Jump to content

Talk:Dan Wheldon/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 04:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

please remove the inflammatory statements towards me as i first announced his death and was banned for no reason its a shame — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.201.108 (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

no Declined No "inflammatory statements" found to remove. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Too much speculation, not enough actual information.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Thank you for the semi protection...it was getting to be a pain to hit undo every 30 seconds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirwulf (talk • contribs) 21:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

please keep personal attacks off wikipedia

96.254.201.108 - you need to stop posting false statements or you will be banned — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirwulf (talk • contribs) 21:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Danica just burst into tears in the garage upon hearing confirmation of Dan WHeldon's death — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.201.108 (talk) 21:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

While the situation is grim, you really should refrain from declaring him dead until there is some official announcement. Otherwise, it's sort of ghoulish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawalex (talk • contribs) 21:01, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I am at the race he is dead. The top half of his car was ripped off including his upper body. All the drivers saw it happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.201.108 (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Nothing has been reported on a death, just speculation 99.139.138.139 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC).

Does anyone know whether he's related to the former Rallycross driver Hugh Wheldon? --MartinUK 10:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

What is his winning time???? and what is his number???

According to Autosport (March 1 2007) He's chasing a Nascar drive. (Page 17) Britmax 18:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Dan Wheldon is not related in any direct way to Hugh Wheldon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.73.88.101 (talk) 09:49, April 18, 2008

How can this site report him dead when there has been no announcement. Shamefull

At 4:50 EST Oct 16. Wikipedia is reporting that Dan Wheldon is dead with an obituary date. There is no confirmation from any source that this is indeed, true. Cite for non verifiaability at this time.

It was just announced I am searching for a source I was not the one to change it but I am actively working to find one as they just announced that he died -Supereditor8000 is Cousin's Nephew--- ==

named Joey?! What on earth is this all about?

Dan is not dead, but alive in a stable condition in hospital Sky are reporting - but with no hardcore source. Please stop posting death dates WITHOUT confirmation from the IndyCar Stewards OR officials. Paddiiee (Patrick Carney) (talk) 21:03, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Reserve Image

Dan Wheldon consults with his team on Pole Day for the 2007 Indianapolis 500.

The page had too many images of the driver, so I am moving one here until there is more text. Royalbroil 04:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wha? You sure that is Wheldon?

I know he is wearing white sunnies, but that photo in the article sure doesn't look like Wheldon to me. Looks more like Scott Dixon to me. Comments? Kaiwhakahaere (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's Dan Wheldon, because look at his hairdo. Ptb1997 (Ptb1997) 10:51, 25 May 2015 (CDT).

Difficult Dan

Can someone show me where Difficult Dan came from. I can't find it independently, I can only find word for word quotes in a couple of blogs. I'm thinking someone made it up. Snetter2007 (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it should be removed as unsourced. HADRIANVS (talk) 11:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I would also like it either deleted or properly cited. Someone cited a Wikipedia mirror, which I removed.Minding (talk) 03:25, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Wheldon's career might be ending today. :'( (AutoRacingGenie (talk) 20:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC))

Las Vegas crash

Can anybody who knows how to, ask for semi-protection? (Edmurbobby (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC))

It's already been requested. Meanwhile, I'm also now watching the page, and I've warned at least one editor regarding edit warring. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 21:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, page needs to be semi-protected ASAP due to the serious crash.Froo (talk) 21:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 Done Page has been semi-protected by Bongwarrior for the WP:BLP violations. I'm still going to watch the page for a while, and wait to see if we get any reliable information, preferably from IndyCar itself. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed dead, check Google News. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.218.101.53 (talk) 21:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Google News is an aggregator, not a journalistic source. Where did they get their information from? --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 21:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

This is hardly reliable, but watching the coverage on ABC, and everything seems to say to me that he's gone. Most telling: the media was told that the drivers would not be available for interviews until IndyCar makes a statement. And Tony Kanaan is visibly crying on camera... rdfox 76 (talk) 21:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

ABC news just confirmed Wheldon has died. [----]

IndyCar just announced Wheldon's death in a press conference at the speedway. rdfox 76 (talk) 22:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
I just heard it on ESPNews. I'm looking for an online source that can be cited. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 22:03, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
From ESPN.com: [1]. –MuZemike 22:06, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
You beat me to it. IndyCar's site appears to have announced it as well, but I can't get the full site to come up...they're probably getting hammered. At any rate, we have a WP:RS announcing his death. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 22:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Dan had started in last place and was racing for $5million. He had moved up 10 positions at the time of the crash. 3 other drivers also went to the hospital. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonrunner (talk • contribs) 22:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

OK so if you see the ongoing edits that have occurred you will see that there is quite a conflict as to what lap the crash was on most sources including the one I added with the original edit say 13 but people are changing it again most sources including many recently updated articles say that it was lap 13 so I have been maintaining that with in the article people have been changing it with out proper source and leaving the source that says it was lap 13. I will continue to monitor the news outlets and change if necessary. Thanks and RIP Dan Wheldon.Supereditor8000 (talk) 22:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Supereditor8000, why don't you cite IndyCar as the source for the Lap 11? That might reduce the back-and-forth somewhat if people can see in the article that Indy has said it was Lap 11. And I second your RIP Dan Wheldon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Branson (talk • contribs) 01:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I contacted the BBC by email a couple of hours ago, to point out their error, and their online news item now states the crash happened on Lap 11 (see [2]) Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 18:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Just a quick update (happened to be looking back at this page remembering the whole "lap issue") the official IRL website 404ed the page with the information that has the lap number in which the crash occurred. I will leave it be for right now until I find something else that is in agreement with what the IRL formerly had on their site. Just wanted to give everyone a heads up in case someone noticed things being changed in what was a bit of a back and forth originally.Supereditor8000 (talk) 08:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Lap count

Apparently multiple sources are stating the crash took place on lap 13. This is a case where the otherwise-reliable sources are wrong. The wreck occured during lap 11, the red flag came out during lap 13. Note IndyCar official timing and scoring showed, as of the completion of lap 12, Wheldon and the rest of the wrecked cars at "Diff.: 2 LAPS", i.e. two laps behind the leader, who had completed 12 laps, therefore having completed 10 laps with the wreck occuring on lap 11. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry did not see your post change if you deem necessary and no hard feelings about the back and forth between what lap it I agree that clearly no one knows for sure what lap it occurred on and maybe it would be better to eliminate that until it becomes clear.Supereditor8000 (talk) 23:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

No worries. For the moment I think it'd be best to leave it out of the article, probably, yeah. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:03, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I'm going to be bold and say IndyCar is probably THE reliable source for how many laps had been completed at the time of the wreck, considering they're the sanctioning body for the event. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk)
If the screenshot of their scoring page is acceptable, then I'll agree - the live-scoring page itself is going to be gone before too long, leaving it unsourced otherwise until a "results" page is posted. (Which could be problematic, since, as the race didn't make it to half distance, statistically it never happened.) - The Bushranger One ping only 23:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree I am hands off on that if one of you want to make the change but IndyCar would be the best source. ThanksSupereditor8000 (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The IRL website confirms lap 11. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.115.71.200 (talk) 00:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, IndyCar says lap 11, not 13 as reported by BBC and CBS. Sorry for contributing to the back-and-forth! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Branson (talk • contribs) 01:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Other drivers involved in crash?

Who were the other 14 drivers involved in the crash? Watching the video replays shows there were two separate crashes, one right after the other. Both caused by one car swerving down the track and colliding with the car just behind. Dan Wheldon was involved in the second crash. Bizzybody (talk) 00:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Those involved in the crash: Cunningham, Hildebrand, Bell, Howard, Scheckter, Kimball, Tracy, Viso, Wheldon, Lloyd, Mann, Power, Rice.
Meira and Jakes also suffered damage but were able to drive back to the pits, they are also included as part of the crash. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 00:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Were there no other injuries? The coverage I'm seeing so far is only mentioning Wheldon's death. It would be incredible if no one else was seriously injured in that. The live coverage showed one of the cars broken in half and on fire, but the driver of that one is shown on camera getting out (I believe this was identified as Lloyd), apparently none the worse for wear. 68.146.80.110 (talk) 01:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
The only other noted injuries were to Power, who went to the hospital complaining of lower back pain (exacerbated his broken back from '09) but was released; and to Pippa Mann and Hildebrand, both of whom are being kept in overnight for further observation but are both alert and stable. The car you mentioned was actually the #15 of Jay Howard. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 01:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Power, Hildebrand, and I think Mann all went airborne as well in that wreck. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Might be hard to confirm that, although it depends on the definition of airborne being used. The two cars that most obviously physically went over the back of other cars and had all four wheels off the ground were Wheldon and Power. One landed into the SAFER barrier somewhat level, the other went into the catch fence... TheChrisD Rants•Edits 03:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
From the overhead shot, I definitely saw at least three cars flying. One early on in the wreck, then two later as the backmarkers piled in. And Mann's car looked like it had suffered a rough landing afterwards. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I see what you are referring to, yes. From overhead it does look like she went airborne after barrelling into Bell's car, although from the inside camera I'd say the height she attained was no more than what Hildebrand also was thrown up to in that accident. It's hard to say given her car's shadow isn't as noticeable as those of Dan and Will. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 04:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It said that Cunningham clipped James Hinchcliffe, so wouldn't James Hinchcliffe have been involved in the crash? Also, it said that James Jakes was in the pits after crash. Marty Reid said that his car didn't have damage, even though he was out of the cockpit. Ptb1997 Talk 10:46, May 25, 2015 (CDT)

Find a Grave-Please Remove

Why is there a link to Find a Grave. Mr Wheldon has not even been buried yet. I find what some have tried to put on this page disgusting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.107.152 (talk) 03:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I had the same concern, but it's a biography/memorial page, not a ghoulish thing. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 17 October 2011

please change The reasoning behind the move was that the level of investment needed to fund his racing career in the UK wasn't able to be provided by his family, to The reasoning behind the move was that the level of investment needed to fund his racing career in the UK was beyond his family's resources.

79.44.13.114 (talk) 05:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for improving Wikipedia. mabdul 12:08, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

editprotected

The death section should link to the race article 2011 IZOD IndyCar World Championship (this is the name of the race, not the season). And the intro section should as well. Probably a piped link for "race".70.24.251.158 (talk) 07:08, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a news site

All the above nonsense would be avoided if some editors didn't treat Wikipedia as if it were a news site which has to be updated instantly to include recent events. There should be a Wikipedia policy that only events more than say a year old can be included. That would allow the dust to settled and more accurate information to become available. An encyclopaedia shouldn't encourage short termism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.64.107 (talk) 07:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Agree with this. People go to news sites for up to the minute news, they come to Wikipedia for an accurate account of events after the fact.86.149.101.102 (talk) 10:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree with this completely. First of all, the "wait a year"-idea is random and does not make sense. The only thing we need here is the rule to only include information once there are sources to back them up (which already is a rule that just is not enforced that well). Waiting a year is way too long. If something happened, then something happened and it could be included. We don't need to destroy one of the advantages of the medium by making the Wikipedia slower than books. And while I completely agree that Wikipedia is not a news site, the Wikipedia itself undermines that idea by including a "In the news" block at the top of the home page. While this is not necessarily a problem, it gives people the impression that news are part of the Wikipedia, which is annoying since people already don't understand what an encyclopedia is. But that said, recent events ARE part of an encyclopedia. They just never were, because it took so long for the print products to come out. --78.54.19.112 (talk) 11:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:NOTNEWS is clear on the matter. While a one-year arbitrary limit may not be logical in light of the current "instant-news cycle" environment and culture, the policy exists for a reason: to allow for the development and publication of actual information by reliable, verifiable, neutral sources. Waiting for that development and publication reduces edit warring, speculative edits, and out-and-out falsehoods in the article. Creating a Wikipedia article shouldn't be considered a race at the best of times; when viewing an article that may be subject to heavy editing due to a current or very recent event, waiting becomes an even better idea. Look at the commentary from the day of the crash, when there was a great deal of back-and-forth as to whether Wheldon had survived or not. The situation devolved to the point where the article had to be semi-protected to stem the flood of speculation and guesswork, even though many of those speculating and guessing turned out to have speculated and guessed correctly. Wikipedia articles, however, can NOT be based on speculation or guessing; they MUST reference reliable and verifiable sources. If it takes a year (which, as I pointed out before, is very rare now), so be it...more often, it takes between a few hours and a couple of days. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 02:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Image of crash

The image of the crash is tagged with a (c) watermark; would that make it ineligible for inclusion even though it was botted over with CC licensing? I'm new to image editing, so I don't want to start an FfD case if it is allowed. 67.160.116.66 (talk) 10:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it would. 69.228.91.99 (talk) 16:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Fair use would apply, I believe, under both the "newsworthiness" (although Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS) and "research value". It would take a member of OTRS to definitively answer this question, though. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 01:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Licensing issues aside, I have to question whether we should even have a picture of the crash here. In an article about the race or the crash, absolutely it's appropriate. Here in the biographical article, it strikes me as slightly morbid. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Good point, and applicable under WP:NOTNEWS. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 02:12, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I think images and footage of the incident SHOULD NOT be used ANYWHERE by ANY MEDIA OUTLET. I was appalled enough that ESPN chose to replay the video of the crash after the announcement of Dan's death, but usage of it beyond that is outrightly disrespectful to Dan, his family, crew, fellow competitors, friends, fans, and the motorsporting community as a whole. We deserve better than to have this tragedy exploited for commercial purposes and the entertainment of the morbid. Think of how any of you would feel if it had been your loved one. We're civilized human beings; we're supposed to be beyond such barbaric practices. If the section really needs an image, you should use one of the five-lap tribute or the fan memorial outside the track instead. 68.44.244.172 (talk) 05:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Note that Weldon's car was equipped with an onboard camera. No one is showing that footage. No one is showing pictures of the moment he hit the wall. No one is showing images of the safety crew swarming his car. The only shots being shown of the entire accident are wide angles and an onboard from one of the other cars. With so many cars crashing it's very difficult to ascertain which one is his in any of these shots. As for using the image, we can't use anything that isn't free as any image is replaceable by an image someone took from the stands. Fair use here is invalid as the professional images are theoretically replaceable. N419BH 05:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The argument that showing images of the accident is alright because it's "difficult to ascertain" which car is his is wrong for multiple reasons:

  1. It's very easy to tell which car is his, especially for those of us in the motorsporting community. Only two cars got airborne in the accident, Power's and Dan's, and Dan was further back in the field, so we know exactly which car is his, even from the aerial wideshots. I also know for a fact that the Wikimedia Commons version of the offending image had a box highlighting Dan's car. And your claim that the moment of impact with the wall is not in the footage is completely wrong and misinformed.
  2. Even if it was difficult to tell, with the moment of the fatal injury shown, any usage of the footage is clearly disrespectful. Anyone who doesn't understand this is small, petty, inhuman, and heartless.
  3. Put yourself in the position of Dan's family, his wife, his parents, his brothers. Every time they have to watch footage of the accident plastered all over the news, they'll know it's the moment and have to relive the pain of it. Think about what his sons will feel as they grow up. They deserve better.
  4. Think back to September 11, how outraged everyone was that the news continuously and repeated showed footage of the planes hitting the towers and the towers falling, and how quickly they stopped showing that footage. This is the same type of situation.

No human deserves the indignity of having their death exploited for entertainment purposes, which, quite frankly, is what the news is about these days. Life is precious and should be respected above all else. I applaud the fact that the image has been removed from the article since my initial appeal. --68.44.244.172 (talk) 00:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

The image does NOT show a man dying. It shows a number of cars crashing. The image explains the accident and furthers the reader's understanding of such in a manner which text simply cannot do. We aren't talking about a picture of the man in a body bag. We're talking about a picture which shows a number of vehicles crashing. Dan's car is airborne in the image but isn't anywhere near the wall. He's alive and uninjured in the photo. I would strongly object to including a photograph of Dan's injuries but such don't exist in public archives. The video and photographs of the accident are actually valuable footage which can be used to improve not just IndyCar safety but the safety of many vehicles. This isn't morbid entertainment value. This is academic presentation of facts and images to further the reader's understanding of the subject. N419BH 01:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm willing to be convinced, but I don't think there's any sort of precedent for including these sorts of images in biographical articles. Plenty of notable people died in the September 11th attacks, but you won't find images of planes crashing or about to crash in their articles. Just because there's no blood or dead bodies visible doesn't make it more palatable in my opinion - it's over the top, as well as undignified. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Spelling

This article should be spelt in British English. So it is "lap of honour" not "honor". 86.136.210.142 (talk) 12:16, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorted it. Thanks. JonCTalk 15:15, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to have to object to that, although not especially strenuously...Wheldon was notable for driving in an American sport (witness two Indianapolis 500 wins). So making such an arbitrary change, IMO, fouls WP:ENGVAR. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
... as an Englishman/Briton. I think the bit in ENGVAR about having a tie to one country or the other applies here. British person, British English. It's what I generally stick to, anyway, and no-one's objected so far. :) JonCTalk 18:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Definitely agree. The person himself is a much stronger tie than the location he worked. Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:34, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Death location

The tragedy occurred at Las Vegas Motor Speedway which is in fact in unincorporated Clark County, Nevada, not in the city of Las Vegas, Nevada as currently indicated in the article. I'm going to change it for accuracy. --Oakshade (talk) 16:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Possibly correcting myself here. By all media accounts, he was airlifted to University Medical Center of Southern Nevada which is in fact in the city of Las Vegas. He was declared dead there. However, officials aren't ruling out the possibility that "he died on impact" [3] which would mean he died at the speedway. An autopsy report says he died of "blunt force head trauma." [4] It's just not clear at the moment. --Oakshade (talk) 03:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Other Contributions

Please add information about their participation in Xbox Game "IndyCar Series 2002 and 2005" source is http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/driving/indycarseries2005/review.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by XemDenots (talk • contribs) 16:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Picture

Can we get a better picture? The current one makes him look like a sleazeball. AmericanLeMans (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm wondering why the original picture was replaced...were there WP:NFCC issues? That one, at least, showed him looking like an Indy driver. The current one makes him look like, I don't know, Jim Carrey somewhere between Cable Guy and Bruce Almighty. Kind of creepy. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree, are they even his real teeth? It's like a halloween costume. Surely someone has something better? Twrist (talk) 19:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I also agree I don't feel this picture is relevant any more and the previous one was adequate. Kieran96336 (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 17 October 2011


68.224.149.138 (talk) 18:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC) Death of Dan Wheldon

My name is Heather and I personally was at the race when this tragity occured. It happened during the 12th lap and involved 13 drivers. Your statments on Wiki are not accurate.

 Not done - Hello and welcome. Unfortunately, the IndyCar's official website confirms that the crash occurred in the 11th lap and 15 cars were involved. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:59, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Timing and scoring during the broadcast (and on news reels all over the place when showing the reply) also show that the accident occurred on lap 11. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Also officially stated on the IndyCar website so this should be the used information. IndyCar news page Kieran96336 (talk) 20:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

This is what WP is all about...

...to add a link to the "Find a grave" site for the freshly deceased, long before there is one to find. "Open" can be very ugly. --80.171.56.5 (talk) 04:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

"Open" also means you are free to remove the link if it bothers you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dan Wheldon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dan Wheldon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dan Wheldon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Dan Wheldon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 08:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


I can't resist this one; an article I had considered working on myself in the past. Harrias talk 08:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Motorsport career results

  • The tables here have some issues. There is a lot of information presented without a key.
    • It is relatively intuitive that the small number is position, but it would be worth clarifying this.
    • Even if that is obvious, some of the abbreviations aren't: what do DNP, DNF and C signify?
    • Why are some race titles in bold, and some italtics? If these are being used to signify something, it should be noted that MOS:TEXT and MOS:ACCESS do not support the use of bold or italics alone to signify things, as they are often not picked up by screenreaders.
    • Some of the race abbreviations don't have links: in the 2002 Panther Racing season for example, I don't have a clue what "HMS" or "FON" or "NZR" stand for. These need some sort of explanation.
    • Along the same lines, there is inconsistency over where these links go: in the Toyota Atlantic Championship table, the links go to the race parent page, so "HMS1" takes us to Grand Prix of Miami (open wheel racing), while in IndyCar Series, "INDY" takes us to 2003 Indianapolis 500 (for example). Meanwhile, in Grand-Am Rolex Sports Car Series, "DAY" takes us to Daytona International Speedway, the circuit.
      • Done in the IndyCar Sries apart from the Pikes Peak International Raceway round which redirects to the track it was held on. Similarly, there are several Grand-Am Rolex race overview articles have not been created but have added those that have to the results tables. MWright96 (talk) 19:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
    • The tables are in violation of MOS:FLAG, which states that "The name of a flag's political entity should appear adjacent to the first use of the flag, as no reader is familiar with every flag, and many flags differ only in minor details."
    •  Done
  • Is there a reason that the Indianapolis 500 results table is included, when this information is already presented in the IndyCar Series table above, and the only additional information is also included in the prose.
  • Similar with the duplication of 24 Hours of Daytona results and Grand-Am Rolex Sports Car Series.
  • What is "DP" class?
  • Having each table as a subsection makes the table of contents quite unwieldy; is there a way it can be streamlined?

References

All look good on a quick first pass. I can't access ref #117 ("Indy 500 another way for Wheldon to validate career") in the UK, but I have no reason to believe there is any issue with it. There are a couple of short passages that could bear further paraphrasing though:

  • Daily Telegraph: "The chassis of the 77 impacted (upon) a post along the right side of the tub, and created a deep defect in the tub that extended from the bulkhead, along the upper border of the tub and through the cockpit"
  • Article: "He collided with a fence post along his tub's right-hand side, creating a deep defect in the tub that extended from the pedal bulkhead along its upper section and through the cockpit."
  • Daily Telegraph: "What was also witnessed was unlimited movement on the track surface under race conditions."
  • Article: "and the unlimited movement on the track surface under racing conditions"
    •  Done

Images

  • It isn't a GA requirement, so feel free to disregard, but the images could do with alt text for accessibility purposes.
  • All appropriately licensed and tagged.

Detailed prose review to follow. Harrias talk 09:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Prose

Lead
  • "The following year, Wheldon moved to AGR, winning nine races (including the 2005 Indianapolis 500) and finishing as the runner-up in the 2004 series championship." Is this right? The 2005 Indy, but he 2004 championship?
  • "He won the drivers' title in 2005 with the record for most victories during a season in his time with the team." I'm not quite sure what purpose "in his time with the team" is serving here?
  • "and the fifth Indianapolis 500 winner to die in the same year as winning the race." This feels a bit like trivia, and perhaps not necessary in the lead.
Early and personal life
  • "Wheldon was born in the farming village of Emberton..." Most British villages could be described as "farming villages" to be honest. This isn't mentioned in the reference provided.
  • "and his mother acted as his timekeeper." Clarification is needed here; was she timekeeper for Dan, or Clive?
  • "He went to the private Bedford School.." Do we have any details on how someone who "did not have a wealthy background" went to private school?
    • Removed the word "private"
  • The second paragraph seems to jump very quickly from his childhood into later life details. It might work better to merge the first two sentences of the second paragraph into the first, and then have a short second paragraph starting with "He married...".
Junior career
  • The sentences at the start of this section start; "Wheldon...", "He...", "Wheldon...", "He...", "Wheldon...". Can we rework some of these a little for variety?
  • "...races for second in the standings." Might sound more encyclopaedic as "..races to finish second in the standings."
  • "The following year, Wheldon was fourth in both the British Formula Ford Championship and the European Formula Ford Championship for Andy Welch Racing with seven victories." Seven victories in each, or combined?
  • "...Van Diemen team and drove a Mygale in 1998." The phrasing make it sound like these are two different events; he improved to third and he drove a Mygale. Maybe change to "...Van Diemen team, driving a Mygale, in 1998."?
  • "With Button taking the titles..." Avoid using "with" as a conjunction like this; can the sentence be reworded to get rid of it?
  • "With Button taking the titles, Wheldon did not have the necessary level of funding from his father..." A further issue is that the current wording make it sound like it was Button's fault that Wheldon's father didn't have the funding. I assume that the titles came with sponsorship opportunities? If so, this should be spelt out more clearly.
  • "Thus, at the suggestion of his former team principal and car manufacturer.." Remove "Thus", it's superfluous.
  • "His funding was provided by his team and Van Diemen. Which team, his Van Diemen team from 1998, or the Jayhard/Primus Racing for 1999?
  • When talking about his trips back to the UK, Wagstaff in The British at Indianapolis talks about how Wheldon was still obsessed with Formula 3, rather than focused on the US racing scene; would it be worth including this a little?
  • Can you check whether it should be John or Jon for John Baytos; there seems to be some ambiguity online?
  • The final paragraph starts "During the 2000 Toyota Atlantic Championship, he drove..." This is a sudden jump; can more information on his move to the Toyota Atlantic Championship from the U.S. F2000 National Championship be included; was this a step up, a sideways shift, what?
  • "..in series' history.." No need for the apostrophe; it would only be needed for "..in the series' history..".
  • "..in the championship standings with 159 points with a further.." The quick repetition of "with" is uncomfortable, can it be reworked?
  • "Wheldon was named the series' Rookie of the Year for his season's performance." The last bit, "..for his season's performance." is superfluous and can be cut.
  • "For the 2001 season, Wheldon moved to PacWest Lights to compete in Indy Lights. Again a bit more explanation could be provided. First, clarify that "PacWest Lights" is a racing team, rather than a series. Secondly, can it be clarified whether a move to Indy Lights is a step up, sideways, or whatever.

Okay, taking a break. Harrias talk 10:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

2002–2004
  • I wonder whether a note about the CART/IRL split would be worth including for the first sentence, or whether it's too much to get into here?
  • "He came 15th in the season-closing..." As this number is essentially been compared with the seventh place quali and tenth place finish in the previous race, I think we need to write fifteenth, per MOS:NUMNOTES.
  • "He finished his two-race campaign 36th in the points standings with 35 accrued." It might be overkill, but for clarity I'd spell out "with 35 points accrued."
  • "He was called up later to drive when regular driver Dario Franchitti broke his vertebrae in a motor bike accident in Scotland." The end of the previous paragraph sort of implied that Wheldon would be driving, so it would be worth making it clear that the sponsorship presumably wasn't found for him to drive in 2003 (at least at the start of the season).
  • "He qualified for his first Indianapolis 500 in fifth after his team changed his car number to 26." This wording almost seems to suggest that he qualified in fifth because of the number change. Do we really need to mention the number change at all? If we do, can it be given less prominence somehow?
  • "In late-race, he..." Maybe change to "Late in the race, he..."
  • "Wheldon was retained as a driver following the retirement of team owner Michael Andretti who mentored him." Is there any suggestion that Andretti retired specifically to make way for Wheldon? It would be interesting to note that if so.
  • "Wheldon's performances enhanced his reputation exponentially..." A couple of issues here; "exponentially" is PUFFERY in this context, and should be removed. The suggestion that his reputation was enhanced is quite subjective, and could possibly do with inline attribution ("according to so-and-so...").
  • "...Wheldon won his first career pole position and finished third after his teammate Tony Kanaan passed him on the first lap. Is the fact that Kanaan passed him specifically relevant? At least one other driver overtook him for him to finish third, so it seems odd to mention Kanaan.
2005–2007
  • "Wheldon became the first British driver to win an American open-wheel championship since Nigel Mansell in 1993, and the first to win both the Indianapolis 500 and the title since Jacques Villeneuve in 1995. This (note a) seems to imply that Jacques Villeneuve was a British driver. It might be solved by just adding "driver" again after "and the first"?
  • "He hit Sam Hornish Jr. in the pit lane during a caution period at the 2006 Grand Prix of St. Petersburg." Is this significant enough to include in his biography?
2008–2011
  • "He started eighteenth in the Indianapolis 500 finishing six places higher in 12th.." Needs to be twelfth to match eighteenth and second.
  • "He was released from his CGR contract on 3 September as Dario Franchitti left NASCAR and returned to IndyCar." Did that mean that he missed the end of the season then?
  • "He was tenth in the championship standings with 354 points,[81] his lowest finish since he placed 11th in 2003." "tenth" and "11th" need to match.

That's me for tonight, too tired to read any more! Harrias talk 21:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Other racing ventures
  • "...being eliminated from the Round of 16 by Sébastien Bourdais in a buggy car." I don't know whether "Round" needs to be capitalised here. I'd also recommend removing "in a buggy car", as it could give the impression that Wheldon was in a 'real' car, and Bourdais beat him while only driving a buggy!
  • "The trio won its class and overall..." Given that winning the race overall would automatically mean they won their class, I think this is a bit redundant. Can it be rephrased to basically just say that they won the race?
  • "...due to it sustaining three accidents during the event." Remove "it".
Death
  • "$5 million would be divided equally between the driver and a randomly selected fan..." Per MOS:NUMNOTES, avoid starting a sentence with a number.
  • "..and travelling on the inside line.." This could do with a note to explain what it means.
  • "..towards the infield and collected fellow competitors.." "Collected" might be jargon here, consider a more accessible alternative.
  • "..along his tub's right-hand side, creating a deep defect in the tub that went.." Explanation of what "tub" means needed. Could we just use "car" the first time, and "chassis" the second?
  • "That deformed its roll hoop and sheared from the tub." I'm a little lost here; did the roll hoop shear from the tub? If so, rephrase to "That deformed its roll hoop, which sheared from the tub."
  • "..by the trackside safety team and their Las Vegas-based colleagues.." Are the trackside safety team not LV based? This feels like excessive detail.
  • "He was 33 years old." I umm and arr about this. Technically is is a purely factual statement. However, placing it alone in a sentence like this adds to the emotional impact, and I'm not sure that's appropriate in an encyclopedia.
  • The article uses both "catchfence" and "catch fencing"; be consistent.
  • "..and unlimited track movement while racing created more car-to-car contact.." What does this mean?
  • "During the 2016 Kobalt 400 at Las Vegas Motor Speedway, pit reporter Jamie Little, who covered that INDYCAR race and was assigned to the trauma centre after the crash, and motorsport publicist Brent Brush, who helped Wheldon's sponsorship deals, placed a Dan Wheldon Memorial plaque outside turn two, near the point where he was killed." This is a long sentence which is trying to say too much for me. It either needs splitting down, or some of the information removing. Note also the inconsistent format "INDYCAR".
  • "In May, a book entitled Lionheart: Remembering Dan Wheldon covering his life.." Add the year for clarity.

All done. Great work; do you have plans to take this on to FA? Harrias talk 09:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

  • @Harrias: Have made changes were possible. The intention is not to take the article to FA at the present time though it is something that will be considered in the future. MWright96 (talk) 13:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
    • @MWright96: Good work on this. The article is in great shape, and while FAC is always a rough ride, I think this has the potential to be a Featured article; if you do list it the future, give me a ping, and I'll pop along and take a look there. Harrias talk 18:38, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Why mention he was not from a wealthy background?

The Early and personal life section says Wheldon "...did not have a wealthy background". Why is that worth a mention? It's hardly breathtakingly unusual -- most people in the world don't come from a wealthy background. As well, Wheldon didn't come from a poor background either. Moriori (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Las Vegas formation lap

It wasn’t Amazing Grace that they played after the accident during the 5 lap tribute, it was Danny Boy, on bagpipes. I was there in person. 2600:8802:E00:3B9:6591:D301:B9C2:754C (talk) 00:05, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Per the ESPN source in the article: "The sound of 'Danny Boy' echoed around the track, followed by 'Amazing Grace.'" --Bcschneider53 (talk) 02:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dan_Wheldon/Archive_1&oldid=1193954347"