Talk:Abbie Eaton

"Television career" section
I think the current description of Eaton's introduction to The Grand Tour is a little awkward. I suggest that the description is rephrased and modified a bit, to cut out and add some details:

- "Eaton also stars as the test driver for the second series of the British motoring show The Grand Tour, replacing the previous first series test driver Mike Skinner. James May stated in November 2017 that a large number of drivers had been tested, and that "she was the fastest and the best". Eaton was later introduced to the show in the second episode of the second series, on 15 December 2017, when she was shown testing a green Mercedes-AMG GT R around the Eboladrome test track. In the Mercedes, Eaton says "Right, here we go" to herself, before starting the lap and completing the test drive silently. Eaton did not have her name mentioned at all throughout the episode, only being referred to as "she", and her name was only shown in the credits at the end of the episode, credited as "driver".

Motor1.com speculated that The Grand Tour would likely be under legal restrictions, and needing to provide differentiation between the The Grand Tour test driver and anonymous drivers such as the Stig. A spokesperson for Amazon suggested to Jalopnik of a compromise between the explicitly named "the American" test driver portrayed by Skinner, and being unable to use a completely anonymous driver like on Top Gear."

-

Check the revision diff in this talk page history for the changes that I made. I split the single paragraph into two for easier reading. Sladen, your thoughts? Weslam123 (talk &bull; contrib) 07:47, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Sladen, I honestly cannot take you seriously at all. First, it's pretty rude for you to just make the change yourself without replying to me here at all. Second, you didn't even bother to check what I changed in the text, you just read "split paragraph" and registered nothing else. I would appreciate it if you actually took the time to look through the changes. Like, seriously? Your etiquette feels really poor, not something I'd expect from someone with 22K+ edits. Weslam123  (talk &bull; contrib) 08:59, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * , hopefully more editors will contribute to the discussion and proposed changes (often this takes a couple of days, and is rarely instant, particularly with editors spread across time zones). In the mean-time, it would appear ( Special:Diff/816105096 by User:Weslam123, 75 minutes after opening the discussion; 93 minutes after blanking User talk:Weslam123—Special:Diff/816098503 ) that the proposed changes have been re-added with the edit summary ("Some rephrasing, added and removed some details. Being bold here, because Sladen completely ignored my talk page comment. If you disagree, discuss on the talk page, don't revert.".  This is quite an usual step, and one that does not form part of the normal WP:BRD progression.  Stating being "bold" with a requirement "don't revert" are mutually incompatible—regardless that the proposed changes were already reverted.  Was this accidental?  —Sladen (talk) 09:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * This isn't a major article change, so it's not entirely necessary to have a group discussion on this; if someone doesn't like this (or any other) change in the article, they're free to start another discussion here. First of all, you have to keep in mind that WP:CYCLE is an optional explanatory supplement, and not a Wikipedia guideline, so it's merely a suggestion, and not something that's generally accepted as a rule by the community. Second, I already have followed the BRD sequence, as you requested. I modified the section, you didn't like it, so you reverted it, then you asked me to open the discussion (when you're supposed to be doing it). Which I did. And so I created a new section, here, and started a discussion about doing the changes, and tagged you in it. Then you just completely ignored my entire comment, read only two words out of it ("split" and "paragraph"), didn't bother to check the revision diff (as I asked you to do so, to see what changes I made to the text), just took it upon yourself to assume that splitting the paragraph was the only change I made, while not even bothering to look at the actual text itself to see if I changed anything else. And then you went and did the paragraph split by yourself without replying to the discussion or even leaving a short response, which is incredibly rude, so I think it's fair to say that I'm fairly irritated. So since you decided that reading a few sentences of text and replying to my comment was too much work for you, I decided to go ahead and make the change anyway, finishing the BRD cycle that you requested me to follow. And now here you are, accusing me of violating a guideline, when it's neither a guideline nor a violation, claiming that I didn't do the BRD cycle, which I did.


 * Also, this is unrelated, but please stop spreading your changes over 10 separate edits. It's super irritating, just do all your changes all at once. Please. I don't want to be saving my changes only to find out that you've made another edit in the meantime, then me having to manually transfer my changes to a new edit, only for you to have made yet another edit in the meantime. I think I understand now why you have 22K edits. Weslam123  (talk &bull; contrib) 09:57, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * . This is an article talk page, please keep discussion focused on the content and steer away from WP:No personal attacks.  —Sladen (talk) 10:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Please don't accuse me of making personal attacks (which I'm not) and violating (which I'm not) "guidelines" (that aren't guidelines). Thanks. Weslam123  (talk &bull; contrib) 10:07, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Research
Cite found for suggestion to add word "green" above:



—Sladen (talk) 13:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Inconsistency in "Mazda MX-5 Supercup" section
The first line reads: "In 2013, Eaton raced in the last three races of the Mazda MX-5 SuperCup with a win, two second places, one third and one fourth."

How did she achieve five different finishes if she was only in three races? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nosecohn (talk • contribs) 03:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Because the race meetings are “Triple Header”. 81.99.178.220 (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)