Sky in the article. To answer that request: Just because Sky meets WP:RS doesn't mean that everything they write is of encyclopedic value. It means that we can rely on them on telling the truth when something isn't official (and thus not appropriate for an encyclopedia yet), and they did. When reliable sources report on official news, only then is it approproate. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 12:32, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Tyres

Looking for consensus of the group instead of edit war. Island92 has reverted this edit twice, once citing that the word "diameter" was not well known[1], and the second time without explanation [2]. Should we say the change in wheel size is "the championship moving", or should we say... it is a change in wheel size? RemotelyInterested (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

One of those reverts was me. The current (i.e. not your) version is easier for people to understand. Diameter is a technical term, better to use no technical terms. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Wow, I'm really hoping that others do not feel that "diameter" is a technical term. Other wise, Wikipedia is going to be full of phrases like, "The straight line distance across the middle of the circle made by the wheel...". RemotelyInterested (talk) 12:27, 6 March 2022 (UTC)".

@Joseph2302: diameter is not a techincal term, it is common and plain english (to awnser RemotelyInterested's edit summary, knowing the defintion of diameter is on the UK national curriculum for year 6 students (10-11 years old)[3]), and less ambigous than the current The championship will move from 13 inches (33 cm) to 18 inches (46 cm) wheels where we don't define what measurement this is changing. Even if diameter were a technical term (it isn't) the solution would be a simply wikilink. SSSB (talk) 12:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

The section is literally titled "Technical regulations" and this is not Simple English Wikipedia; and even it it was a technical term (which it isn't), trying to skip around them just makes the information vague or straight-up untrue. That's why we use words like ground effect – not "suction", bargeboards – not "pointy bits", and motor generator unit–heat – whatever that is. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 16:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

The other wording is much more simple to understand, we don't need to make it verbose for no benefit. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:29, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

As Ved havet and I have pointed out, your prefered wording is actually harder to understand, (as it is vague), and it isn't verbose, the word count decreased and the wording is equally plain and basic. SSSB (talk) 22:30, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I think you're really overexaggerating how complicated of a word "diameter" is. Regardless, going from "The wheels are 18 inches" to "The wheels' diameter is 18 inches" doesn't make it more confusing, the information about something with the wheel being 18 inches is still there – but you also have the opportunity to know what specifically about the wheel is 18 inches. If you don't know what a diameter is, which is a bit unusual, there's a wikilink for you right there. What I'm confused about is why you've picked "diameter" as the word that's too technical, out of all the technical words in this section of the article. Ved havet ≈ (talk) 23:55, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

The word "diameter" is needed for clarity. A reader unfamiliar with F1 might think that 15-inch refers to the width of the tyres. With diameter included, it is crystal clear what is meant. Mjroots (talk) 13:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Imola announced til 2025, changes to calendar ASAP

via F1.com https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.formula-1-announces-it-will-race-at-imola-until-2025.Rrtuijub7DtSJKD1uqmIq.html Propork3455 (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is that relevant to this article, which already mentions that it's on the calendar this year? That info should be on the Emilia Romagna Grand Prix page, not here. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:30, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Nothing needs to be changed ASAP. It was in the calendar already.Tvx1 19:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

At the time, the Calendar section stated that the calendar is subject to change due to the Imola contract, but obviously that has been deleted since there is a new contract for Imola. Propork3455 (talk) 00:19, 9 March 2022 (UTC)