Talk:2011 Formula One World Championship/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about 2011 Formula One World Championship. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Ferrari drivers

Ferrari lists 7 drivers as their official (!) formula 1 drivers on their formula 1 website. Bertolini and Rigon are two of them. So they have to be in the table. --Gamma127 (talk) 16:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

They are not listed as official test/reserve/development/whatever drivers like Fisi, Gene and Bianchi are. So no they do not need to be included. QueenCake (talk) 16:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Are young driver tests notable?

I've noticed something odd on the F1 season pages of late: a team's test and reserve drivers are listed in the driver table, but their young drivers are not. I find this an oddity, because the young drivers actually do some testing while the designated test and reserve drivers do not. For example, Renault have Senna, Grosjean, Fauzy, Tung and Charouz listed as their current test and reservists, but at least three of them have not actually driven the car this year - not even in a straight line (the way Wickens and Quaife-Hobbs did for Virgin). So I propose that we either add young drivers to the driver table (possibly in an extra column), or we limit the definition of "test and reserve driver" to drivers who actually drive the car, or are designated as reserve drivers in the event of regular driver being unable to take part Prisonermonkeys (talk) 04:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I have actually been considering in the past few days eliminating the test driver column entirely from season articles, as it has a vague definition and serves little purpose to summarizing the actual championship.

As for your specific question, if a test session is held to analyze the driver's performance, then it's not worthy of inclusion in the table. If the young driver is in fact testing new designs or mehcnicals on the car, then he is a test driver. The young drivers tend to not be testing new equipment and seem to mostly be getting seat time to help them progress up the ladder. The³5₉ (Talk) 06:04, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

In that case, perhaps we should trim down the test driver colum to include any driver who drives in Friday practice, tests parts, or is the designated third driver in the event a regular driver cannot compete - so based on the 2011 page, we can probably remove Paffet, Gene, Bianchi, Fauzy, Tung, Charouz, Valsecchi, Teizeria and possibly Yamamoto since they haven't really done anything. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Being a test driver for a Formula One team is an important step in a driver's journey through motor racing, therefore it is indisputably notable. Officially Mr X (talk) 09:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

To the season review article? I think not. That is relevant to the articles on the particular drivers and their teams, not to this article. The³5₉ (Talk) 10:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

If it is notable to the driver then add it to the drivers' article. You made the point yourself where the notability lies. --Falcadore (talk) 10:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

So I have to use the article search to find a Renault test driver of the 2011 season? Now it takes 5 seconds to find the Renault test drivers of this season, without this column it takes some minutes to find them... --Gamma127 (talk) 13:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I dispute Mr. X's claims - we seen dozens of young drivers get drafted in as a test driver, and then fade into obscurity when they did not make it.

And Gamma, it's not a matter of convenience. It's a matter of notability. If a driver does not actually drive the car at any point during the season, how is that notable? You would still be able to find them by going to the individual team pages; it's just their notability in the context of the season that I'm questioning. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 13:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Test drivers are part of the supporting team, so perhaps the better question is do we list the test drivers, and the managers, and the designers, and the engineers, and the aerodynamicists, and the drafters, and the caterers, and the publicists, and the photographers...

What actually makes a test driver more notable than the rest of the team? --Falcadore (talk) 14:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

To answer Falcadore, nothing. Really it would serve far more purpose to put Team Principles or Technical Directors in the table (please note I don't think for a second that we should), than test drivers - some of which do nothing more than stand in the garage.

There isn't even any consistency in what makes a test/reserve driver, some like Paffet actually do work with the car and run in the simulator, others are there because they belong to a driver program and get the reserve label as a bonus (the Renault/Lotus lot), while a few are just paying to be involved in the F1 paddock. Even the reserve label is nothing official - as we've seen teams reserve the right to pick whoever they want when a main driver is out. So really, it would be better to take them out. QueenCake (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Why there is 'MAL' repersenting Malaysia. Official (ISO-based) abbreviation is 'MYS'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.194.76.42 (talk) 14:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

It was decided not to use ISO abbreviations, especially since in the history of Formula One there have been races held without the title of a country in them (Pacific Grand Prix, Caesars Palace Grand Prix, Pescara Grand Prix, etc). The³5₉ (Talk) 20:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Here is the project-approved list of race abbreviations, with links to the supporting discussions. DH85868993 (talk) 03:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Condensing Race Report

I do believe the race report should be condensed, but not nearly as short as Prisonermonkeys had it. He almost 1/4th it, while it should only be 1/2ed. Most articles have about half of the size of this one's race report. The pictures became too close together on his also. Editadam 14:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Then take some of the pictures out, or move them elsewhere. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe the other race reports should be longer rather than F1 shorter. Race reporting needs to be of a length so that all the trivia that can't be deleted looks significantly smaller. There are, or at least used to be several articles where pre-season testing or lists of driver changes, got more writing than any other component of the article. So very wrong --Falcadore (talk) 22:49, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I mean, the race report is the MOST important part of the article, as it describes the season, from the lights in the opener, to the checkered flag in the finale. It should be the longest component of the article, and I have to agree with Falcadore, it is so wrong when the driver changes gets more writing than what actually happens in the season. Editadam 00:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I moved the picture of the two Lotuses (Lotii?) to the team and driver changes section, because that section includes a description of the two teams and the situation regarding their name changes. That should free up some space in the report section. As a general rule, I think we should have no more than four (or maybe five) lines for each race.

Also, I'm not sure why there is a citations template at the start of the report. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

(trivia) Lotuses. The use of the 'ii' for plural applies only of the word concerned is derived from Latin.(/trivia) --Falcadore (talk) 03:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

"Lotii" is an-in joke from the days when James Hunt used to refer to them thus in commentaries. Britmax (talk) 09:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Calendar table links

I would like to restore the calendar table to the state it was in prior to the edit that occurred on June 11, 2012, in which the links to the appropriate GP pages were unilaterally destroyed without discussion and without a reasonable and rational explanation.

The reason I would like the links restored is they make navigating to the appropriate articles less of a chore for the reader. That is the beauty of hyperlinks. The table has a row for each GP of the season and a column giving the full 'Race Name' of each of those GPs (which is specific to that year's race), along with the circuit name and the date. Yet, although there is a race name given for each row in the table and a separate article exists to cover each of those specific races, that article is, following the destructive edit of June 11 that I would like to revert, no longer hyperlinked. Indeed the race name is no longer hyperlinked to any article at all so is vacant and begging for the link to be restored. Perversely, there is a redundant column in the table, the one labelled 'Grand Prix,' which does carry a hyperlink; but not to the specific GP concerned, rather to the generic GP article for that country. The guideline for links is specific in reccommending the most specific links possible be made, with them then in turn linking to the more general articles. Why shouldn't we do that here?

Eff Won (talk) 18:23, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Why are you putting this discussion here when there is an ongoing discussion on the 2012 page? This is redundant. The³5₉ (Talk) 18:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

This one concerns this page alone as this page was reverted in June 2011 with no apparent consensus. I wouldn't expect anything discussed here (or there) to apply to any other article. Eff Won (talk) 20:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Being intentionally obtuse is of no help to anyone. Keep the discussion centralized so that all can see and discuss it. The³5₉ (Talk) 21:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Obtuse? Isn't this where the contents of this article are supposed to be discussed? Eff Won (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

But it's essentially the same subject, regardless of multiple-articles. Either argue it once only at the 2012 page, or shift the whole argument to WT:Formula One. Argueing the same subject on multiple pages will just encourage multiple contradicting and confusing outcomes. --Falcadore (talk) 00:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Please note: as suggested at Talk:2010 Formula One season, this discussion has moved to WT:F1. Eff Won (talk) 18:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Official Race Edit Songs section

Many may have noticed that the Official Race Edit Songs section has been added to this article.
This is because the previous article it was included in was deleted because it was not a stand-alone article.

Please leave this section in this article.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WesleyBranton (talk • contribs) 04:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Except the article that the section was "spun off from" is now at AFD, so it may be an inevitability that it will get removed soon. Zappa O Mati 04:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 20 external links on 2011 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.

Y 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)