Template talk:F1 Constructors Standings

Manor
Someone keeps changing the name of Manor to Marussia. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.198.36.210 (talk) 08:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Because that's how they're listed in the official standings: http://www.formula1.com/content/fom-website/en/championship/results/2015-constructor-standings.html DH85868993 (talk) 08:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Table ordered by best finishing position??
Since when has this been the normal way to show the standings? It's pretty confusing and IMO unnecessary... clearly given the amount of edits being made to correct the order indicates it is something that people are confused by and will only get worse as the season progresses?? Thoughts? MetalDylan (talk) 11:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I have already raised the issue here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:46, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * why would we not list the drivers like we did in F1 2012 with the driver number to clarify and hence can add rows if the drivers change mid season. I swear this is how we used to do it and cannot figure out when or why this changed? MetalDylan (talk) 13:20, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Because of Toro Rosso situation the table looked like this. Which is quite messy. Corvus tristis (talk) 14:10, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * agreed it was messy but it was understandable and didn't cause as much confusion as the situation now. I'm not saying bring back the driver number column (although I can't see the problem with it being there) but at least have the results corresponding the the rows. The situation with the torro Rosso drivers last year was a bit of a unique situation that is unlikely to happen again and, as far as I have looked, has not happened before. Does this kind of rare occurrence really require a redesign of the wheel?? MetalDylan (talk) 15:26, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The world doesn't turn around F1 only, we have other motorsport championships where the team standings decided by one, two, three, etc, best car result. Use of numbers in the teams' standings is a perverse practice. Moreover the numbers don't affect team standings, while results do.Corvus tristis (talk) 19:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This was all discussed here. That discussion ran for three months and consensus was achieved for the current version. There was amply time for enough users to weigh in. We haven't used the 2012 style for ages because numbers haven't been attributed to the cars for years.Tvx1 16:29, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

To me it is a table which looks totally illogical and car numbers should be entered within the table instead of ordering on best finishing position. The German, French, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian, Arab, Slovak, Polish wikipedia sites (to name a few), all use car numbers or even driver names in the constructor standings. It makes is so much easier to read and understand the table straight away.
 * No, what's illogical is sorting the results in the table by an irrelevant measure. Who each result belongs to does not impact on the constructors championship, and therefore sorting the results like that makes no sense. The fact that other wikis do this, is also irrelevant. SSSB (talk) 09:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2018
Changes to Force India positions

Sergio Perez - Change Bahrain GP position to 16 Sergio Perez - Change Chinese GP position to 12

Estaban Ocon - Change Bahrain GP position to 10 Estaban Ocon - Change Chinese GP position to 11 205.167.186.197 (talk) 19:23, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Not done. As explained above, results for each team are ordered by best finishing position; there is not "one row per driver". DH85868993 (talk) 21:51, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Austrian Pole Position
Bottas took the pole, not Hamilton. --valepert (talk) 18:13, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
 * For each race, the results are ordered by finishing position; it's not "one row per driver". So, for Austria, Bottas' result "Retired (from pole position)" is listed first, followed by Hamilton's result "Retired (not from pole position)". DH85868993 (talk) 09:15, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Changing the "Constructor" column
Moved to WP:F1

Proposed change to table look to improve readability
I would like to propose that we slightly change the formatting of this table in order to improve the readability of the info. At present, it is quite difficult to distinguish which results relate to which constructor due to there being merged cells for the constructor and points. Towards the beginning and end of the seasons this is less of an issue but during the majority of the season I find myself having to count the number of cells in order to see what result was for each team. I would therefore like to propose that we adjust the table slightly to the format I have prepared here: 11:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Notes:
 * † – Driver did not finish the Grand Prix, but was classified as he completed more than 90% of the race distance.

Footnotes

I am open to suggestions about how best to implement this but I do think this is an area that is often overlooked and could be easy to remedy. MetalDylan (talk) 11:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * What are the differences from the current format? Is it just the bolder lines separating the constructors? DH85868993 (talk) 10:48, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, just added darker lines for each constructor as it makes it clearer for which results relate to which constructor. A small and simple change in my mind that shouldn't have many objections. MetalDylan (talk) 12:38, 12 November 2018 (UTC)MetalDylan (talk) 12:39, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not sure if the change that necessary. But if there will be consensus for the change then I prefer grey lines like here. Corvus tristis (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

McLaren withdrew from the Australian Grand Prix
. Please, could you fix the problem I created? McLaren withdrew from the 2020 Australian Grand Prix and not the generic Australian Grand Prix. Important to know for the table.--80.117.52.71 (talk) 23:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, you only need to define a footnote once. SSSB (talk) 23:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but for both tables (drivers and constructors standings} a mistake is still present. You're able to have a look at it from desktop view.--80.117.52.71 (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry can you be more specific, I cant seem to identify what this problem is. SSSB (talk) 08:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It was a notelist issues. Now is ok.--80.117.52.71 (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Haas drivers
Haas drivers you need to remove Grosjean dnf's and sawo them with magnissens Ndspider (talk) 07:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no "one driver per line" in this template. The best result achieved by the team's drivers goes in the top row, the lesser result in the bottom. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 07:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Leclerc and Vettel results need to be switched for 2020 Turkish GP
I would do this myself, but do not know how. Vettel finished 3rd, Leclerc 4th, but if you looked at current results in this table it indicates the reverse occurred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.33.159.245 (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It indicates nothing of the sort as Leclerc and Vettel don't have individual rows. SSSB (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Vettel DSQ - 2021 Hungary
This is still showing Vettel P2 in Hungary despite the Driver's table correctly showing him DSQ for fuel irregularities? Aston Martin should be showing DSQ & Ret with everyone behind bumped up a spot. - Cheers, Burwellian (Talk) 22:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ by someone at somepoint. SSSB (talk) 10:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

British Grand Prix
The Red Bull results for the British Grand Prix are now broken. Recent edits to Template:F1R2021, in an attempt to change Ret1 to Ret1 P, seems to be the cause. I'm not sure how to fix it. --DB1729 (talk) 20:04, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Fixed. DH85868993 (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks DH85868993, but there's more problems now. Same Template:F1R2021 though not for the constructor standings, but at Max Verstappen's page. Both cells for British and Italian Grands Prix are broken. I tried to fix it and gave up. --DB1729 (talk) 16:49, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think I've managed to fix it myself this time. An issue with Template:F1R2021 is that editors forget (or maybe not aware) that the XXX2 parameters are for the driver's pages and therefore are coded differently for poles and fastest laps. Perhaps we should consider moving out those parameters into a separate template? --DB1729 (talk) 18:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's one option. Another option would be to update the driver results tables to use the "P/F" format like the season summary articles (noting that this format is also used in some of the car/constructor result tables), then the XXX2 parameters would not be required at all. If there's support for that idea, we could probably update the results tables for the current-season drivers in the 2-week break before the next race, and then do the other drivers over the season break (noting that not all 1000 F1 driver results tables need to be updated, just the 100 or so who have set a pole or fastest lap). DH85868993 (talk) 10:04, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I would support that. The reason we went to P/F system was because of accessibility. This is still an issue for driver pages (as well as pre-2018(?) season pages). Another thing we might want to do is add the sprint quali results into the F1 race position template. I did create a sandbox to expirement with this, but I never got round to it. We are also currently in a state where the P and F icons are smaller for driver-race combos where the driver had a pole/fastest lap and a top-3 sprint result (Red Bull's result at the British Grand Prix does look slightly odd), exaclty because of this reason.. I don't mind this in the slightest, but I daresay some people do. I think ideally (to avoid it becoming to wide if a driver has pole, fastest lap and a sprint quali result (not unlikely)) it may be worth having template reduce the font size depending on the number of superscripts. Or is this not worth it for the effort it will take? SSSB (talk) 10:14, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I support the above idea, but rather than reduce font size I would suggest using both superscript and subscript. For example, 1$$ or Ret$$. This could affect the height of rows rather than width of columns, but just putting it out there as an alternative. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 12:06, 13 September 2021 (UTC); 12:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of subscript for sprint position. Something else to note is that the keys used for the results tables in the driver/constructor/car articles (F1 driver results legend 2 and F1 driver results legend 5) don't include an explanation of the (currently) superscript numbers, but the numbers do appear in those tables, so they should be probably be added to those templates. Also, if we do remove the XXX2 parameters from F1R2021, that might mean we could use F1R2021 in F1 Drivers Standings again. DH85868993 (talk) 00:34, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Firstly we can’t remove those XXX2 paremeters because they’re necessary for all results tables in the drivers’ and constructors’ articles. Secondly they’re not what prevents us from using the template F1 Drivers Standings. That’s caused by there being to many templates in there for an article to handle if we generate every single result through a template.Tvx1 13:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The suggestion of removing the XXX2 parameters from F1R2021 was dependent on them either being moved to a separate template (as suggested by DB1729), or the driver results tables being updated to use the "P/F" format (which would mean they could use the XXX parameters instead). Also noting that I believe the XXX2 parameters are currently only used in the driver results tables - I believe the constructor and car results tables use the XXX parameters. And I wasn't sure whether the problem with using F1R2021 in F1 Drivers Standings was the number of transclusions, or the total number of bytes transcluded - if it's the latter, then reducing the size of F1R2021 by removing the XXX2 parameters may enable it to be used. DH85868993 (talk) 10:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is mainly the number of transclusions. The XXX2 parameters aren’t even transcluded at all in the articles using the XXX paramaters. That’s just not how it works.
 * And no we cannot remove the XXX2 parameters by changing the pole/FL format. The XXX2 parameters exist for tables that have the races in each individual cell as opposed to on top of the table.Tvx1 11:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course. Thanks for the clarification/correcting my misunderstanding. DH85868993 (talk) 11:33, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Template limits says: "When a page reaches the template limits, the most common solution is to make the templates shorter" which suggests it is about the number of bytes transcluded. Or am I reading into that wrong? SSSB (talk) 11:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You’re not reading this wrong, but you don’t understand how transclusions work. The XXX2 parameters are NOT transcluded at all in articles that don’t use them at all. With our championship tables the limit of amount of bytes is exceeded by an excessive amount of transclusions all adding up to a total of bytes over the limit. And that with only the one race result transcluded per transclusion. It’s the repetitive transclusion of the templates base functions that do the damage, not the parameters. Changing the template so that we can transclude an entire row of results at a time instead of each result individually would actually be a solution.Tvx1 11:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Australia GP
two things, Sergio & Max have their results wrong way round for the Aussie GP, Max retired not Sergio, and can you teach me how to correct things like this if they crop up? Thanks. X-750 I've made a mistake, haven't I? 01:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not a mistake. As you can quite clearly see in the explanatory notes under the table, Rows are not related to the drivers: within each team, individual Grand Prix standings are sorted purely based on the final classification in the race (not by total points scored in the event, which includes points awarded for fastest lap and sprint). There isn't anything here that needs to be corrected. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 03:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * like 5225C explains, the results are not the wrong way around in this case. However, if you do need to swap two drivers you simply edit the code. If you want to swap Leclerc and Sainz's result for the British Grand Prix, you replace  with   and vice versa. The "F1R2022" refers to the template name, the "LEC" and "SAI" refer to the driver whose result it is (in this case Leclerc and Sainz) and the "GBR" refers to the round (in this case GBR is the British Grand Prix. A full list of all the letter combinations (which aren't the same as the ones used on FIA graphics) can be found at Template:F1R2022/doc  SSSB (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Google sheets to automate standings tables
Please see Template talk:F1 Drivers Standings for a full breakdown of how this would work, but TLDR I have made a google sheet at 2023 Formula 1-2-3-E wiki tables to automate the updating of these templates. The sheet can calculate points, sort the table, and colour the cells correctly. For proof of concept on how it would work for the Constructors' Standings, I've loaded in some sample data (slightly tweaked first few races of 2022, including a sprint)--

Please let me know what you think! AsmodeanUnderscore (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Please make any comments at the WP:CENTRALised discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One. SSSB (talk) 16:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposed changed to Template:F1 Drivers Standings and Template:F1 Constructors Standings
Please see Template talk:F1 Drivers Standings for a proposed changes relevant to this template. Cerebral726 (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)