Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorsport

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Motorsport and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30: 30 days

This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 2 July 2012.

Australian Grand Prix article check

Hi, I'm new to the vocabulary and names in the area. I started this page and would appreciate if you could expand it in next 1-2 days:

Possibly CC Island92 and DH85868993 as edited some page here about related topic.

Many thanks.

Regards, -- Gryllida 07:05, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've never touched WikiNews before but I did my best to copyedit what is there so far. I don't have the time to expand it at the moment, but I'd gladly look it over again once more content is added. Also, for future reference, anything relating to Formula One is best addressed at the sub WikiProject. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the article has been deleted. T v x1 20:43, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes news got old before it was written up properly. Unfortunately, it was way above my head and the site rules are to publish within 3 days or else it is not a news. Gryllida 11:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ATCC/V8 Supercars season MOSFLAG breaches

.User:Maxster573 has systematically gone through all of the Supercars Championship articles (mainly 2013 onwards) and added an unnecessary amount of flags to the 'Season summary' sections. I've removed what I can, but as my edit limit is going to run out (and I have no intention of starting an account) can a proper user please clean these up? This is not the first time such flagrant MOSFLAG breaches have been made to these articles, and judging by a past warning for a libelous article this users' activity may need to be monitored. ~2026-18282-79 (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m guessing this deals with the manufacturers’ flag? But what about the state flags in the results summaries? T v x1 09:52, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Any info on Cyclekarting?

I somewhat randomly discovered the Wikipedia article for cyclekarting, and it's really bad over there. I need an expert on this to basically chainsaw the whole thing (or AfD it if deemed necessary). Hyperlink: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclekart —It's Okkirae.temp ^('Sup?)! 19:14, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What specifically is bad about the article? Assadzadeh (talk) 20:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are no sources and needs to be rewritten. There's just no information on them and I need an expert. —It's Okkirae.temp ^('Sup?)! 15:18, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Rachel Robertson (racing driver)#Requested move 14 March 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rachel Robertson (racing driver)#Requested move 14 March 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 09:15, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article Review Requests

Hello.

Could anyone have a look at my outstanding AfC for
Draft:2003 British Superbike Championship,
Draft:2002 British Superbike Championship,
Draft:2000 British Superbike Championship

I've also have another issue with the reason for the rejection of Draft:1990 Formula TT Season and Draft:1989 Formula TT Season. I've provided multiple (2) online result sheets and added the requested Book References. After being pending for 8 weeks, the articles aren't in a worse state than the ones I did before for 1977 Formula TT Season and 1978 Formula TT Season, so I question the validation of the evaluation and would like to have another opinion.

Thank You

M1GHTY M4VS (talk) 13:01, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

With no disrespect to your efforts intended; they're not encyclopaedia articles. They exist solely for reproductions of information tables. See WP:INDISCRIMINATE which says: To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources. As explained in § Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This does not restrict editors from citing databases; however, Wikipedia itself should not be a database. Rally Wonk (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Issue I take with it that I based it on the existing structure that has been followed since in the subsequent seasons (for the BSB) (and put the translation of the TTF wiki articles up). Current and following season articles follow the same structure, bolstered by more online resources (since waybackmachine can only date back to around 2002). Most Reliable source are the Motocourse Books which are a secondary source to my understanding. For the way the structure is set up I cannot see a differentiator to subsequent seasons or related articles. MotoGP as the FIM Motorcycle World Championship pre-Internet also has eligible articles and I struggle to see exclusion criteria.

If I compare the ladder system TTF1 would be at the time the Number 2 World Championship behind the MotoGP. Comparatively the 1980 European Formula Two Championship is around the same behind Formula 1 and has similar sources. The article 1979 European Formula Two Championship

has more per event description but those aren't mandatory by that subsequent structure in the latter articles - That is my issue with the evaluation. The base overview is in both main articles British Superbike Championship and TT Formula, so I genuinely don't know what to contextualize and is expected in the individual season articles further to what I see in existing ones adjacent to the topic. Is it possible to elaborate the Indiscriminate statement with an applicable example on the ones that fulfill it available compared to the ones I AfC'ed ?

On the BSB season talk pages I have put to-do on the tables on the issues I acknowledge, but I blank out what to make of the statement so it probably requires someone else to put further information, that I don't see and recognize because the issue on the rejection I have addressed. M1GHTY M4VS (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if I have digressed into 'WP is not' instead of tackling the reliability of the sources like you asked. This is just my opinion.

If I were to ask you what is notable about (eg.) 1990 Formula TT Season, and your reply is 'here are the winners and some associated stats', then I don't need an encyclopedia, I need a database. It's basically just saying 'here is the proof of the resuts, therefore it happened' - and verifiability doesn't justify inclusion.

Can you extract anything about that season from this, one of the sources? It doesn't even return Fogarty's name.

OK, there are many, many articles like this across wikipedia and motorsport but that doesn't justify anything. If there were such a wikimedia program called 'wikibase' where editors could collate stats like this, then wikipedia could shrink by 50%. But then what's the point? It's just parroting the very sources it'd all cite. Rally Wonk (talk) 20:08, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. I possibly made a mistake with that source, I don't recall it being US based but rather UK and I didn't find this online copy like you did but I specifically searched for associated book references to the season and had it as a result with the except but now I can't replicate that result. M1GHTY M4VS (talk) 10:04, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]