Talk:Monaco Grand Prix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Monaco Grand Prix was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Monaco Grand Prix:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:


1 2 3


Hi, I noticed that Ayrton Senna's Brazilian nationality has been mentioned *five* times in this article, which is fine. However, shouldn't we mention other nationalities then?

I wanted to add that five-time champion Fangio was from Argentina, and it has been deleted - why the bias against mentioning that? I don't think it ruins the sentence.

Whoever has a problem with it, please discuss it here before deleting it. Otherwise I will continue to maintain it.

Fangio is a legend, and denying this detail of his nationality strikes me as a little bit odd, especially when compared to the mention of other racers.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 28 April 2007

I removed the detail, simply because the way it was added to the article (That 1950 race provided future five-time world champion Juan Manuel Fangio, from Argentina, with his first win in a World Championship race) was awkward and made it look like an extra irrelevant fact. You're right that Senna's nationality is noted five times, and that's probably too many. A driver's nationality is often used to vary the article and introduce the driver. In Fangio's case, that has been done by saying future five-time world champion Juan Manuel Fangio instead of Argentinian Juan Manuel Fangio. Using the nationality 5 times suggests a lack of variety in the article, so that will be addressed. I think the "from Argentina" detail though looks out of place as it is, but will leave it for others to comment and decide on how to address it. AlexJ 23:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Monaco part of the European Championship[edit]

Looking at this site, the best resource I can find on the net for pre-war racing, the Monaco GP seems to only have been part of the European championship in 1936 and 1937, although it was formally designated as an International Grand Prix (Grande Epreuve) from 1933 to 1939. Unless anyone knows differently I will re-word on that basis (when I get the time! I used my allocation this morning doing the research!) 4u1e 07:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. 4u1e 09:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


How can this be justified as fair use? The criteria is 'to illustrate the organization, item, or event in question'. But this article is about the Monaco GP, not the Indy 500, so I'd say that it's there purely as a decoration. Alexj2002 10:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Removed. 4u1e 22 February 2007 16:39

'Master of Monaco'[edit]

I see we had a discussion on this above last summer, the result of which was to remove reference to 'Master of Monaco' as a title, as there appeared to be little support for it in the references. While Senna is referred to in this way, so are G Hill and Schumacher (try googling 'Master of Monaco' and each of the drivers' names - you'll get a similarly small number of hits for each). I think it eventually was reinstated on the strength of a reference to Senna being 'master of Monaco' in one race, but I've removed that as not really supporting the claim. Having failed to find a better source, I'm going to remove this material now. As ever, if anyone finds a better source, it can go back in. Cheers. 4u1e 23 February 2007, 12:25

I've also switched from 'King of Monaco' to 'Mr Monaco' in the lead (referring to Graham Hill) because I believe Mr Monaco is a name more often associated with Hill (supporting evidence: It's the title of one of his biographies and Hill + 'Mr Monaco' turns up about 5 times as many hits on Google as Hill + 'King of Monaco'). 4u1e 23 February 2007, 12:38


Blnguyen has objected to the 'notable races' section. (see Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Monaco_Grand_Prix). I don't really agree with the reasoning, but I'm not entirely happy with the current structure. Two thoughts for discussion:

  1. Are all the races listed really notable? Are the '65, '92 and '93 races really normally mentioned when discussing the race?
  2. Should we restructure the 'Notable races' and 'Notable drivers' sections into a single 'History of the race' section? This would include much of the same material, but would offer scope to mention other things, probably be more readable and get away from Blnguyen's concerns.

Views? 4u1e 19:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm working up a re-written history in my sandbox, if anyone wants to comment. 4u1e 16:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, no commment here, so I've transferred it from my sandbox to the article. The Formula One section is too long, the writing needs work and the references need tidying up, but I'm happier with the structure this way. 4u1e 21:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

A further thought[edit]

The article is rather F1-centric. The lists of winners etc only feature F1 results. Should we be less POV and include pre-F1 results? (The effect of this would be to add Bugatti and Mercedes-Benz to the list of multiple winners). The wording could be tweaked in other places to reflect pre-F1 events. Anyone agree? 4u1e 20:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

4u1e just go adead and do whatever you what to this article. Someone need to do somethin soon. It's been sittng on the FAC page for over a mounth now and nothing has been added for a week. In supried it hasn't bben removed really. Buc 06:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I've already done quite a lot ;-) I'm going to keep working on it as I can - where I'm not sure what's best, I'll ask for the views of others. Where I get no other views, I'll do what I think is best. Wikipedia is meant to be a collaborative medium, after all. If the FAC fails, it's not the end of the world (I don't think it's unusual for an article to be on the list for a month, by the way). I don't think the article was really ready for FA nomination anyway, but it having been nominated I preferred to work on it rather than just let it slide. I do think we've improved it over the last month, so it's not wasted effort. 4u1e 11:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

There's still stuff you could do, you know. The references are not all in consistent Cite book, cite web etc format, which ought really to be sorted out as well. Cheers. 4u1e 11:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

1948 race[edit]

Looks to me like the '48 race was a pre-championship Formula One race, as it was apparently won by a Maserati 4CLT [1], a pre-war voiturette, which I guess would have been eligible for F1 races post war. They certainly seem to have entered several F1 races in the early years of the championship. 4u1e 23:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I know that Grand Prix races in the immediate post-war period were made up of whatever cars that had survived the war. There's a fascinating story about some Alfa Romeo Grand Prix cars being hidden in an Italian cheese factory, but I digress. The FIA (possibly still called the AIACR at this point) created Formula A (which later became F1) to fit what cars were available, so that meant both 4.5 litre normally-aspirated engines and 1.5 litre supercharged engines. Thus voiturettes could compete. Readro 00:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Which leads me to my next question - do we want or need to identify what rules the non-championship races were held to in the list of winners? 4u1e 07:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think there's a right or wrong answer on this, but I'd be in favour of it. Readro 17:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

FAC failed[edit]

FAC failed as of today, which is fair enough. I do think the article has improved through thisw process, however, thanks to all those who contributed. Looking at the comments, I think the following still need addressing:

  • Referencing. Some still missing, format for others need standardising, including archiving where possible.
  • Writing - needs an end to end copyedit. 1a was raised as an object at the review.
  • WP:MoS - could do with a check against this as well.

Cheers. 4u1e 08:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Copy Edit[edit]

I did some copy editing today to try and clean this up a little bit. There were a few inconsistencies across the article so I fixed those up. I also removed some items from the first set of paragraphs that were covered again in more details later on in the article.

I'll leave the {{copyedit}} on the page for now but if there are no objections I'll remove it in seven days. Nicko (TalkContribs) 05:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I've had another go through the article and removed the tag. It's not perfect, but it doesn't seem likely that it's going to get much attention this way, and it's in far better condition than some other articles! Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


Would anyone here be against a re-nomination? Buc (talk) 12:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

inaccuracy in wording in the opening paragraph[edit]

how can Monaco GP be an F1 race since 1929 when the first F1 championship was held in 1950? granted "F1 has roots in European Grand Prix Motor Racing", but still this reads as a factual error.

It doesn't say it's an F1 race since 1929. It says the MGP has been run since 1929, and that the MGP is currently an F1 race but it doesn't connect the two facts. The second paragraph of the opening explains clearly it's history as to when it became an F1 race. On a side note, please remember to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ at the end - helps people keep track of the conversation. AlexJ (talk) 11:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Indy 500[edit]

I dont think its correct to say the Indy 500 is one of the most prestigious automobile races in the world. Maybe this is the thought amungst Americans but this isn't conservapedia, I think that should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Beg to differ: [2]: "(The Monaco Grand Prix) has become one of the most important races in the world, alongside the Indianapolis 500 and the 24 Hours of Le Mans. The three races are collectively known as the Triple Crown." It stays. AlexJ (talk) 20:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Schumacher a Nazi?[edit]

Could someone change the Nazi Flags for Micheal Scumacher, that signify the nationality of the driver.

Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScroogeMcDuck (talkcontribs) 19:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Lap Record in Race information box??[edit]

Michael Schumacher holds the lap record with a 1:14.439 set in 2004 according to the official F1 site. I believe this should be included in the race information box along with most wins by a driver and constructor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Number1schumacherfan (talkcontribs) 01:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. For some Grand Prix, like the British Grand Prix, where the venue has not been one event throughout the sports' history a lap record cannot be made because circuits aren't really the same length. Besides, lap records are really for circuit articles only, in this case it would be the Circuit de Monaco that he holds the lap record for. --Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 10:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

German flags[edit]

Can anyone please change the german flag to the proper one ! Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

If you're referring to the flags for 1935-1937, then they already are "the proper ones" - the Nazi flag was the official flag of Germany during that period. DH85868993 (talk) 03:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Monaco Grand Prix/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will do a GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 15:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I am about half way through the article but I wanted to make a comment on this statement: "Prost lost that year's championship by only half a point - had the race not been stopped early, if Prost had finished second, he would have gained 6 points as opposed to 4.5, and been crowned World Champion." It is not good form to speculate as to what would have happened. Given the previously-stated unpredictable nature of this race, anything could have happened had the race continued, and Prost could have not finished the race at all. I would recommend trimming this statement to only the fact that Prost lost the championship by half a point. Readers can infer what might have happened had the race been allowed to continue to the end.

(inserted later) If you watch the full BBC race coverage on youtube it is clear that Prost was losing about 20-30 seconds a lap in the very last two laps (i.e. his half-lap lead evaporates almost instantly) and would not have been able to hold second either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:130:400:1660:2476:BAB5:6DF5:98BD (talk) 21:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Take care with the word "prestigious". I removed it from one sentence. It is usually unnecessary and can be interpreted to be a peacock word.

I added a [by whom?] tag to one statement that could be in violation of WP:WEASEL, check it out and see what you think. H1nkles (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Fixed a couple of these. Agree with the 'prestigious' you removed, but note that this particular race does merit the title so its use will sometimes merit the word. I look forward to further comment. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
No argument here that the race is certainly "prestigious", which is why I left one of the uses of the word in the article. Thank you for your prompt work. Since you've jumped on it so quickly I will hold off on notifying interested projects and editors of this review. H1nkles (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the information about Schumacher's "accident" and controversy really adds to the article. It is also supported by an in-line citation that has a dead link tag since May 2009. Consider removing.

There are several [citation needed] tags from as early as February 2007 in the "Organisation" section. This is a concern and should be addressed.

There are also several dead links in the references section including: 21, 40. Links 1 and 22 also do not appear to be working correctly in my browser and 33 and 34 don't open at all. Please look into these.

Overall the article is stable and current. I'd like to see the speculative statement, and the (in my opinion) unnecessary information about Schumacher's controversial actions in qualifying, be removed. I don't think this disqualifies the article from GA though. The writing is ok, images are good, no edit wars. My primary concerns are related to the dead links, and the [citation needed] tags in the Organisation section. I will put the article on hold for a week pending work on the cites. I will advise editors and projects of this in the hopes that these can be addressed. H1nkles (talk) 16:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Deadlinks and unreffed sections fixed. Prose issues may be best handled by someone more familiar with the subject. Wizardman 18:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Wizardman. Refs 34 and 35 still seem to be broken, but apart from that I'd tentatively say all the issues identified have been fixed. I've thought about removing the Schumacher incident, but it made big news at the time, so I think probably counts as a notable part of the event's history (as the 1994 Australian Grand Prix and the 1997 European Grand Prix do for their respective circuits). Are we missing anything, H1nkles? 4u1e (talk) 07:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Great work, thanks. The two refs (34 and 35) are still dead as far as I can tell. Can new references be put in there? Otherwise I have no problem keeping it at GA. I'll go ahead and process the GA keep trusting that you'll find a fix for those two dead links. H1nkles (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Fixed with archived copies of the pages from the wayback machine. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 01:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Monte Carlo Formula 1 tr map.svg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Monte Carlo Formula 1 tr map.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 25 August 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Track map of the Monte Carlo F1 track right.svg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Track map of the Monte Carlo F1 track right.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 25 August 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Part in France?[edit]

Is it true that part of the circuit is in France? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

No. Tvx1 12:52, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Monaco Grand Prix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

The archive URL doesn't work so have I reverted it and tagged it with {{cbignore}}. DH85868993 (talk) 03:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)