Misplaced Pages

Talk:2013 Formula One World Championship: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:54, 2 December 2012 editTboa (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,177 edits →Unassigned car numbers← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:57, 1 February 2024 edit undoCyberwolf (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers5,845 edits Assessment: banner shell, Formula One (Rater) 
(403 intermediate revisions by 72 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}} {{talkheader|search=yes}}
{{WikiProject Formula One|class=start|importance=low}}
{{dyktalk|21 November|2011|entry=... that veteran ] promoter ] is an advisor to the ''']''', a ] race to be run ''']''' ''(planned track layout pictured)'' starting ''']'''?}} {{dyktalk|21 November|2011|entry=... that veteran ] promoter ] is an advisor to the ''']''', a ] race to be run ''']''' ''(planned track layout pictured)'' starting ''']'''?}}
{{ITN talk|October 27|2013}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
{{WikiProject Formula One|importance=Mid}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:2013 Formula One season/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age=1 |units=month }}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:2013 Formula One season/Archive index
|mask=Talk:2013 Formula One season/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
}}

== Ma Qinghua ==

Please do not list Ma Qinghua as a driver for HRT. Although a source is supplied, we cannot actually verify it for the time being. The only English-language source I can find on this is Joe Saward's blog (which I personally feel fails ] after his attacks on Vijay Mallya in the past), and even that only refers to "reports in China". We need an English translation to be sure, or if there is an established editor out there who is fluent in Mandarin and can confirm that the source is reliable. Given the time differences, I can understand why this might not have appeared on the likes of Autosport just yet. There is no need to rush to add Ma to the article, and if you have any concerns, you can rest assured that he will be added in the moment a reliable source is found.

As per convetion established by consensus, any reference to Ma joining HRT should contain quotes from Ma himself or someone who a member of the team and who is named (ie Luis Perez-Sala). ] (]) 10:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

== Entry Fees ==

I noticed a small problem with the cost of entry, 1pt is quoted as being worth USD$5,000 or EUR€3,895 which 1/100 of the basic entry fee. The problem occurs when USD$6,000 is quoted as being less the USD$5,000 at EUR€3,674. I would change it but I'm not sure which exchange rate is right or if it you would want to update it using figures from today.] (]) 11:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:The FIA work in euros not dollars, so the exchange rates should of been calculated the other way round, likely to be the reason whoever added that in made a mistake. Going into that much detail is probably unnecessary anyway. ] (]) 12:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::The source supplied makes it pretty clear that from 2012, the entry fee will be paid in dollars, not Euros. ] (]) 21:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

== HRT in 2013 ==

Should HRT be in the 2013 entry list? I thought they where leaving. ] 11:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:As ever, speculation has no place here. If/when they actually say they are withdrawing HRT will be removed from the list. ] (]) 12:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::I doubt there's any chance of the team leaving F1 altogether. It's for sale, but I'm sure it won't disappear. If and when it's sold, we can change the team name accordingly. ] (]) 20:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Daniels, you've been editing long enough to know that content cannot be added or removed without a valid source to support it. If HRT were leaving and had confirmed it, then it would have been reported by now. ] (]) 21:49, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

== Television Coverage ==

The existing piece states, mistakenly, that the 2013 season will be covered by Fox. In fact, Speed is part of Fox Sports. The 2013 season will be the first of a four year deal with NBC Sports Group. Proposed rewrite below.

For the first time in seventeen years, will not be covering any of the Formula One races. Instead, will be the sole provider of television coverage of F1 in the US.--] (]) 04:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

:As a rule, we don't cover changes in broadcasters. They don't affect the season as a whole. We did mention the switch from the BBC to Sky in the 2012 season page, but only because that represented a significant change in the broadcasting structure. ] (]) 07:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

== Numbers and the team and driver table ==

Please do not add numbers to the team and driver table, or rearrange the entries to reflect the final championship standings of 2012. As per a long-standing consensus established at the ], the team and driver table should remain in alphabetical order (first by constructor name, then by driver name for each constructor) until the FIA publishes an entry list or 2013, which will assign numbers to cars. ] (]) 07:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

:Hi PM, as a point of reference, and to reduce the likelihood of duplicated discussion, can you substantiate your claim with a link to the precise discussion which resulted in that consensus please. ] (]) 07:28, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::The FIA issues F1 race numbers ], not the editors of Misplaced Pages. So have they done it yet? --] (]) 07:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:::Hi Falcadore, but that wasn't what I was asking about. Can you throw any light on the whereabouts of the consensus to which PM was referring? ] (]) 18:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::::]. Does that assist? --] (]) 05:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
:::::Exactly what I wanted - thank you. Wow! PM's comments are rather illuminating. ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

::Can you not question every time someone claims there is a past consensus? We're not simply making things up. Unless there are references for the numbers, it is original research because the basis is pure assumption, even if it is an educated assumption. If you have no references for the numbers, they aren't posted. Simple as that. ] (]) 08:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:::Hi The359, if a consensus is cited, then a link should be provided so that interested parties can examine the context of it and the judge strength of it. I'm not particularly interested in the numbers for the 2013 season, but I would be ''very'' interested in reading the "long-standing consensus" which mandates that "the team and driver table should remain in alphabetical order (first by constructor name, then by driver name for each constructor) until the FIA publishes an entry list or 2013". ] (]) 18:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::::If the consensus can be explained in two sentences and there is no one objecting, then no, there is no need to find the specifics of the previous debate, nor is there any particular reason to "judge the strength of it", which really seems to be another way of calling into question the original consensus like I mentioned before. If you're so interested in reading it, you find it. ] (]) 19:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::And if the numbers aren't posted, how can you rearrange the table in any way? Yes, the alternative is based on championship standings, but how can you prove that all 12 teams will continue to exist as they currently are three months from now when the 2013 season begins? What if, for example, Force India is sold on 1 February 2013, missing the date for entries to be received and therefore relegating the team to the number 24 and 25 (which is precisely what happened to Brawn GP in 2009)?

::Without numbers, the table cannot be rearranged. This is an issue that shouldn't ''need'' a consensus, because simple common sense should apply. However, I made this discussion as a reference for reverting changes to the page from IP addresses and/or new users who are unfamiliar with the editing process. And given your history, showing you a previous discussion in which a consensus was achieved will do no good, because you will find a way to try and undermine it. Even when the consensus is for the betterment of the page. So, if you are looking to change the way the table is constructed, then please, make your argument; but until such time as you do, you should consider my comments and those of Falcadore and The359 to be a preliminary consensus in favour of keeping the table un-numbered and in alphabetical order. If you are looking to change the way the table is constructed, then please, answer me this: what on earth are you doing questioning it? ] (]) 08:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

:::I agree; keep it as it is until it's official. (BTW - I do believe it also happened to Sauber in 2009/2010 season change). ] (]) 17:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

::::Yes, I think it happened to Sauber as well (though as I remember, USF1, Campos, Manor and Sauber were all accepted to the grid together and all given their choice of numbers from those that were vailable). I was only using Brawn as an example because it was the first example that came to mind. ] (]) 00:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

:::PM, I had no intention of modifying the table, but I am ''very'' interested in locating and understanding WP:F1 consensuses. It was you who claimed there was a "long-standing consensus" which mandates that "the team and driver table should remain in alphabetical order (first by constructor name, then by driver name for each constructor) until the FIA publishes an entry list or 2013". Presumably you weren't just bluffing - so where exactly is it? ] (]) 18:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::::Even mentioning the fact that one could be bluffing makes your entire argument bullshit. ]. Calling into question whether or not someone is making shit up is uncalled for, and you're already on thin ice. ] (]) 19:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:::::No, you are mistaken. Assuming someone is ''not'' bluffing is to assume good faith. Bad faith might lead to an assumption that they ''were'' bluffing. Are you assuming good faith in this discussion? ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::::::Bringing up bluffing at all is a sign of bad faith, period. If you assume someone is not bluffing, there is no need to mention it in the first place. ] (]) 18:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::::I can't put my hands on it exactly, but it was formed in late 2008 or late 2009. I remember it well because The359 convinced me to change my mind on the subject. ] (]) 21:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:::::I don't recall specifics but I remember the debate centered on teams deciding who their #1 driver was, and people arbitrarily deciding that one driver should get the lower number instead of the other driver. There have however been instances of teams not giving their top driver the first number, as in the case of Honda, when Button allowed Barrichello to have the number 11 as it was good luck to him or something, while Button took 12. Then, even though Honda had been given 18 and 19 for their finishing position in 2009, Brawn took the numbers 22 and 23 after buying out the team. So simply put, Vettel has #1, everything else is crystal balling. And we're not going to put a column just to add Vettel as 1 because that will just invite stupidity. ] (]) 21:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

::::::If I remember rightly, the major point you talked me around on was updating the team and driver table to reflect WCC positions from race to race. ] (]) 00:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Rather than debating the existence of the consensus, why don't we spend the time establishing/confirming the consensus, for future reference. ] (]) 23:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

'''Proposal:''' The "Teams and Drivers" tables of future F1 season articles should remain in alphabetical order on constructor name, with no "car number" column, until the official provisional entry list is published by the FIA.
{|class=wikitable
|'''Support''' || DH85868993, Bretonbanquet, Prisonermonkeys, Bosleytree, Eff Won
|-
|'''Oppose''' ||
|}

:I don't see anyone objecting to it at the moment, so it seems fairly clear that a consensus exists. Again. ] (]) 23:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::(e/c) Why the fuck we still have to explain '''everything''' we do to Eff Won or face endless timewasting, I have no idea. This, like all the other occasions, is a total non-starter. I care little for where the old consensus is or was – this discussion constitutes a consensus already because, yet again, Eff Won is alone. ] (]) 23:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:::Because the alternative is chaos when Eff Won denies that there is any such consensus and starts reverting all edits until such time as we can prove that a previous consensus exists. Which we won't be able to, because Eff Won will deny that whatever evidence we provide is a consensus because it was obtained fraudulently or some such. I'm keep to avoid that. ] (]) 00:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::::You're right. I object to being required to AGF concerning an editor who spends their time doing nothing of the sort, challenging several editors to produce a consensus which is self-evident. ] (]) 00:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

:::::Just think: every time we AGF and he doesn't, it's another nail in his coffin. ] (]) 02:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

::::::Rest assured, I ''am'' assuming good faith; but are you? ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

:::::::Challenging whether or not a consensus exists does not fit the definition of "assuming good faith" on any level. ] (]) 23:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

:::::BB, AGF is a civility thing, intended to make collaboration on Wikipediadia articles easier. I didn't "challenge" him, I requested a link to the consensus to help me try to understand the unusual culture and lore that has developed around the F1 articles, with the intention of becoming more familiar with it so I can better be accepted. Not much to ask really? ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::::::''"Presumably you weren't just bluffing - so where exactly is it?"'' If you don't see that as a challenge then you might want to seriously consider rephrasing your posts when you get into situations like this. You still don't apparently understand what a consensus is if you still think a link was required for you to accept it. It was the clearest community consensus that Misplaced Pages can offer, yet it wasn't good enough for you – as, I think you know, the admin told you on your talk page. Take a hint and drop this. ] (]) 20:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

::::PM, I never reverted ''anything'' here, and don't plan to as I support the stance you took - all I wanted was a link (now supplied by Falcadore above). ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
:::::Then perhaps you should give serious consideration to the way you present yourself. If you had no plans to edit anything and supported the stance I put forward, why did you phrase your request to see the consensus as a challenge? Even if that was not your intention, it is how you came across, and given your track record when it comes to discussing established consensus, your approach to this discussion was, at best, ''very'' poorly thought-out. ] (]) 08:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
:::BB, all I asked for was a link to the consensus discussion that PM was using as the reason he reverted another editor. I'm not sure why you have such a problem with that. ] (]) 18:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
::::He didn't cite a discussion, he cited a consensus. Consensus is not always manifest as a discussion, but you wouldn't know that because you don't understand what a consensus is. I have a problem with it because you asked several times for a link that a) was not necessary to prove PM's point, and b) you should have looked for yourself if you were so damned interested. You weren't even seeking to make a change (you say you actually supported the stance we took), yet you persisted in a quite antagonistic fashion – that is purely and simply disruptive. How you weren't reblocked is a total mystery to me, but I rest easy in the knowledge that you either have no idea what you did wrong therefore you'll do it again and get reblocked, or you... no wait, BB, "AGF". There's a little joke for you. ] (]) 20:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

== Edit request on 28 November 2012 ==

{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
Last Paragraph under heading of:

'''<big>Driver changes</big>'''

] will move from ] to ].<ref name="CP C'ham"/> ] was promoted to a race drive at ] replacing ], Bottas will partner ] winner ] who stays at the team for a third season.<ref name="Williams 2013"/>

Last link should go to ] - below para with the small change:

] will move from ] to ].<ref name="CP C'ham"/> ] was promoted to a race drive at ] replacing ], Bottas will partner ] winner ] who stays at the team for a third season.<ref name="Williams 2013"/>

<!-- End request -->
] (]) 11:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

{{ESp|d}} - thank you for pointing that out. <span style="font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#000;">]&thinsp;]</span> 11:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

== Jerome D'Ambrosio ==
{{Edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
Has been confirmed as the 3rd driver for Lotus, according to his official website: http://www.jeromedambrosio.com/node/177 {{unsigned|Sicilianjuly}}

{{ESp|n}} - that page seems to be from January 2012, concerning the ], where he is indeed listed. <span style="font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#000;">]&thinsp;]</span> 14:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

== FIA entry list ==

On the FIA site, , there is an entry list released on November 30, if you need it. ] (]) 15:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
:Seems legit, but odd that there are no confirmed Sauber or Toro Roso drivers, no Pic or Glock. Personally I'd say it's no good for car numbers either since there are so many gaps in it. ] (]) 15:20, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
::I don't think it's that odd at all - Sauber rarely confirm driver numbers until the final entry list, which will probably come between late January and mid-February. ] (]) 22:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
:::That doesn't mean the drivers' names wouldn't be present. At the moment, we're selectively utilising this source as gospel for the HRT situation and the numbers, and ignoring it regarding confirmed drivers. I don't rate it as a source, and there's a precedent for error-strewn FIA entry lists. ] (]) 22:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

== Unassigned car numbers ==

Okay, maybe it's just me, but I think this looks weird. In fact, I think it looks downright inconsistent:
:{| class="wikitable" border="1" style="font-size: 85%;"
! Team
! Constructor
! Engine
! Tyre
! No.
! Race drivers
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|Germany}} Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]
|rowspan=2| Mercedes
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|align="center"| 9
| Rosberg
|-
|align="center"| 10
| Hamilton
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|CHE}} Sauber F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]-]
|rowspan=2| Ferrari
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|rowspan=2 align="center"| 11/12
| Gutierrez
|-
| Hulkenberg
|-
|}

It just looks wrong to my eyes. Half the teams have their numbers assigned to specific drivers, half the teams do not, and there is no real explanation as to why. So I suggest we do either one of two things until such time as the full entry list - or at least enough drivers are assigned numbers that there is no longer the split between two number (as is the case with Sauber) - is released.

'''Number one,''' we have no numbers in the table, restoring the table to what it was yesterday with teams and drivers listed alphabetically:
:{| class="wikitable" border="1" style="font-size: 85%;"
! Team
! Constructor
! Engine
! Tyre
! Race drivers
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|Germany}} Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]
|rowspan=2| Mercedes
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
| Hamilton
|-
| Rosberg
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|CHE}} Sauber F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]-]
|rowspan=2| Ferrari
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
| Gutierrez
|-
| Hulkenberg
|-
|}

'''Number two,''' we explain the discrepancy:
:{| class="wikitable" border="1" style="font-size: 85%;"
! Team
! Constructor
! Engine
! Tyre
! No.
! Race drivers
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|Germany}} Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]
|rowspan=2| Mercedes
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|align="center"| 9
| Rosberg
|-
|align="center"| 10
| Hamilton
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|CHE}} Sauber F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]-]
|rowspan=2| Ferrari
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|rowspan=2 align="center"| TBA{{ref|1|1}}
| Gutierrez
|-
| Hulkenberg
|-
|}
:'''Notes:'''
:*{{note|1|1}} — With the release of the provisional entry list, ], ], ], ] and ] were all issued numbers for the season, but these numbers had not been assigned to individual cars.

The problem with the first solution is that we are knowingly holding back relevant information, and it does slightly contradict the above discussion where we decided to keep the table alphabetical - as opposed to based on 2012 WCC standings - until such time as numbers were assigned.


== External links modified ==
The problem with the second solution is that it's rather inelegant. It's more elegant than having half the teams with numbers assigned to drivers, half the team without any assigned numbers, and no explanation as to why, but it's still the lesser evil.


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
Nevertheless, I don't think we can keep the half-and-half split between assigned and unassigned numbers. It's inconsistent, and at the very least, needs and explanation. ] (]) 01:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


I have just added archive links to {{plural:25|one external link|25 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
: Why don't we just input all of the numbers to individuals even though the FIA haven't confirmed them yet. ] (]) 11:36, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121025004728/http://www.fia.com:80/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/f1releases/2012/Pages/f1-concorde.aspx to http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/f1releases/2012/Pages/f1-concorde.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111107123744/http://www3.mercedes-gp.com:80/en to http://www3.mercedes-gp.com/en/#/s/news/1148/mercedes-gp-petronas-nico-rosberg-agree-contract-extension
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121104140121/http://www.sauberf1team.com:80/en/news.cfm?id=W95J4V1W-Sauber_F1_Team_signs_on_brNico_Huelkenberg_for_2013 to http://www.sauberf1team.com/en/news.cfm?id=W95J4V1W-Sauber_F1_Team_signs_on_brNico_Huelkenberg_for_2013
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121130011658/http://www.sauberf1team.com:80/en/news.cfm?id=491RA6HS-Sauber_F1_Team_signs_Esteban_Gutierrez_as_its_race_driver_Robin_Frijns_becomes_test_and_reserve_driver to http://www.sauberf1team.com/en/news.cfm?id=491RA6HS-Sauber_F1_Team_signs_Esteban_Gutierrez_as_its_race_driver_Robin_Frijns_becomes_test_and_reserve_driver
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130117230831/http://www.forceindiaf1.com/paul-di-resta to http://www.forceindiaf1.com/paul-di-resta
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130302224243/http://www.forceindiaf1.com:80/news/detail/general/adrian-sutil-completes-sahara-force-indias-2013-line-up to http://www.forceindiaf1.com/news/detail/general/adrian-sutil-completes-sahara-force-indias-2013-line-up
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131103193928/http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2013/11/15196.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2013/11/15196.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130610022625/http://www.formula1.com:80/news/headlines/2013/6/14643.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2013/6/14643.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130304055252/http://www.marussiaf1team.com:80/news/762/ to http://www.marussiaf1team.com/news/762/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121231232951/http://www.marussiaf1team.com:80/news/702/ to http://www.marussiaf1team.com/news/702/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121213043544/http://www1.skysports.com:80/formula-1/news/12433/8322437 to http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12433/8322437/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120519134114/http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com:80/2007/racing/06/12/hamilton0618/index.html to http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/racing/06/12/hamilton0618/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130123224940/http://www.marussiaf1team.com:80/news/709/ to http://www.marussiaf1team.com/news/709/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130209003422/http://www.marussiaf1team.com:80/news/745/razia-returns to http://www.marussiaf1team.com/news/745/razia-returns
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110213010355/http://www.thef1times.com:80/news/display/02642 to http://thef1times.com/news/display/02642
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140618224048/http://www.formula1.com:80/races/calendar.html to http://www.formula1.com/races/calendar.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130208022708/http://www.fia.com:80/championship/formula-1-world-championship/2013/calendar to http://www.fia.com/championship/formula-1-world-championship/2013/calendar
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140618224048/http://www.formula1.com:80/races/calendar.html to http://www.formula1.com/races/calendar.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120114083445/http://www.ferrari.com:80/English/Formula1/News/Headlines/Pages/120111-f1-domenicali-the-new-car-different-not-particularly-pretty-and-we-hope-quick.aspx to http://www.ferrari.com/English/Formula1/News/Headlines/Pages/120111-f1-domenicali-the-new-car-different-not-particularly-pretty-and-we-hope-quick.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130413110311/http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au:80/article.aspx?id=8640481 to http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8640481
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130927133758/http://tensport.com.au/news/newsarticles/Motor-Racing-Vettel-wins-Canadian-Grand-Prix.htm to http://tensport.com.au/news/newsarticles/Motor-Racing-Vettel-wins-Canadian-Grand-Prix.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130825182849/http://www.formula1.com:80/results/team/2013/ to http://www.formula1.com/results/team/2013/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130927213726/http://sports.yahoo.com/news/motor-racing-raikkonens-record-run-ends-spa-181836881.html to http://sports.yahoo.com/news/motor-racing-raikkonens-record-run-ends-spa-181836881.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130225081305/http://www.racingfanatic.net:80/2013/02/jenson-button-says-mclaren-struggling.html to http://www.racingfanatic.net/2013/02/jenson-button-says-mclaren-struggling.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130608105439/http://www.formula1.com:80/results/driver/2013/ to http://www.formula1.com/results/driver/2013/


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
:::We can't do that because we don't know which driver will be assigned which number. We can't knowingly put in false information. ] (]) 21:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
::I like it saying TBA. It provides the relevant information needed, and it doesn't look as 'messy' either. Inputting all the numbers now could end up being incorrect - we need to wait until something is confirmed rather than just trying to fill the spaces now with potentially wrong information. ] (]) 12:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">]:Online</sub></small> 04:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
The 2 numbers given to each team have been confirmed by the FIA, so we can enter all of that information somewhere in the article. What we don't know officially yet, is how some of the teams are going to allocate their numbers. ] (]) 18:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


== Misleading sentence ==
:So why not something like this:
::{| class="wikitable" border="1" style="font-size: 85%;"
! Team
! Constructor
! Engine
! Tyre
! No.
! Race drivers
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|Germany}} Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]
|rowspan=2| Mercedes
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|align="center"| 9
| Rosberg
|-
|align="center"| 10
| Hamilton
|-
|rowspan=2| {{flagicon|CHE}} Sauber F1 Team
!rowspan=2| ]-]
|rowspan=2| Ferrari
|rowspan=2 align="center"| {{Pirelli}}
|rowspan=2 align="center"| 11 & 12 TBA{{ref|1|1}}
| Gutierrez
|-
| Hulkenberg
|-
|}
:'''Notes:'''
:*{{note|1|1}} — With the release of the provisional entry list, ], ], ], ] and ] were all issued numbers for the season, but these numbers had not been assigned to individual cars.


The article have the following sentence:
:Rather than leaving the reader wondering why they've been missed out. ] (]) 18:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


"''With Michael Schumacher and Pedro de la Rosa no longer in the sport, the 2013 season was the first in which none of the field had competed in the 20th century."''
::There is already an explanation given as to why some numbers have been missed out. ] (]) 21:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Which is not true since the 20th century technically ended in Dec 31, 2000 and not Dec 31, 1999 as commonly thought, and Jenson Button, who start racing in 2000, was still on the grid until 2016 (and making a one-off appearance in 2017 Monaco Grand Prix). So my suggestion is or remove the line entirely, or move to 2018 F1 Season or correct it stating no driver on the field have competed before 2000. ] (]) 23:57, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
:::I've changed my mind about TBA - I think there should be two numbers in there rather than TBA, because, yes it is explained, but the numbers have still been assigned to a particular team. ] (]) 21:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
:I'm removing the line on the grounds of ] <br/>] (]) 11:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
:It was also ] <br/>] (]) 11:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:57, 1 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2013 Formula One World Championship article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3
A fact from 2013 Formula One World Championship appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 November 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: A record of the entry may be seen at Misplaced Pages:Recent additions/2011/November.
Misplaced Pages
In the newsA news item involving 2013 Formula One World Championship was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 27 October 2013.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconFormula One Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 25 external links on 2013 Formula One season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—Talk to my owner:Online 04:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Misleading sentence

The article have the following sentence:

"With Michael Schumacher and Pedro de la Rosa no longer in the sport, the 2013 season was the first in which none of the field had competed in the 20th century."

Which is not true since the 20th century technically ended in Dec 31, 2000 and not Dec 31, 1999 as commonly thought, and Jenson Button, who start racing in 2000, was still on the grid until 2016 (and making a one-off appearance in 2017 Monaco Grand Prix). So my suggestion is or remove the line entirely, or move to 2018 F1 Season or correct it stating no driver on the field have competed before 2000. 201.22.236.229 (talk) 23:57, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm removing the line on the grounds of WP:FANCRUFT
SSSB (talk) 11:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
It was also WP:UNSOURCED
SSSB (talk) 11:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Categories: