Category talk:Trans-Am Series drivers
Is this worthwhile?
[edit]With no season articles, and a main article that needs much attention (and there is no link from the main article to this page) is this category justified?
Additionally there is no real connection between Trans-Am and TrANZAM. --Falcadore (talk) 20:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Trans Am is (or moreso, was), a much more significant racing series than many of the regional Formula Renault and other ladder series that have driver categories. Also, the series has existed for over 40 years with a number of very notable drivers. The main article does need help, but that has nothing to do with the justification of the category. Categories aren't typically linked from articles. -Drdisque (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Also, what the heck is TrANZAM? Why would you mention it? I didn't. -01:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of the Formula Renault drivers one either, and certainly think that Formula Ford is massive overkill, but it's not about comparisons is it? A category should stand on its own merits, not on the supposed merits of others. I'm fairly sure by way of parrallel example when articles are submitted for FA/GA they are assesed more on an individual basis than comparitive, but I stand to be corrected.
- The reason I mentioned TrANZAM was Paul Radisich, I'm far from infallible but I don't recall 'The Rat' spending time in an American rooved category, and I was speculating if there might have been some confusion with the very similarly named New Zealand category and I fully acknowledge I could be quite wrong in this as Radisich did spend some time in the US in his Formula Pacific days.
- The problem here with this Category is the lack of context. The leading Trans-Am article is significantly short of details to give this Category of drivers context, and there are no season articles to support it.
- Another part of the issue is verifiability, Categories by their nature don't really allow for referencing, but supporting references in linked articles, whether they be the drivers articles or the series articles can fix this. --Falcadore (talk) 02:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, Paul Radisich just drove in a single race in 1988 source Yes, there are very few internet primary sources that extensively cover this series and that's probably why the series article seems so disjointed. The series has been on WP:SCR's improve list for some time, but seeing as the vast majority of their active members are European, they are not familiar with the series and haven't done much to improve it. I'll take a pass at the series article to at least clean it up and provide some sources. There's also a book that extensively covers the history of the series from 1966-1995. I should see if a library near me has it.-Drdisque (talk) 02:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- The long list of competing cars should be a particular target as it provides no context, and the nation of manufacture is a stat for the sake of it, unless there is some kind of trophy purely for home country of manufacture of these cars. Tables or lists should be used to accompany text, not substitute, and that just looks glaringly bad IMHO. If you prefer I can make this note on the relevant talk page? --Falcadore (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, Paul Radisich just drove in a single race in 1988 source Yes, there are very few internet primary sources that extensively cover this series and that's probably why the series article seems so disjointed. The series has been on WP:SCR's improve list for some time, but seeing as the vast majority of their active members are European, they are not familiar with the series and haven't done much to improve it. I'll take a pass at the series article to at least clean it up and provide some sources. There's also a book that extensively covers the history of the series from 1966-1995. I should see if a library near me has it.-Drdisque (talk) 02:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)