User talk:DH85868993/Archive 8

Thanks
Ha, thanks for spotting and fixing that, you'd of thought because of how long I spent on that article I would of noticed my mistake! Though I must admit, the thought of sticking Vettel into a can every race is increasingly appealing... ;) QueenCake (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. DH85868993 (talk) 01:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Grand Prix of Europe
I really think that the flag of the European Grand Prix article should be changed to the the "EU" flag, I know its the official flag of the European Union but the flag has always been associated with being the flag of europe and it would be much easier to recognise as other sport articles with a Europe titled event use the EU flag so shouln't this article.

European Grand Prix - Example!

Daniels Renault Sport (talk) 12:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * One problem with doing that is that we then have to consider what flags to use for the other non-national Grands Prix which have been part of the World Championship, e.g. the Pacific Grand Prix, the Pescara Grand Prix, the Caesars Palace Grand Prix, the Detroit Grand Prix, the Dallas Grand Prix and even the Indianapolis 500, to say nothing of the myriad non-Championship Grand Prix, e.g. Buenos Aires Grand Prix, Glover Trophy, etc. The current convention (i.e. to use the flag of the country in which the circuit is located), while perhaps occasionally non-intuitive, is much simpler. DH85868993 (talk) 06:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Baghetti
No worries! I thought that was probably what happened. Cheers! Bretonbanquet (talk) 07:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Caterham Group Template
I've created a template for the Caterham Group article so it would be easier to navigate around other Caterham related articles would you mind taking a look over it and suggest any improvements, your open to edit it yourself if you want. Daniels Renault Sport (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Fix for double cat problem
see Template talk:WikiProject Formula One. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Arrows A11
Oooops, I confused the number of races for the A11 and its modifications with the number of entries there.

It did of course feature in 35 races, while it had a total of 69 entries (two in each race except Imola '91). It was the five entries in '91 that got me confused.

Thanks for rectifying my mistake, DH85868993. Bluebird207 (talk) 00:21, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries - we're all entitled to the odd mistake! DH85868993 (talk) 04:30, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk:McLaren Archiving
Hi. I've proposed archiving Talk:McLaren and wanted to bring this to your attention and ask you to weigh-in on the discussion page, since you're one of the most prolific contributors to the main article. Please feel free to advise any other editors as well! No action will be taken by me prior to establishing consensus, however. Cheers. Azx2 16:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've left a comment at Talk:McLaren. As a general rule, archiving of talk pages is fairly uncontroversial, so if you encounter a similar situation in the future, my advice would be to be bold and just do it. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 09:01, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback. I will certainly consider being bolder in the future. But for now I went ahead and set-up the archiving and it seems to be working fine. Thanks again for your support. Cheers! Azx2 05:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sauber Grand Prix results
I was looking over the Sauber grand prix results section of the Sauber article and I noticed that the results of the team when it was under the name BMW Sauber where not included, Shouldn't they be included even under different ownership the team was still considered to be Sauber itself and that the BMW era was part of its competition history, I personally think it should be included just like how the Footwork results are included in the Arrows results even though its under different ownership and constructor name Footwork -> Arrows results combined YES and BMW Sauber -> Sauber results combined NO what's up with that? It would be easier and suitable to have their results combined. Daniels Renault Sport (talk) 00:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Footer Movies Harish Shankar
Template:Footer Movies Harish Shankar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 22:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Derek Bell and WP:F1 convention on Teams
Hi DH85868993, thanks for your attention on my edit on Derek Bell. I am thinking hard about your comment "although the field is labelled 'Teams', by WP:F1 convention the constructors are listed", and have a question. While your comment is certainly true, I always thought the convention is there for the ease of assembling the info, without any intention of limiting the scope and the accuracy of the articles. As you know, the teams are required to be chassis constructors (but not required to be makers of engine/transmission/tyre/etc.) by the current F1 reguration, so the convention has no problem describing current events, but this was not the case in the past, and there is no guarantee that this is going to be the case in the future. So, my question is "Does WP:F1 realise and endorse ignoring this important part of the history of Grand Prix racing by the enforcement of the Team=Constructor convention?" Drivers compete, Teams compete, Engineer/Designers compete, Chassis makers compete, Engine makers compete, Tyre makers compete; these are all part of the F1 spectacle at least in the past, and any convention (or at least the enforcement of it) that limits the effective presentation of the spectacle is harmful in my mind. In the case of Derek Bell, I believe he would be terribly disappointed if the Wikipedia article cannot include the contribution of Wheatcroft Racing on his career. Yiba (talk) 02:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Yiba. To clarify, I don't think that WP:F1 is enforcing a convention that "Team=Constructor"; the convention is merely that in a driver's infobox, the constructors (well, the chassis makes, actually) of the cars the driver drove are listed, rather than the teams for which they drove. It's just somewhat confusing/unhelpful that the field is labelled "Teams" rather than "Constructors" or "Makes" or "Cars Driven" or something like that (I've previously suggested changing the field label; perhaps I should raise it for discussion again). One of the reasons behind the convention is to keep the information in the infobox fairly concise - imagine if Andrea de Cesaris' infobox contained the full names of all the teams he drove for - the list of constructors/chassis makes is long enough! Certainly there is no intention to downplay the importance of the teams; they're all listed in full in each driver's results table. DH85868993 (talk) 09:45, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi DH85868993, thank you very much for the explanation. I now understand where and how I misunderstood in the whole picture, and see the difficulty clearly through the Cesaris example.  As I am not part of WP:F1 (I am more into sports car racing), I would leave the 'Teams' labelling issue with you, hoping that it will be solved in the future.
 * I would like to offer some pointers for your convenience: 1. 'Team' was, and is, an important part of F1 history, possibly more so than the concept of 'Constructor' (Rob Walker Racing Team won a GP with a Lotus before Team Lotus did.)., 2. It may be easier for the younger editors to understand the concept by thinking about the roles of "on track" contingent vs. "home base" contingent of a modern F1 team., 3. Many F1 drivers compete in CART Racing where "Team=Constructor" does not apply, and this is becoming the important part of more and more number of F1 driver careers. (Danny Sullivan article uses both F1 and "racing driver" infoboxes, and Emerson Fittipaldi article uses just the "F1 Driver" infobox. Takuma Sato may be a good example of what to expect in the future.)  Yiba (talk) 04:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hamilton edit
Sorry for my wrong edit... sorry :( --Francesco Betti Sorbelli (talk) 10:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. DH85868993 (talk) 10:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Larry Perkins   Perkins Engineering
Hi DH85868993 Thanks for contacting me and apologises for self editing. I would be happy to clean up Perkins Engineering at some stage but not all that skilled at editing WP. If you would like me to verify myself please tell me how cheers Larry Larryp50 (talk) 22:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Montreal lap record
On the F1 lap record for the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve. I noticed that the article said that RSC's 2004 lap was not considered an official record as it was set in qualifying, however the table below listed Montoya's 2002 lap which was also set in qualifying! So I put Ralf's in, which you reverted back, and I've reverted back again for the time being. But the decision that needs to be made is whether the table should list fastest race lap or fastest ever lap. I don't know what the other categories' lap records were but there needs to be consistency. Personally I think it might be more instructive to list the fastest ever lap, but of course general F1 convention is to only list race laps, however this is different as it is comparing F1 to other categories of motorsport. But my point is, listing Montoya's 2002 qualifying lap makes no sense whatsoever! The- (talk) 15:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I've fixed the "year" link. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It isn't F1's convention. It is everyone except USA's convention. --Falcadore (talk) 02:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The rationale behind listing only the race laps is that many race regulations in the past allowed adjustments to the cars in between qualifying and the race, making a "qualifying-only" setup like minimum fuel or super-soft tires to be possible, so that the race time is comparable fairly and qualifying time is not. In those races with 'impounding' in between qualifying and the start of the race, qualifying time becomes more comparable. Yiba (talk) 02:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

BRM P83 and P115 and Cooper T86
Hello again, Since you've shown an interest in my articles in the past I thought I'd nudge you in the direction of a couple of F1 car articles I've created in the last couple of days that may need the odd bit of tidying up here and there: BRM P115, BRM P83 and Cooper T86. Hope you like them! Spiderlounge (talk) 11:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've made a few minor tweaks, but apart from that they look great! DH85868993 (talk) 11:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, always nice to get a new pair of eyes to check things over. Glad you liked them. More articles coming soon I hope! Any suggestions? Spiderlounge (talk) 00:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Spiderlounge for the 3 great looking articles. This may not be an appropriate venue for the question, but I'd like to ask the opinions of the people who read this page.  The articles list the front suspension as Double Wishbone with Inboard coil/damper unit, and I know this has been the custom.  However, a wishbone has two legs connected to form a 'V' or 'U' shape, and the upper suspension arm of these cars do not meet the definition.  Wouldn't it be more accurate/appropriate to describe them as "Upper cantilever arm, lower wishbone, inboard coil/damper unit" or some alternatives? Yiba (talk) 01:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's probably a little above my pay grade, one could argue the suspension struts are wishbones where the two legs are so close together that they overlap, and if you look closely at some (and perhaps all, although obviously I haven't seen them all) of the struts/wishbones/whatever from these cars they seem to be designed with more strength at front and back than they do in the middle. I may be wrong about that, but that's my impression. The cantilever point is unarguable, so I suppose you're probably right. I'm not confident enough in how the terminology is defined to make a change but if you want to edit I certainly won't correct you... Thanks for the kind words too, glad you liked them Spiderlounge (talk) 13:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for British Racing Motors V16
An article that you have been involved in editing, British Racing Motors V16, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Spiderlounge (talk) 13:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Driver's records are elsewhere
It should be constructor records or at least some other disambiguating word, because driver records are on their own page. To whom have you made the request and why? May I read the request? Boot Blues (talk) 00:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The driver records page is effectively a subpage of List of Formula One records - it was split out because the page had become too large. I have lodged the request at Requested moves - you can see it here. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 00:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's not there. Where is it? Boot Blues (talk) 07:31, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The request has been removed because it's been actioned (i.e. the page has been moved back). Here's what it looked like: . DH85868993 (talk) 13:27, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
- Jayadevp  13  14:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Account renaming
I can't do that. You will have to ask a bureaucrat to rename the account. Daniel Case (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah. Cool. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 02:40, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Powers subject to be approved definitively by the organizers of the Formula 1 World Championship
The GP of Mexico, Korea and New Jersey is subject to be approved definitively by the organizers of the Formula 1 World Championship--Shinobilanterncorps (talk) 19:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2014_Formula_One_season — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagheuher (talk • contribs) 23:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

1998 Monaco Grand Prix
I agree it may not have been the best disam but i am unsure where to disam it to that would be more appropriate. Longterm it shouldn't be pointing to a disambiguation page. Do you have any ideas? Blethering  Scot  17:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've dabbed it to List of Formula One driver records, as has been done elsewhere. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 22:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Really sorry I'm an idiot. Thats the page i thought i had dabbed it too and have done on other pages and I presumed it was that you didn't agree with. Only when you said that page did i actually check the diff and realise i have linked it to Golf. Blethering  Scot  17:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. I figured the golf link was a mistake. We're all entitled to those from time to time. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 21:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

RB10
Hi, I would like to make you aware that there is a discussion about updates that you may have made to Red Bull RB10 at Talk:Red Bull RB10. Freimütig (talk) 07:38, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 08:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Reply to mail
I've tweaked one of the edit filters. Let me know if the problem recurs. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 02:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the Jack McGrath links
Thanks for fixing the Jack McGrath links. I made a mistake. I thought they would be automatically fixed. Aberdeen01 (talk) 02:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. DH85868993 (talk) 02:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Lfc
Template:Lfc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.. QED 237  (talk)  23:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

RAM Racing
Thank you for correcting my edit to RAM Racing - it's good that you checked it. However, an issue remains - the link to John Macdonald is very ambiguous and not helpful to a user. It should either be unlinked if the owner of RAM Racing wasn't particularly notable, or changed to something specific. What should be done with it?  PK T (alk)  23:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've unlinked it. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 23:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

W05 image
The image might not be on F1 Fanatic, but I am sure I have seen it before. I have certainly seen images from the same angle. It was uploaded at around the same time as some that were definitely COPYVIOs. I just find that too coincidental, and I would rather err on the side of caution for now. It would not be the first time someone cropped a non-free image and claimed it as their own. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 06:33, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

In fact, here it is. It has been taken from Autosport's image gallery:

http://cdn.images.autosport.com/editorial/1390897136.jpg

Given the lack of information provided by the user who uploaded it, I seriously doubt it is their own work. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 06:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

thank you
for cleaning up my hastily applied patch at Jo Davidson. I happened to have the article on my watch list and the book nearby and went for speed rather than neatness because I dislike having such tags in "my" articles. You finished it off nicely. Life is good. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Your "hastily applied patch" was fine - it provided the missing information that enabled me to "finish it off". Cheers. DH85868993 (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Brabham BT46 deletion in favor of Fan Car
Curious why that pic of the actual BT46 was deleted in favor of the Fan Car. Deleted from Wikipedia Commons also? was there some copyright infringement or what? Looking back, Lauda did some prety amazing work with the non fan car BT 46 Brabham that year, considering all the problems of a new car, etc. When it ran he nearly always finished in the top 3. Won Italy, right? I cannot seem to find any (talk) on any archived talk page, so this is my inquiry> Thank you> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugatti35racer (talk • contribs) 01:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was a copyright infringement. Pity, because even though it was a lower quality photo, it was a better photo of the car as a whole. DH85868993 (talk) 01:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * So for future reference, how is it copyright infringement, if the person who posted on the Brabham BT46 talk page says he took the picture while at the race? Or is there a dispute over who took the pic or what? I was of the understanding that original pics were fine to post.

How does that work? thanks> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugatti35racer (talk • contribs) 02:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies. When I wrote "copyright infringement" I was going from memory. Upon checking, I see it was actually a case of "no permission", i.e. the person who uploaded the file did not provide suitable confirmation that they had permission to upload the file (which is not quite the same thing) - see Commons:OTRS for more information. I hope that answers your question. DH85868993 (talk) 02:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

1967 Monaco Grand Prix
That partial revert has created some referencing errors, as well as re-installing some redirects as links, might want to look into that. --Falcadore (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I've readded the reflist. I'm not especially fussed about the redirects (per WP:NOTBROKEN). Thanks for the heads up. DH85868993 (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Formula One/Next Grand Prix‎
No problem. I stumbled across them and noticed the information was already two years old. So I decided to give them their long overdue update. Tvx1 (talk) 13:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Algerian Grand Prix
It is not a Formula One race? It's a Grand Prix according to 1934 Grand Prix season. So is WPF1 1950 onwards only? --Falcadore (talk) 06:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It's my understanding that WPF1's scope is limited to Formula One races and other races which counted for the WDC. But I'm happy for you to confirm that at the Project. DH85868993 (talk) 06:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not stated anywhere what the scope is other than "Formula One". --Falcadore (talk) 06:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * In that case Algerian Grand Prix is outside the project's scope, because it pre-dates Formula One, which was defined in 1946. It would be covered by WP:MOTOR, specifically the History of Motorsport taskforce. DH85868993 (talk) 07:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Nationality convention
Slightly related to the above Algerian GP, I noticed in creating 1934 Monaco Grand Prix that the winner Guy Moll was an Algerian. Algeria is a sovereign state, but was a French colony then. Could you tell me if you feel he should be listed as an Algerian, or as a French? My sentiment is towards listing him as Algerian, but I don't know if Algeria had a different national flag as a colony of France, and it would be a problem in converting the article into the format with flag-laden template. Yiba (talk &#124; contribs) 02:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Yiba. I'd be tempted to show him as French, for consistency with other articles - consider that the first line of Guy Moll says "Guillaume Laurent "Guy" Moll (28 May 1910 - 15 August 1934) was a French racing driver" and he has a French flag next to his name in articles such as 1933 24 Hours of Le Mans, 1934 Grand Prix season, 1933 Penya Rhin Grand Prix, 1933 Nice Grand Prix, etc. DH85868993 (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Another angle to look at the issue is to think about listing Ayrton Senna da Silva as a Portuguese, with the timing of Brazil gaining independence from Portugal being different to the Moll case.  Of course the timing difference is a factor in it being before or after the birth and the winnings/achievements of the driver, but such geo-political developments are something I would very much like to leave outside of the motorsport discussions/articles.  If we place ourselves in the position of Algerian nationals, the "French racing driver" description would taint the conceived stand point of Wikipedia.  On the other hand, open-minded French would accept an "Algerian racing driver" description without a problem, don't you think?  Yiba  (talk &#124; contribs) 03:38, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I think we need to be guided by what external reliable sources say. Unfortunately in this case, some external sources (e.g. 8W, FindAGrave and grandprixhistory.org) describe him as Algerian, whereas others (e.g. FORIX (subscription site)) describe him as French. It might be worth starting a discussion at Talk:Guy Moll. DH85868993 (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you again. As sources of good reputation could be "mostly correct" on many news/issues, while blatantly wrong on some, and may have unknown/hidden/not admitted agenda that come from ethnic/cultural/financial backgrounds, I try to depend less on them on issues with political/ethnic factors.  Hope some useful info would come out of User talk:Yiba.   Yiba  (talk &#124; contribs) 06:47, 23 March 2014 (UTC)