Talk:2010 British Touring Car Championship

Motorsport Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MotorsportWikipedia:WikiProject MotorsportTemplate:WikiProject Motorsportmotorsport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Entries

Either we have RML and Dynamics there or we have neither. RML is perhaps more confirmed than Dynamics based on the Autosport story this week. "Jason Plato will race an RML Chevrolet in the British Touring Car Championship this year after plans for Volvo to return to the series with a works team fell through last week." Jonathan McLeod (talk) 13:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RML have not finalised their plans [1]. As for Dynamics, they have been confirmed with two Civics, but no drivers, by Honda UK [2]. Therefore, it is appropriate to have Dynamics but no RML. - mspete93 15:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using TcT as a source is very unwise. Like the precedence set by the F1 2010 and similar articles we should avoid listing entries until they are officially announced. And as such stories on the btcc.net website are what we should consider as official entries Jonathan McLeod (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike Autosport, the RML story used a quote from the team. Dynamics has been officially announced by Honda UK. The BTCC is not like F1. Regular teams often do not 'confirm' their entry, just their drivers. btcc.net has mentioned both Dynamics and Motorbase in recent weeks so there is no need to doubt their participation. - mspete93 15:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

I definitely believe that the table with the single reference to the OFFICAL BTCC Entry List as posted on btcc.net this morning is all we need. All the other sources are superseded by the publication of the official list Jonathan McLeod (talk) 15:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most motorsport articles of late use a reference per driver, with the entry list also referenced. Whether it be Formula One, Indy Lights, MotoGP/Moto2/125s or British Formula Three, each follow the same guideline/consensus. Hence, it should remain as is. Cs-wolves (talk) 16:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should also reference the nationality and other details then. Shall I add that in? Look this is completely ridiculous. As of today we have a new source which completely supersedes any previous announcements!Jonathan McLeod (talk) 21:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Older F1 Season articles are a great example of this. Clean and uncluttered by useless references now we have an official list. The only point of the references is to verify the content. This is better achieved by having a general reference to the OFFICIAL entry list, not some crap Touring Car Times or the like has reported. Is it really that difficult to understand? The purpose is not to maintain a bibliography of the off-season news reports, it is merely to provide and accurate entry list. The mass of references is completely unnecessary. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:When to cite Jonathan McLeod (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting back in the old, sometimes incorrect, sometimes invalid references! The official list, as published by the series itself takes precedence over anything on Touring Car Times or Autosport. How is this difficult to understand? Maybe in other series where an official list is not published in the same way that TOCA do for the BTCC then their approach is valid, but when there is an official list we should refer to that. Please familiarise yourself with the contents of this article too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Why_and_when_to_cite_sources . It seems to me there's a lot of people on here who think they know what they are doing when that isn't really the case. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also take a look at most TV series pages and similar, and you will see that the episode names do not all have separate references once they have been shown (they do beforehand, as we had here). For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_House_episodes or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Top_Gear_episodes or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Doctor_Who_serials or note we do not reference the participation of individual premier league teams here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League_2009-10 This seems a very straight forward issue to me. This article is verifiable, but without the obtrusive footnoting of every single component of the table. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 21:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Glew

I propose that Glew should only have his name once on the entry list because it makes the list look like it has more drivers on it then there has been in the championship. I know that the table is aranged in numerical order but i propose it should change in these circumstances. Mharris99 (talk) 16:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As is the case in other championships, drivers should only span two teams when these teams are next to each other numerically. - mspete93 17:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]