User talk:DH85868993/Archive 2

Brett Lunger
DH there is a problem with the Hesketh portion of the Lunger article which I have been working on for days. There seems to be no way to correct it easily. As I am revising and adding to it, the Hesketh portion is at the very bottom, out of chronological order, and has disappeared from category list. --Robert 06:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi DH,

I was not clear, I meant section headings rather than categories. The Hesketh section disappeared but is now ok. Best, Sincerely, Robert--Robert 02:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Course car
Thank you ! Tintin 12:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Tyrrell spelling
Hi, I noticed you changed the spelling of 'Tyrrell' on the List of Formula One World Drivers' Runners-up to 'Tyrell'. That's not right. Check the Tyrrell team page.
 * Nevermind... I see you changed it the other way around. Which is good. Lustigson 13:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Categories - France 2007
Done. Davnel03 08:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Bandini trophy
Yes, Montezemolo won it in 1997! I can only assume the award meant something different then. You might want to check out the official website (it's in Italian though) - it's list of winners is here. They don't list a winner for 1993 and 1994. It's funny because you can't find the official website by searching in English - you have to enter the Italian name "Trofeo Bandini" to catch it. Readro 13:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Results & References
Hello DH85868993, I have been a Formula One racing fan for many years but I'm totally new to Wikipedia, and I have some questions about race results and references. Allow me to explain: I have a lot of experience with formula one results and timing as I use the data to calculate performance levels for F1 simulation games like GP3 and GP4. Realistic simulation obviously requires accurate and detailed results, and it's my experience that when you get into the details, no matter what source you take there will always be errors. My method is to start out with "hardcopy" results from a F1-magazine and the official results from the offical website, and then check everything against a number of other archives like f1-facts. The only way to be sure is to see if you get the same data two or three times. What I'm trying to say is that perhaps it would be better to devise some kind of label that can be requested/awarded/applied to result tables that have been checked and meet a ceratin standard of (for example) 3 individual sources that confirm the data. It would look a lot better too because instead of footnotes inside the tables and a long reference list, you would just have three reference links, along with a short mention of any errors there may be. Or link to a "table verified"-report.....? I don't know exactly how much is possible here. Any thoughts?

I am planning to take shot at one of the '90s F1 seasons and write/expand the race reports, and the question is in a way the same as above - how do I reference my report and the results? I have "hardcopy" results going back to 1995 in the form of a Dutch Formula One magazine called "Formule 1". Since the magazine first appeared its name has been changed to "Formule 1 Race Report" and the website is located here. Is it allowed to base race reports on (old) magazine issues?? BTW I read the rules about translating but when it comes to results (numbers) it's the source that counts, right?

I'm also still wondering about the pictures a bit - is it allowed to link to circuit maps for example, in the race report info boxes? And what about other pictures?

Many questions :) I could use some advice. Thanks - Bobby Doorknobs 22:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

template:F1GP
Thanks for your message. I wasn't aware about the stanard country codes, so by all means go ahead and change them. Thanks for letting me know :-) Tom pw (talk) (review) 18:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
DH85868993, thank you for taking a look at my questions! I did consider posting my message on the project discussion page like you suggest, but I wanted a good opinion instead of a whole bunch of different answers :) My main concern with the dutch F1 magazines was that Wikipedia does not encourage users translating their own material, i.e. the race reports, but thanks to Wikipedia I found several websites that do have old F1 reports in english - problem solved! (for now anyway) I see that we pretty much work the same way when it comes to the results. I agree that the archive should be based on www.formula1.com because, crappy as it may be, it's the official archive. Referencing of inaccuracies is important - we just have to find a way to get rid of all those footnotes inside the result tables because it's confusing and doesn't look cool :) I have some ideas and will post them on the project discussion page in a while. First, I think the best way to get answers is to really start editing and see what happens :) Feel free to juggle with my English writing (thanks) it's been a while :) Bobby Doorknobs 20:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Brabham BT24, Lotus 81, Cooper T81
Thanks for taking a look at my three entries and sorting out a few things. I'm probably better at creating the content than at formating it properly for Wikipedia, so you might like to keep an eye on pages I create to make sure its of a good enough standard. Thanks again. Spiderlounge 17:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Benetton nationality
Discussion transferred to the Benetton template talk page.

Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 15:15 2 August 2007 (GMT).

Formula 1 Times
Another user changed it back, I'm afraid. Compare the technology of 1971 to the technology we have now. Scar ian Talk  21:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries, I'm not actually an expert on F1, the main reason I reverted it in the first place was because a vandal I.P. actually made a suspect edit of the said page in question. He'd been naughty originally and I didn't want him to be causing anymore damage. But my apologies for getting involved in things that I have no idea about! Hehe. Take care. Scar ian Talk  04:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Firman
Thanks for removing that ridiculous rubbish from the Ralph Firman talk page. I was actually going to ask someone to remove it but I knew that guy would check up and say we were ganging up on him or something. I appreciate it. Bretonbanquet 11:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

1991 australian grand prix
Hi, I have been improving the ‘1991 Australian Grand Prix’ page, but some of my references have been removed.

For example, I made statements within the ‘race’ section that most defiantly need references to prove the claims. This includes reference number three and four, on the page. However the reference comes from an F1 clip from Youtube that is BBC footage. How, therefore can I provide the evidence, in the referencing, without being subject to copyright?

I would like to keep the reference in the page because it is vital to the document and is vital evidence to the claim.

Finasteride
It's great that you are willing to use AWB to correct typographical errors. However, please make certain that you aren't just correcting, and thereby obscuring, a vandal's work. Rklawton 15:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Toro Rosso
Minor POV revert, I love it :D mattbuck 15:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Englebert (tyre manufacturer)
Hi Mkpumphrey. I was just wondering why you removed Englebert (tyre manufacturer) from Category:Tire manufacturers? Thanks. DH85868993 15:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * According to the site, it indicates that Englebert "was" a manufacturer. The "Tire manufacturers" category looked to be a list of current manufacturers (even if currently owned or operated by others).  I attempted to access the two websites provided at the Englebert site and neither worked (for me).  If this is incorrect, please accept my apology and please add the company back in to the list.  I was not trying to harm the Englebert site.  I did add Englebert to the "Formula One" categoty.  Thank you for being interested.  Mkpumphrey 15:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:F3000 results tables
Thanks for the notification - I hadn't noticed that.--Diniz (talk) 11:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

DEFAULTSPORT Changes
Thanks, so what changes do i have to make when i add the DEFAULTSPORT categories? Eddie6705 21:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Driver's Number Removal
No problem, do you think eventually all of the drivers championships tables from 1950-1962 seasons should be in the more detailed style like the 1963 Formula One season? Eddie6705 19:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

A1 New Zealand
I see you added Category:National sports teams of New Zealand to A1 Team New Zealand. Do you think that is truly justified? A New Zealand national sporting body is not involved. Cheers. Moriori 08:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Category "Motorsport in Australia"
I object very strongly re the action that has been taken to remove the category "Motorsport in Australia" from a number of articles on Australian motor racing championships and endurance races. A couple of us have been working for some months now on creating these articles and the cohesion between these has now been lost. I beleive that this categorisation should be re-applied to these articles as soon as possible.

GTHO 11:03, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I got a little excited!!! I can now see what you are doing and agree that it's probably going to be a better arrangement as things continue to grow. What I did like about having all of the articles listed on one Category page is that it formed a simple index of what articles existed for Oz motorpsort. I guess I'll have to get used to hunting through multiple pages rather than one page to see this in the future.

GTHO 11:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

category duplication
I saw your nomination of Category:British Formula One series at CfD. However, you can just tag the duplicate you accidentally created with and it will be speedily deleted for you. If you do this, let me know and I'll close the CfD discussion (I can't delete the category as I don't have the mop!). Regards, BencherliteTalk 15:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem: I've accidentally created "bad" categories in the past and db-author saves having to publicise mistakes to a wider audience! Discussion closed at CfD and the category will be deleted in due course by a passing admin. Best wishes, BencherliteTalk 15:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

A bit of recognition

 * Thanks, Adrian. I'm honoured. DH85868993 21:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hear hear! --Falcadore 03:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

F1 results tables
Feel free to add the numbers to the tables. I was working originally with an unnumbered table and I forgot to put them on! Asendoh 22:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Geelong Karting Club
Hello, I noticed that you edited the Geelong Karting Club Article, I was just woundering, how much do you no about the club, I am a member of the club and I also Race there, and i'm not shore if one of your edits makes sense, the park about the club owning the track, The club build the track after all.

Muitint78 10:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Brabham BT19
Any chance you could give Brabham BT19 the once over for any inconsistencies with accepted practice? I know the colours in the Non-champ F1 box aren't currently right, and I have a non-standard key, but I'd be amazed if there weren't other issues. Any other comments also gratefully received. Cheers. 4u1e 10:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ta. 4u1e 10:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Williams FW15C
I've made a start on an article about the Williams FW15C, which I thought you might be interested in given the Alain Prost connection. I'm finding it rather hard to find info on the internet for my research so if you know of any any good sites let me know. Spiderlounge 17:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

F1 Records
Sorry clicked on the wrong version to restore to. Thanks for picking it up. Kelpin 10:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Renaming of Category:Race report infoboxes
I don't mind carrying the can for that, my mistake after all. I'll get onto it and then db it when done.  Pyrop e  15:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Cooper T51
You've seen the bit I've done about the Cooper T51, but I've got a bit of a dilemma. I want to do one of those boxes with race results in for all my car articles, but with this car it's a little problematic. It only started 24 races but had 38 different drivers, 19 different entrants and 5 different engines across 4 different seasons... I'm thinking I'll do one set of boxes for the Cooper and Rob Walker entries (i.e. the proper works entries) and possibly a seperate section of the article with a seperate set of results for the privateers, but I'd welcome your opinion. Spiderlounge 18:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Aston Martin DBR4
Thanks! And thanks for the corrections. Oh, and thanks for listing the infoboxes at CfD, it gave me the time to write the article...  Pyrop e  08:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Results tables
Can you help me on the WP talk page? Some anonymous guy has come along saying the new expanded driver tables are no good, he wants to go back to the simple ones, and someone even backed him up. We've spent a lot of time doing them and I am going to go mental if it's all been for nothing... Bretonbanquet 00:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments on my page. I'm a little disappointed that there weren't more people interested in the style of the tables, but mainly I'm just glad the argument seems to have ended. Bretonbanquet 21:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey
Are you stalking me!? ;-) Good points, both of them. I hadn't previously noticed the authorlink thing in the template. Cheers. 4u1e 16:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Highest Average Points per Race Entered
I saw you changed some points for Prost, Senna & Fangio - I got the data direct from the List of Formula One drivers, what's the difference? mattbuck 15:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. In that case, Alberto Ascari's score was 4.25. I'll start getting points together... though gonna be a while. mattbuck 15:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That will be very helpful. Thankyou. mattbuck 15:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Updated my spreadsheet with your info, and redid the table to suit. I should sort out the list sometime later. I uploaded my spreadsheet if you want it. mattbuck 16:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back
Hi. mattbuck 08:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. DH85868993 14:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Niki Lauda
Another editor asked me to take a look at the article, where I noticed you introduced this external online source.diff The source in turn cites the Wikipedia article as its only source, and I removed the reference from the article accordingly, and tagged the article as unreferenced and as needing inline citations. |dorf|trottel| |mess|age| 14:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't judge about the other source, but it's probably better than that website. Thanks, and I agree that in that case refimprove is more appropriate. |dorf|trottel| |mess|age| 14:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Interpretation of "season" in F1 season summary articles for years with non-championship races
Most of the F1 season summary articles start with the lines:
 * "The YYYY Formula One season was the Nth FIA Formula One World Championship season. It commenced on and ended on after N races."

and contain sections titled "Season summary" and "Season review" which cover only the Championship season.

For years in which non-championship F1 races were held, since the season summary articles include details of those non-championship races (which I believe they should) plus a list of all the championship races and the dates on which they were held, I propose to reword the opening sentences to something like:
 * "The YYYY Formula One season included the Nth FIA Formula One World Championship season, plus numerous/several non-championship Formula One races."

and rename the "Season summary" and "Season review" sections as "World Championship season summary" and "World Championship season review". Thoughts?


 * It all looks ok to me, very similar to the way in which I rewrote the 1951 Formula One season's lead section a while back. I altered a few others at the time, but they all seem to have drifted back to the standard season=WC interpretation. If we can make this a general point of protocol within WP:F1 then we stand a much better chance of actually maintaining it this time. One minor change I'd make is to drop the second use of the word "season" in the lead, as the World Championship is a single entity and not really a season, as such.  Pyrop e  14:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks sensible to me and would be consistent with older season summaries. I don't know about Autocourse, but the 1976 John Player Motorsport Yearbook (the only season review I have from that far back) includes the non-champ races in the main F1 section. Minor quibble: I'd use 'as well as' instead of 'plus'. What do you propose to do about the British Formula One Series and South African Formula One Championship? There's potential overlap there. 4u1e (talk) 14:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: editing articles
It's a good reminder, but no guarantee action will happen. I more or less edit as I go along reading Wikipedia, and do what I like. However, it does get put in that to-do list at the back of my mind to do something with it, and that's worthwhile if anything. Guroadrunner 06:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

My Edit
You recently edited one of my edits here - [] - i edited the box so Force India were no longer in the future teams section. I don't mean to argue but i believe i am right as the 2008 season has officially started. According to F1 Regulations it starts on the day of testing after the previous season when one team has tried a 2008 part. Lots of teams have done that in the two sets of tests there has been so far and therefore the 2008 season has started. Peter-27

Incorrect race results
Thanks for picking those up - I should know better than to trust www.formula1.com. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I usually at least check it against one of the other websites, but have gotten a little lazy recently! 4u1e (talk) 14:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
  You got a Christmas card! → → →

Reply re:1991 race reports
Hi, and thanks for the welcome. Yes in fact I did write these myself, what I did was break out the old FIA 1991 review tape and watch that to jog my memory. I hope to finish the remaining 1991 races soon and start on 1992! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senorsoupe (talk • contribs) 16:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Formula One
You know, I had the same thought. But I went with automobiles to go with our general conventions. We have Category:Automobiles and Category:Automotive navigational boxes. In fact, if you go to Category:Cars, it redirects you. So cars makes more sense but we seem to go more with "automobiles". --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see we do have Formula One cars as a cat. I'll change to cars by season. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. :) --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Monaco Grand Prix Drivers
OK, go ahead. Regards, Mxcatania (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Carlo Felice Trossi
Hi DH, how do you do? I saw you added Carlo Felice Trossi as F1 driver, but I failed to see him racing in the Formula One World Championship (1950-onwards). You said that Trossi took part of non-Championship races, that is much true, but is there any standard in Wikipedia to say 'he is F1 driver, he is not'? If so, I think Carlo should not be included as F1 driver. Let me know your comments. Best regards, Mxcatania (talk) 20:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Massimo Natili and Patrick Nève
Hi there, I have added references for the two drivers / races that you mentioned. If there are any others that stick out to you as being unusual, please don't hesitate to ask :) I had two references for the Natili entry, both the Steve Small book and my John Thompson results book included Natili on the entry list as having practiced. The John Thompson book was co-authored by Duncan Rabagliati and Dr K Paul Sheldon, two guys who know absolutely everything there is to know about who took part in which race!! All the best, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Just cos


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Belgium '55
Hi again, I have a reference for Schell, which I will add shortly. But I have no mention of Taruffi driving Ferrari #48, or being entered. It may well be true but I can't verify it! Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

André Testut
Hi DH, how are you? Maybe you can help me with this issue. As per WP article, André Testut is French driver from Lyon but both in 1958 Monaco Grand Prix and 1959 Monaco Grand Prix he was shown as Monegasque (look the flag). Where was André from? Regards, Mxcatania (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * DH, you are great! I think FORIX.com is the most authorised source of information regarding F1 around the world, so I would agree with that site (the fact André Testut being French). I really appreciate your feedback! Best regards, Mxcatania (talk) 11:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: F1-column-heading-changing bot
Sorry, another issue has taken my attention, and I don't think I can get to this task. Since you are running AWB, and have thought through how to do the regexes, is there a reason you can't make the heading change yourself? Gimmetrow 06:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Artist
Thanks for that. I've deleted it. Does the same apply to "| imagesize    = " and the default size, as a matter of interest? Should this be changed or left as a variable parameter? Tyrenius (talk) 08:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've reduced protection to semi, and will leave you to do the clean up, in case I mess it up. It would be good if the blue appeared as default, unless specifically forced otherwise.  Most people are not going to mess around with color - they just want the info up.  Also a standard color is better for consistency across articles. How's about including it in the template, so it will appear, unless someone chooses otherwise? Tyrenius (talk) 09:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: F1 race report infoboxes
Yes, all this adding infoboxes will take a while to complete! I don't know how to add reference links yet, however. I am getting most of my information from the race pages here:. Regards, Sam Emmett (talk) 19:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Changes to driver race results
Hi DH. Sorry for not replying sooner, but I don't have regular access to Hotmail any more (I really ought to change my default email...). I'm not so sure about your proposal. I can see where you are coming from, but what you are talking about is removing information. If you draw all the different chassis into a single box, how can you tell which he used in any particular race? This comes down to a fundamental question of where we balance the need for space vs. detail.  Pyrop e  16:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
I would to say sorry for that. I will do my best in that matter.Robert Siow (talk) 14:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Template Fix
Thank you very much! It's greatly appreciated. Benkenobi18 (talk) 06:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

late thanks!
Thank you so much for formatting the userboxes on my userpage. I just logged on for the first time in months, and BAM! it's stunning.

Thanks!

--Aeryka the Gnome (talk) 05:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-championship results
Hi! Thanks for your comments, I wasn't sure anyone had noticed what I was doing! I have managed so far to put together a fairly defined list from 1961 onwards. The list includes all F1 races which weren't part of a national series - so all the odd little mid-season South African races are omitted, the Rhodesian Grand Prix etc - because no European teams turned up to those. Same goes for the British F1 series in the late 70s. I have included the Australian and New Zealand Grands Prix though, even though they're fairly insignificant. The list is open to change though, for sure. The abbreviations I pretty much just knocked up as I went along - these are also very much open to suggestions for change etc. Cheers! Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

F1 assessment Bot request
''Hi Guroadrunner. I saw your message on the bot request page. I think what you are wanting to do wouldn't be too hard to do using AWB. If you don't get a satisfactory response from the bot requests page by the weekend, I'll try to have a crack at it with AWB. (Have you used AWB? I love it. When I think about all those repetitive edits I made manually before I discovered AWB, it makes me want to cry...) Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 04:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)''
 * DH, Thanks for the heads up! - I have never used AWB before, but I just downloaded it per your suggestion. I will have to figure out how to make it work this weekend because I'd really like to have all of the article assessed (pet project). Guroadrunner (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Question about AWB
Hi DH,

I've been approved for AWB and I think I know how to get a list set up and use the find/replace set up to make edits, but how do I set it up to find things on an article page and make edits to the connected talk page?

I would like to seek all tags and edit the talk page to add.

Please let me know if you have time to help me - imagine working with a complete newbie regarding AWB. Guroadrunner (talk) 13:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Solitude Grands Prix
Thanks! As far as I'm aware, 'Solituderennen' was a kind of coverall term for races at the Solitudering. The term 'Grosser Preis der Solitude' was used occasionally, for both car races and bike races, but other races were called other things. The F1 races I've written articles about were all given the Grosser Preis title, but for the sake of consistency with other grands prix articles, I translated it to English. So which name you give to the category would, I guess, depend on whether or not you intend it to cover any racing held there, or just the grands prix (car and bike). Cheers! Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Sorry - I assumed I had picked up all the same things at Renault R28 that you did. I was wrong. :( Good work! 4u1e (talk) 01:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

revert to "racing driver" it is, isn t it
just to confirm that I should revert the changes that I made to the disambig term back to "racing driver" regardless of which continent a racer has raced on, as by the sentiments of the majority of users in discussion at WP:MOTOR on this matter Mayumashu (talk) 02:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Standings After Each GP
Hi DH. Could you possibly comment on this discussion at WT:F1. I've brought it up, so that I can see if consensus has changed at all. I'm also getting into a revert war with several IP's, and I'm on the verge of violating 3RR. D.M.N. (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Kubica
Oops! I got that wrong, didn't I? It wasn't intentional vandalism, I got mixed up with his qualifying position in Australia! :-/ Mjroots (talk) 08:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Your edit summary was perfectly correct and fair, happy editing. Mjroots (talk) 08:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

F1 constructors
I just totted up the drivers listed on the relevant page of ChicaneF1.com. They have usually been pretty reliable in the past.  Pyrop e  14:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was wondering how to handle that myself. I reckon that, in accordance with the usual "common name" principle (and to save a little space!), we ought to use the abbreviation, with the full name in the smaller font. How does that sound?  Pyrop e  15:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that is a can of worms that I would prefer stays shut. The number of pages that require updating after races is already long enough. I think listing them and then redirecting people's attention to that page if they require more information is enough for now.  Pyrop e  17:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, bit of a mess on this front as things stand. There didn't seem to be any fixed pattern to those done before I got involved. I personally favour total race entries, as this better represents those constructors that have a high percentage of privateer entrants. If you just show races entered then these will broadly correlate to years in the sport, so you are effectively duplicating information. What are your thoughts?  Pyrop e  14:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm... but we aren't in the business of making things sound impressive. We're here to record fact. Ok, so McLaren won 15 out of 16 races, but they did have to use 32 entries to get there. My problem with using the number of races is that there have been wildly different levels of involvement in the past. Take the 1960 British Grand Prix for example: 13 Coopers, 4 Loti, 3 BRMs, 2 each from Aston and Ferrari, and one lone JBW. This wildly different level of involvement makes it seem odd to me that you should record all of these as equal; Cooper entered 1200% more cars than JBW! Had the single JBW won this would have been far more unlikely than one of the Coopers (as Black Jack's winning car actually was).  Pyrop e  15:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Artist
How about inserting the default colour in the template and then if someone want a different colour they can amend the inserted colour code? That seems to be a more straightforward approach.  Ty  12:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've changed it at Template:Infobox Artist/doc.  Ty  12:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Grand Prix race report
Although I'm pretty sure it was done in good faith, in my view this edit has changed the template for worse. On the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article, the fastest lap runs onto a new line, and so does McLaren-Mercedes, although its the first one that makes the template look worse. Please note I am viewing this on 1280 x 800 monitor, so you may see it differently. D.M.N. (talk) 14:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Any chance you could stretch the template out, so that it covers a little bit more of the page, then you'd be able to have more room for the middle column, and hopefully the lap number should get on the same line. Apart from that, you may want to bring it up at WT:F1 for suggestions (as it's with MS's name, it will affect all articles where he set the fastest lap in. D.M.N. (talk) 15:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind me chipping in; why is the lap number listed against the driver name and not the lap time? This seems very odd to me, and is the root cause of this template foul up.  Pyrop e  20:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * All too complicated for me... I think I'l just stick to making driver results tables! ;-) btw, on a personal note, you aren't involved with GP Manager Pro, are you?  Pyrop e  02:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nothing really, just a misplaced hunch. There's an Aussie guy I've been racing against for the last few weeks who sounds a lot like you...  Pyrop e  02:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Formula One constructors
Hi.
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AFormula_One_constructors&diff=202764274&oldid=202760040
 * (rv division into decades: not necessary)

Arguably, listing the former constructors and even the template itself is not necessary. Could we please try reinstating the previous version and see if and how many other folk don't find the decade information useful/intriguing? Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm hoping that even if other folk aren't keen on it, it'll be okay to keep, as the "Former" section is collapsed by default (i.e. the template isn't big until you show that part). Sardanaphalus (talk) 21:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Computing signal
Hi again. Thanks for stepping in to disable the malfunction in the above. I think it's now sorted (I'd forgotten an end-table tag) and I've left this message for User:Lostchicken. Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

AOWR Driver template
I had originally thought the template itself was fine, but then someone came along and brought it up for speedy deletion due to it apparently not being, according to whatever Wikipedian definitions, an actual template. The conversation on AOWR, earlier, bears out the difficulties, and the resolution to the problem, that being the reclassification of the page to a WP:AOWR/"Section Page". Anyway...if we can get the thing switched back to a direct template, then I'm all for it...but I prefer linking to pages by their accurate names, whenever not "dictated|otherwise" by the way a prose section might refer to a subject. --Chr.K. (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Music genre
Hi again. Yes, I happened to see a few minutes ago the alert User:Peter Fleet left me about this template. I guess I could go ahead and try to use AWB to swap the and  in the pages using the template, although I'm thinking some special setup or settings might be needed as simply trying to rename the parameters will either generate a loop (color→bgcolor→color→) or both parameters named the same. Do you know what to do with AWB here? Otherwise, it's an opportunity for me to learn more about it. If I find it's something AWB can't quite do (yet), I suppose the template will need to fall back on your solution, at least until a bot can fix things instead. Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Although maybe your "fred" idea might work given some fiddling with the renaming order in and/or across the Normal and Advanced find'n'replace settings. I'll test some of that now. Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it does work, using the Normal find'n'replace. (I just tried it on Psychadelic rock.) I'll need to log off for a while in a moment, so I could set up AWB to chug through the pages while I'm away. Good idea? Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just completed the test run and all seems okay, so I'll set up the full list and unleash AWB onto it. I'll be away from a computer now for at least an hour and a half, so, if you happen to check an article and notice that it's been mangled by the AWB edit, send me a message and hopefully it will stop mangling any more. I'll clear up any mess on my return. Thanks for the "fred" idea. Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Infoboxes for non-champ F1 races
Hi and thanks :) I guess the main reason is that I had no idea there were different kinds of infoboxes... I just used whichever one was used on the race report that I originally used as a basis for the ones I wanted to do, maybe one of the BRDC Interntaional Trophy races or perhaps the 1962 Mexican Grand Prix one, which originally gave me the idea. They seem basically the same though, what do you think I should do? Bretonbanquet (talk)
 * OK, sounds good to me :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, nice work. I see now that the correct South African flag can be shown... that was bugging me somewhat :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Sports navigational boxes
Actually I'm using this as sort of a test to see if a bot will come over and do this for me. I could probably do it without AWB in 10 minutes. :) It's not that. But I do appreciate the tip. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe. :) Not in a hurry. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

new jersey
I saw that. AWB put the second half of the edit summary in there. can't change it now. I'll make another minor edit to bury the edit summ in the hist; that's all I can do. Ling.Nut (talk) 03:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, they 'all say it! Didn't see that. well, c'est la vie. Won't happen again. :-) Ling.Nut (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Ferrari fastest laps
Hi DH. Where are you getting the "correct" number of Ferrari fastest laps from? ChicaneF1 gives the number as 208 for Ferrari cars, and 207 for the Scuderia. (The difference being Baghetti's FL at the 1961 Italian Grand Prix.) It would be interesting to track down which of these sources is correct.  Pyrop e  12:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * FORIX? Hmm, I can see why you would believe that. However, as ChicaneF1 actually lists them individually I would be inclined to treat their number as a minimum, so the FORIX number definitely looks suspect. I have to go off and have a whole day ArcGIS training session now, but I'll get on to the McLaren question later.  Pyrop e  12:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I see the discrepancy now, well spotted. I'm not so sure we need a whole other table for McLaren and Ferrari, they aren't like Cooper or Lotus who had oodles of privateers or Tyrrell who ran many other cars, but it should be possible to annotate their infobox to indicate the correct situation.  Pyrop e  16:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

empty categories
I don't know of any way to tell for certain whether a category has been empty for four days. I think most editors would look at the history, and if the empty category was created more than 4 days ago, they would assume that the category had been empty since then. What I sometimes do, when I'm feeling cautious, is flag the empty category with and then check back four days later. Even that's not foolproof, of course, but it gives the creator a chance to realize that they forgot to populate the category, if that's what happened. Stepheng3 (talk) 16:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Leave the IMS oval layout alone, please. Fclass (talk) 14:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ryan Briscoe
Don't you think your laying it on a little thick with the Briscoe F1 thing? Your looking like a cock. --Greg Nail (talk) 22:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)