Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One: Difference between revisions

Lap leader charts

During the GA review of 2015 Mexican Grand Prix, the reviewer Saskoiler suggested a caption to be added for the lap leader chart. I do not really consider this necessary and I also do not know if it is technically possible, so I wanted to get your thoughts on it. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing something, why would we need a caption? The "Lap Leader" title I think makes it clear enough, we'd just be repeating that surely? CDRL102 (talk) 21:27, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Imagen of the 2003 British Grand Prix

This gallery of Flickr has many images of the 2003 British Grand Prix under the 2.0 license. Whoever is interested, can upload them to Commons. Thanks. --Adriel 00 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Formula One racing

Shouldn't this article be moved to "Formula One Grand Prix"? "Formula One race" is part of "Formula One Grand Prix" (free practice sessions, qualifying sessions and race). Eurohunter (talk) 23:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

World Constructors' Championship standings

So, as far as I can tell, for the all seasons prior to 2014 the results delineate which car scored each result. Here is an example from the 2013 season, As you can see, for example, the #9 Mercedes won in Monaco while the #10 finished Fourth. However, beginning with the pages for the 2014 seasons and beyond, the results are no longer sorted by car number but that the first finisher goes in the top row while the second finished goes in the second row for the team. Here is an example of the 2016 season, for example. I am just wondering if there was a change in the formatting policy or if the most recent seasons need to be brought in line with the prior way of doing things. 100.0.38.202 (talk) 01:47, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

• The seasons prior to 2014 should be arranged in the same way as those post 2014 as this is the agreed format throughout WP:F1 the pre 2014 season simply haven't been updated to reflect this. SSSB (talk) 14:28, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

That statement is not correct. The format currently in use in the post-2013 articles was only discussed in the context of the post-2013 articles (i.e. since permanent driver numbers were allocated). There has never been agreement to use it for the pre-2014 articles. Not to mention that it doesn't even reflect the consensus from the October 2017 discussion (which was the original proposal from that discussion, with car numbers, as confirmed by the editor who closed the discussion). DH85868993 (talk) 23:10, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Why does it matter anyway? It makes no difference to the pointscore which car scored the points. --Falcadore (talk) 10:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I agree that it doesn't matter which car scored the points. But it does make a difference whether we have a table format which is intuitive for readers to understand, or one which some readers find confusing. DH85868993 (talk) 11:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

I actually believe that the consensus over the current post-2013 format should be re-evaluated, given that quite a lot of readers are confused by the tables as they are now. Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Tom Pryce

A disagreement at Tom Pryce seems to have developed, concerning adding or not adding the Welsh flag to the infobox. Some extra input, may be required there. GoodDay (talk) 00:34, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Highest Average Points per Race Started

This list should also be presented with an adjustment compensating for the differences in points awarded for positions and fastest laps, so that people like Juan Fangio, who raced for 6-point wins vs the 25 currently awarded, would compare accurately with current drivers. Better yet, there should be a category for highest average finishing position per race started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:57F0:7120:256E:BD91:BFDE:42E8 (talk) 15:34, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Unless such tables are already published by reliable sources, it would count as original research, which is not permitted. Added to which, you have the complication of shared drives, such as Fangio's shared win with Fagioli in the 1951 French Grand Prix. Under today's rules/scoring system, shared drives are not allowed, so in the "adjusted" table, how many points would Fangio be awarded for that race - 12.5 or 0? DH85868993 (talk) 19:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Fangio would be awarded whatever points he received for that race. Any statistic the changes the details of what occurred at the time becomes a fictional statistic the steps firmly into original research. Delete. --Falcadore (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

There is nothing to be deleted. It's a proposal to add something.Tvx1 10:42, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

DH85868993 was talking about representing 1950s races under todays rules. That needs to be nixed now before it can draw breath. --Falcadore (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I was just trying to point out that such a table would be problematic even if it wasn't original research. But I accept that my comment possibly invited continued discussion on the subject. DH85868993 (talk) 19:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Constructors' Standings revisited

Hey folks! I hate to bring this debate up again but the complaints are piling up. Readers clearly do not understand the way the Constructors' Table is formatted at the moment. I suggest reverting back to the pre-2014 way, having one row for each driver. Please discuss. And see the 2018 season talk page for a number of complaints about it just in the last couple of days. Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)