Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One

Nationality articles

I've just finished a rather lengthy project: creating articles about nationalities of Formula One drivers:

I've now completed every country that has a world champion and transferred it to the main namespace. It is now on DYK (Template:Did you know nominations/Formula One nationalities) and I'm hoping that it could appear on the front page when Vettel/Alonso is crowned, but it might take too long to get all of the individual articles reviewed.

I suppose the next task could be to start linking to this from the other articles. violet/riga _^[talk] 11:39, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic work! We can also places it at the Formula One list. We could make a page with small introductions of all articles with a link to the main article. What do you think? Jahn1234567890 (talk) 13:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.186.161.95 (talk)

I forgot to log in Sorry! Jahn1234567890 (talk) 13:28, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I was considering making a Nationalities of Formula One drivers page... violet/riga _^[talk] 14:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I think the List of Formula One drivers page already includes enough information on this topic, there is no reason for a Nationalities of Formula One drivers page. It is a bit redundant. Editadam 12:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Liuzzi's birth year

Hi, there is an online service by Agenzia delle Entrate about the Italian fiscal code card that allows to verify the correspondence between the tax code and personal data of a person; if you put a code and its related personal data the system says whether the data are valid or not. I've tried to put this data in the form: LZZVNT80M06E645S as fiscal code; then Liuzzi, Vitantonio, 06/08/1980, Bari, Locorotondo, Maschio. Then if you submit the data it says Dati validi (valid data). You can verify it here. So his birth year is actually 1980. If you try with 1981 as year (using LZZVNT81M06E645T as correspondent code) it says Dati non validi (Invalid data). 87.5.82.83 (talk) 19:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

P.S. With the same system you can also verify that Giovanna Amati was born in 1959, not in 1962. 87.5.82.83 (talk) 20:50, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

On Liuzzi's website, [1], he clearly states his year of birth, thanks for the rubbish though. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Except if you looked at our article on Vitantonio Liuzzi, you'd see that his birth year is in question. Various sources use either 1980 or 1981. This therefore provides yet another source to the debate, and hence is not at all rubbish. The³5₉ (Talk) 21:39, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Dontforgetthisone: That's a bit harsh, especially considering birth year fudging is a favourite pastime of racing drivers. Plenty of past examples. --Falcadore (talk) 00:07, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Dontforgetthisone, start being a bit more civil or we can take it somewhere. As Falcadore said, switching birthdates is something a lot of racing drivers have done, like Ratzenberger. Personal websites aren't always going to be fully truthful. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I've changed it back to 1980, on the basis of the evidence above and FORIX, etc. DH85868993 (talk) 10:45, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes OK, I admit, I snapped to early. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 12:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

But can I just say F1.com ([2]), Crash.net ([3]), F1 Fanatic ([4]), BBC F1 ([5]) and his official website I said earlier ([6]) all say 1981.

Which all would have been based on driver/team supplied data who has a vested interest sometimes in falsifying the data. --Falcadore (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I've also changed Amati's year of birth to 1959 (this is supported by numerous other sources including FORIX and oldracingcars.com). DH85868993 (talk) 13:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

@Dontforgetthisone: there are also other websites reporting 1980, exempli gratia the Superstars Series profile, a 2005 interview (the source cited for this interview is ITV-F1) and La Repubblica ([7]). I must also say that Codice Fiscale is not rubbish, but a personal and unique document as an Identity Card can be ("the card serves to identify unambiguously individuals residing in Italy irrespective of residency status." - from the wikipedia article); the code that Liuzzi would have if he was born in 1981 does not exist, the code with 1980 exists. We're on an encyclopedia and we must write the real birth year, not the one Liuzzi would like to be written. :) 79.51.77.116 (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree, it must be said that sources like the Codice Fiscale trump any of our usual F1 sources, and stuff like Crash.net and F1Fanatic are not great sources anyway, and F1.com is lousy with errors as we know. The chances of the Codice Fiscale being wrong are effectively nil. Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

template:F1stat

I've started a discussion at template talk:F1stat about the usefulness of the "seasonposition" and "seasonpoints" stats. You are welcome to express any views you may have on the matter at the discussion. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 23:17, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Triple Crown of Motorsport nominated for deletion

Triple Crown of Motorsport has been nominated for deletion. Please express any views you may have on the matter at the AfD page. DH85868993 (talk) 14:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Fernando Alonso:‎ ‎Formula One career: New section: Comparison with team-mate

An editor has added this section to the Alonso article. I have removed it with an edit note telling them not to bother if they are not going to do it for every racing driver, ever. I wondered what the project's opinion of this would be. Britmax (talk) 19:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

It's WP:OR so you were right to get rid of it. --Falcadore (talk) 20:50, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

There is a "comparison with team-mates" section in Alain Prost, but I don't think it adds much value (I mean if you're a multiple F1 World Champion, there's a fair chance that you will have outscored your team-mate on many if not most occasions) and I'd be happy to see it deleted. As a general principle, I think such comparisons are better suited to a specialist F1 website rather than a general purpose encyclopedia like Wikipedia. DH85868993 (talk) 21:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm noticing a few "comparison with team mate" lines appearing in articles. These are rarely sourced and even if they are what's the benefit? Britmax (talk) 16:35, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Definitely right to get rid of it. Unencyclopedic. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Raikkonen photo

I was sure I've brought this up before, but apparently I haven't.

As is usual once the championship is decided, the 2012 season page was updated with the images of the first-, second- and third-placed finishers. However, I have to say that I think the photo of Kimi Räikkönen is rather unflattering. Unfortuantely, it also happens to be the only one of him that I can find in Lotus colours on the Wikimedia Commons pages.

Does anyone know of a better photo that we could use? Prisonermonkeys (talk) 09:58, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm a little confused on what is unflattering about it? Seems like a fairly normal and clear photo to me. The³5₉ (Talk) 10:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Many of his photos are unflattering. This one I have no problem with. --Falcadore (talk) 10:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

head of aero

The head of aero is important for the team McLaren and this feature gives notability? 89.17.224.6 (talk) 09:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

No, significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources confers notability. Go read WP:GNG. Pyrope 18:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton twice winner in America

An editor keeps adding this to the article, adding that the first was Ayrton Senna. I think this is trivial. Opinions? Britmax (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Considering Schumacher, Hill and Clark all have won more than twice, yeah very. --Falcadore (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I thought the 'stat' was that Hamilton and Senna are the only two drivers to have won the United States GP at two different tracks. Probably pretty trivia-ish though. --TreyGeek (talk) 13:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Definitely trivial. DH85868993 (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

It was two different tracks, although I personally don't think that changes its triviality status. Britmax (talk) 23:27, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

The editor has added it again, and the first "status" to the Ayrton Senna article. Opinions? Britmax (talk) 10:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Baghetti's Ferrari in 1961

I've just made an edit to Giancarlo Baghetti article, in which I've replaced previously mentioned "Ferrari 246 F2 car" (which I'm not sure ever existed) with the 156 Dino (also an F2 car). It's clear that 246 (being an F1 car from 1958–60 with a 2.4-liter engine) couldn't be the right model, moreover Small (2000) in Grand Prix Who's Who lists all 3 championship entries in 1961 as 156, while here his cars in Syracuse & Naples are listed as 156 '0008' (assuming 0008 is a chassis number) and here in France his car is listed as 156 '01'.

If 156 is indeed the correct model number for both non-championship and championship races, the hunch I have is that due to the previously used prose (unreferenced and unattributed!), there's a strong suggestion that 156 as used in Syracuse and Naples was an F2 car (an F2 model from late 1950s, also sometimes referred to as "156 Dino"), while 156 as used in Italy was a 1961-vintage F1 car. I couldn't find any sources to confirm or deny that the 156s were different models. Can someone help?

The options I see are:

1) all first 3 entries in 1961 (Syracuse, Naples, France) were with the same car (i.e. 156 F1), in which case the article text needs to be re-worked

2) first 2 entries (Syracuse and Naples) are indeed with 156 F2 and the third (France) is with 156 F1 (in which case only minor changes are needed to the Baghetti article, mostly removing maintenance tags and creating proper wikilinks)

3) there was indeed such a thing as 246 F2 car, in which case my change to Baghetti's page will need to be reversed and Baghetti's article will need to be properly referenced – and we'll also need to create a new article about the 246 F2 car and track down proper sources (I couldn't find any)

I feel this question is somewhat wider than just Baghetti, as it also relates to confusion about model numbering in Ferrari's early years (multiple 156s, multiple 246s, etc.). That's why I'm placing it here, instead of just Baghetti Talk page. A few other pages might need to be harmonized as well depending on the answer, including Ferrari Grand Prix results, etc. cherkash (talk) 23:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Modified above inline - some info was incorrect. cherkash (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal

An editor has proposed that Team Lotus (2010-11) be merged with Caterham F1. Please add any views you may have on the matter at Talk:Team_Lotus_(2010–11)#Merger_Proposal. DH85868993 (talk) 01:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Mark Webber move proposal

An editor has proposed that Mark Webber be moved to Mark Webber (racing driver) and that Mark Webber (disambiguation) be moved to Mark Webber. You are welcome to express any views you may have on the matter at Talk:Mark_Webber#Requested_move. DH85868993 (talk) 13:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Feedback requested

Couple of new articles I've created, wondering about some feedback from my fellow editors. --Falcadore (talk) 11:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Should probably mention what they are. Mozambique Grand Prix and Tunis Grand Prix. --Falcadore (talk) 11:49, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Any chance of a DYK from these do you think? --Falcadore (talk) 12:55, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Wow you do learn something every day, we once had a race in Mozambique? I see no reason why you couldn't go for a DYK, they're well written, referenced, and on an interesting topic. Since Tunis Grand Prix is the longer article I'll try for that one. Nicely done if I may say, the only feedback I can think of would be that Tunis is probably long enough to split into a lead/section. QueenCake (talk) 23:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Flagicons

The infobox formatting examples appear to suggest the inclusion of flagicons in direct but nevertheless silent opposition to MOS:FLAG. No attempt is even made at an overriding reasoning that would outweight the considerations that have led to the formulation of MOS:FLAG. Guidelines are of course not strictly binding, but exceptions have to be justified by rationale. A WikiProject cannot just ignore the project-wide consensus and considerations that have gone into addressing this particular issue.

So, the F1 editors who prefer the current use of flagicons have to include a reasoning that outweighs the reasonings behind MOS:FLAG. Or alternatively, the WikiProject's style recommendations should be brought in line with our Manual of Style. --213.196.218.39 (talk) 13:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Gee, we really haven't been through this a zillion times before. Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:51, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

You're failing to understand the core point: However much the WikiProject has discussed this, and however strong your consensus is, is entirely irrelevant if it doesn't yield a rationale that overrides the considerations behind MOS:FLAG. That overriding rationale would have to be included at the project page, to justify the style recommendations opposing the MOS. --213.196.218.39 (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Where does it say that? Link, please. Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

You fail to understand the burden of proof here. I could right now edit the F1 WikiProject page, bring the infobox suggestion in line with the MOS and simply point to MOS:FLAG as the applicable guideline. You couldn't justifiably revert unless and until you present a rationale that overrides the considerations of the Manual of Style. Are you following? What is that rationale, if it exists? Otherwise, I'm adjusting the WikiProject page to reflect MOS:FLAG. --213.196.218.39 (talk) 14:11, 17 December 2012 (UTC)