Jump to content

Talk:2024 Formula One World Championship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Photo choice

[edit]
Option A
Option B
Option C

Between the options presented, which is best for the lead. My preference would be Option C, which best displays both the Red Bull logo and his face, the two important elements of the image that's purpose is to represent the WDC leader. Starting this discussion after Tvx1 re-instated their edit (Option B) after I restored the original image (Option A) [1]. Cerebral726 (talk) 12:51, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agreed, C. 5225C (talk • contributions) 12:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option B - with McLaren being the leader of the constructors, there's absolutely no reason to include the Red Bull branding in the image of the leader of the drivers. I would've thought this was obvious. I also think Option B is more aesthetically pleasing (apart from having to see Verstappen's face 🤣). I'd also eliminate the text of who Verstappen is driving for, as that is redundant. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option B. The image is for the Drivers' Championship leader. The logo on his race suit is not relevant. Which team he drives for isn't relevant. The only thing that's relevant is that he is leading the championship. All other information (whether it is presented in the image, or the caption) is not relevant, and should not be mentioned. Also, why have we moved from this image? This image is better. SSSB (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option B. There are two images, one each for the leaders of each championship. Just like we don‘t give attention to the driver of the car in the WCC leader picture, we don‘t need draw attention to the constructior in the WDC leader picture. As for a direct reply to SSSB questioning the switch of picture, I actually think the new one is better. The background is better, not black, it‘s more recent by a whole seven years and we should actually embrace having a good quality picture from the season in question. Tvx1 00:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Option B has the best picture for Verstappen in my opinion (not necessary to show the rest of him!). I think it's a very good photo to use as well (especially as it's more recent). I do however think that the photo of the McLaren isn't ideal, something closer to a 3 quarter angle would look better but I haven't looked at what other photos are available. A7V2 (talk) 05:32, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Option B with different McLaren photo
I believe the ideal choice would be cropping the photo slightly less with a more suitable aspect ratio (1:1 just doesn't look right). The current one looks odd. Strong disagree that we should revert to the 2017 photo, can hardly tell it's him now, the new photo is of fantastic quality and clarity. Mb2437 (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are free to make a new cropping of the original picture and place your propsed version of the pair of images here.Tvx1 18:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking back on it, Option C is by far the best option. As there is no clear precedent favouring a single style, both aesthetic and clarity should be considered. The proportions simply look wonky with B—his head is actually larger than the McLaren—and doesn't serve to increase the clarity of C by a whole lot, his face is clear to see in both. Mb2437 (talk) 19:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but that argument is nonsense. I think it is very obvious that the two images are not to scale. The only proporions worth worrying about are the proportions within each individual image. Neither images has been stretched or manipulated in any way (besides cropping) and therefore the proportions not only look fine, but are perfectly accurate. SSSB (talk) 21:22, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the size of the focal point of image A to image B is almost comical with option B, I find it to be an aesthetic clash as a graphic designer but that seems to be just me. Option B draws considerably more attention to Verstappen than it does to the McLaren, where it should be balanced. Mb2437 (talk) 22:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your perspective Mb2437. Cerebral726 (talk) 16:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When can the practice be changed?

[edit]

Suggested to include second and third place, but that is "not the practice". So when can the "practice" be changed? Wikipedia has undergone many changes, so why not this one? Eivindgh (talk) 15:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is an existing consensus against it that needs to be overturned with a new consensus in favour. SSSB (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Toyota partnership a "team change"?

[edit]

Been a lot of back and forth on this subject. The answer to me is pretty clear: no, it's not. It's a technical arrangement, it doesn't change the operation of the team as a competitor. Would be interested to hear some justification from those who think it does. 5225C (talk • contributions) 02:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not a team change and I don't know why anyone would think otherwise. TGR will start off as a sponsor, and then eventually offer some technical assistance in areas where leaning on Ferrari is not ideal (such as wind tunnel testing). But the essense of the Haas team will continue as it is for the time being. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is relevant to be reported. Island92 (talk) 09:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Care to elaborate on why? 5225C (talk • contributions) 10:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The prose was sufficient to explain it but you removed it not thinking twice. Island92 (talk) 10:43, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the prose did not explain how anything about the team has changed, especially not in the context of its entry in the 2024 season. We clearly have thought twice since we came here to discuss it – but perhaps you need some more time to think of an explanation? If none is forthcoming then I take it we agree the section is irrelevant. 5225C (talk • contributions) 10:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Next time discuss it with user @Stewikiaman1: then who normally adds this information without considering it a team changes or not. Island92 (talk) 13:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F1 Sprint Winners need to be added to Results & Standings Chart

[edit]

F1 Sprint Winners need to be added to Results & Standings Chart

Thanks 2601:18B:302:2960:1850:FA23:C178:E681 (talk) 18:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, they don't "need" to be added. And they won't (at least wothout a discussion) because there is an existing consensus against doing this. SSSB (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not needed. Sprints are not stand alone events. Island92 (talk) 21:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the IPs defense, I think they meant that sprints should be added as a column, not as a stand alone row. SSSB (talk) 21:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary. Island92 (talk) 09:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since the starting grid is no longer determined by the result of the sprint race, it is actually a separate event in itself, even with its own qualifying practice. There will definitely be a situation in the future where, due to external factors such as weather, the sprint race takes place but the main race has to be cancelled. At that point, the question arises whether the sprint results should be entered as a separate column or not. I can live with the current presentation at the moment. But I think it would be better to show the sprint results as a separate column in the results table. In most other racing series, the sprint and feature races are also shown as separate columns. --Mark McWire (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In most other series a sprint win and a Grand Prix win have equal weight (I.e. in F2 a sprint win is considered a win in the stats book, as is a feature race win; even though they are worth a different amount of points) this is not the case in F1. As for the main race being cancelled, but the sprint race having been held, I doubt this will happen. The only race that has come close to be cancelled in the last 10 years (200 Grand Prix) was Bel 2021 (0.5%). A sprint race happens 6 times a year (25%). So both happening in a weekend is once every 40 years. SSSB (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"In most other racing series, the sprint and feature races are also shown as separate columns" just because the sprint takes place alongside each Grand Prix. Here the condition is different, and we have the Note explaining where the sprints take place (at the moment just in six Grands Prix). In 2024 MotoGP World Championship, the most common example in comparison to Formula One, there is no sprint separate columns despite it being on the schedule for each Grand Prix. Island92 (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good example of a very confusing table. --Mark McWire (talk) 19:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with having a seperate column is that it places too much emphasis on the sprint. A sprint win and GP win are not equal. Having a seperate column would imply that they are equal, it would imply Piastri's first F1 win was at the 2023 Qatar Grand Prix, but no F1 site (that I'm aware of) would make this claim - they all list Hungary 2024 as the first. Although this solution does make the table a little harder to intepret, I do think it is the best option. SSSB (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello, why does clicking of a specific Grand Prix in the lists send me, not to the 24 GP page itself, but rather the general GP page? Example: I click Australian GP, and I get redirected to the general page about it... When I just want to access the specific page for the '24 Australian GP, obviously? Can we not change that? Cheers. 2A02:A03F:C10E:CB00:5619:5F64:88B9:919B (talk) 14:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is obvious at all. I would say it is 50-50 at best. The text you are clicking is "Australian Grand Prix". The least astonishing destination (as recommened by WP:EGG) is Australian Grand Prix, not 2024 Australian Grand Prix. SSSB (talk) 14:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bearman

[edit]

@5225C: Magnussen is only missing Friday running in São Paulo which consists of FP1 and Sprint qualifying. Haas will give an update on him further notice. This is what F1.com source says. Island92 (talk) 13:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So if you'd bothered to read either of the two sources which I cited, you'd see they both contain a clear explanation that the regulations prohibit Magnussen from participating in the sprint, and would require Haas to field Bearman. 5225C (talk • contributions) 13:28, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some other sources for you to consider: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 5225C (talk • contributions) 13:32, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(This is still original research at this point) but if I intepret article 37.1 of the sporting regs correctly, Magnussen will not be allowed to participate in the Grand Prix either, hacing not particpated in at least one practice session. SSSB (talk) 13:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the case, because qualifying is a practice session. Any session before the Grand Prix is a practice session, the term isn't synonymous with free practice sessions. I recall this being the source of the confusion around the "DNP" (Did Not Practice) confusion a few years back. 5225C (talk • contributions) 13:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check 37.4, it refers to "any free practice session, qualifying session or the sprint qualifying session" as being a practice session. It's confusing because we usually use "practice" as shorthand for free practice, but it's a distinct term in the regulations. 5225C (talk • contributions) 13:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is up to Haas to give a further update on Magnussen (likely tomorrow). I am not totally convinced he has to miss the sprint in any case just because his car will attend sprint qualifying in someoneelse hands. Island92 (talk) 13:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The regulation states "driver" not "car". Simple as that. 5225C (talk • contributions) 13:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I just pointed out article 37.1 which is explictly clear on the matter. Anyway, with all due respect, we don't need to convince you, we only have to provide reliable sources which state this, which we have. SSSB (talk) 13:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Original research I suppose, but Article 32.2 of the Sporting Regulations states that driver changes can be made "At each Competition where a sprint session is scheduled, at any time before the start of the sprint qualifying session for a driver who will participate in the sprint session, or at any time before the start of the qualifying session for a driver who will participate in the race." The clear implication is that you can't change drivers between sprint qualifying and the sprint. Jestal50 (talk) 13:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am watching Sky Sports F1 and they have said that he will take part in FP1, Sprint Qualifying and the Sprint Race on Saturday. Haas will decide if Magnussen will compete in the Grand Prix later. MSalmon (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@5225C and Island92: have either of you got the official document confirming Bearman replacing Magnussen? I'm just wondering what exactly it says. Thanks. SSSB (talk) 14:40, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's the same generic form, you can read it here. It was released 15 minutes after the race entry form, which suggests to me that Haas want the option of switching back to Magnussen (otherwise, why not just enter Bearman as the regular race driver?). 5225C (talk • contributions) 14:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. However I trusted F1.com which said Bearman running on Friday (FP1 and sprint qualifying in case of a sprint weekend). This is not the case per sporting regulations. Island92 (talk) 15:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bearman out for the remainder of the weekend. Revised entry list. Island92 (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In, you mean? Marbe166 (talk) 22:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes my fault. Island92 (talk) 22:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@5225C: you are wrong according to the prose. Why sprint sessions? Bearman replaced Magnussen for FP1 and sprint qualifying (Friday running). This was later expanded to the rest of weekend means sprint, qualifying and race. Island92 (talk) 10:37, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was always going to replace Magnussen for the sprint. We went over this yesterday. 5225C (talk • contributions) 10:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that but is still incorrect to say This was later expanded to the rest of weekend following sprint qualifying if you write sprint sessions above. Sprint qualifying takes place on Friday, sprint on Saturday. Per what happened, "he replaced Magnussen for the Friday sessions" which did not include the sprint. Island92 (talk) 10:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One source says he was only replacing Magnussen for Friday. Other sources say for Friday and the sprint on Saturday morning. I am more inclined to believe the source which actually quotes the regulation and explains that he will be unable to compete in the sprint. Whereas the F1.com source simply takes Haas' statement at face value. SSSB (talk) 12:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And F1.com have now corrected themselves, with their latest article stating Prior to Friday’s action getting under way at the Autodromo Jose Carlos Pace, the news came that Magnussen would not participate in the day’s running after reporting feeling unwell, with Bearman stepping in for free practice, Sprint Qualifying and Saturday’s Sprint. [8] 5225C (talk • contributions) 12:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not pointing out what sources say. The actual prose according to what happened and grammar tense is wrong. Why reporting sprint sessions above (Bearman replaced Magnussen for FP1 and sprint sessions, sprint qualifying and sprint) if only after sprint qualifying it was confirmed that Bearman would replace Magnussen for the whole weekend? Island92 (talk) 13:01, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per what happened Bearman replaced Magnussen in FP1 and sprint qualifying (friday). After sprint qualifying the confirmation he would stand for the whole weekend, rather than he was going the replace him in sprint qualifying and sprint too in any case. Island92 (talk) 13:03, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albon

[edit]

@SSSB:, @5225C: Stroll was entered in SGP 2023 but later withdrew due to a crash in qualifying. Efn note used for this. Why that cannot be the case for Albon in Brazil? Williams confirmed his withdrawal due to too damage on the car. Island92 (talk) 00:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In drivers and constructors standings the Belgian Grand Prix is shortened to Beautiful

[edit]

Is there a reason why in both standings for the Belgian Grand Prix it says Beatiful and not Bel? I dont know how to change it as I cant find the word in the text code when in editor... Valvs (talk) 12:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valvs: It appears as "BEL" to me. DH85868993 (talk) 12:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks normal to me too. Do you have an auto-translator browser extension that is getting confused? Jestal50 (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Looks fine to me. MSalmon (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Race director

[edit]

@Island92 and Stewikiaman1: can you please justify mentioning there is a new race director (either here or at 2024 Las Vegas Grand Prix)? It shouldn't change the management of the event, and is therefore WP:ROUTINE, non-notable news. Wikipedia does not report on routine WP:news. And before you mention that we did similar things with the Whiting/Masi and Masi/Wittich switches: neither of these were routine. Whiting died hours before the event was due to start and Masi was replaced following major controversy. This, however, is not routine, and is therefore not notable for an encylopedia. SSSB (talk) 20:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are you missing is a change in the routine worth mentioning, as was the case in 2022. So why in 2022 the introduction of Wittich was mentioned and now it cannot be the case for Rui Marques? Island92 (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just explained how this is different to the Masi/Wittich switch in 2022. Masi was replaced because of his involvement in several controversies in 2021 - this is what made it worth mentioning. This is not the case for Wittich leaving. So comparing 2022 and now is like comparing applies and oranges. And this "change in the routine" is not worth mentioning - partly because there is no change in routine. Only in personnel. This is why it is routine news. Wikipedia does not report routine news. SSSB (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, was it our fault for Masi several controversies in 2021 and replaced? Reported. Secondly, was it our fault that Wittich decided to leave with immediate effect and replaced? Reported. Today Alpine new deal with Mercedes for power units in 2026. According to you, we should not report that as Alpine routine was to run Renault engines, right? It doesn't make any sense. Island92 (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly cannot understand how you make that out from their words… Tvx1 20:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure you understand what WP:ROUTINE is. SSSB (talk) 21:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I second SSSB. This is not the place to mention this. It should be mentioned in the articles of the people involved. This change is not a consequence of a 2024 WC event. It‘s only tagentially related. And why on earth you kept framing it as a regulation change is beyond me. Tvx1 20:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2024_Formula_One_World_Championship&oldid=1257027882"