Talk:Jonathan Wheatley

Date of birth

The date of birth in the infobox (May 7, 1967), but his Red Bull biography states it as "5/6/1967." Whether that is the "Americanized" date form, or the more internationalized date form is unclear, but either way, the "7th" of any month is not a correct interpretation. JC Berger (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@JC Berger: I'm a bit confused. What I see at the link you provided is "Born: 07/05/1967", i.e. 7th of May 1967. Do you see something different? DH85868993 (talk) 04:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

That's weird, because I do. It says "BORN

5/6/1967" JC Berger (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

@JC Berger: I now see "BORN 5/7/1967" (which confusingly doesn't match what I said I saw in 2021), but does match what I see at the "live" Red Bull Racing website. I can't understand why we see different things. But I also can't understand why what I see today at the archived webpage differs from what I said I saw in 2021. DH85868993 (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Lock the page

As there has been mass vandalism this page needs to be locked SpannerJNR (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

This section that has been added "2021 Abu Dhabi Last Lap Controversy" is one-sided and inaccurate, based on a fan interpretation. The section should be deleted and the page should be locked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarmRichards (talk • contribs) 18:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Delete Section : "Abu Dhabhi Last Lap Controversy - Added Feb 9 "

This section that has been added "2021 Abu Dhabi Last Lap Controversy" is one-sided, biased, defamatory and inaccurate, based on a fan interpretation and devoid of facts. Please immediately delete this new section and lock this page from further vandalism . — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarmRichards (talk • contribs) 18:37, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Please remove this part, as it's biased and false. Jabdul1234 (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Cannolis (talk) 20:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I am not a prolific Wikipedia editor and thus am not aware of the proper method to remove this section and establish “consensus” as mentioned in another discussion, however it should be obvious to any seasoned editor here that this section is a hit piece, admittedly more well written then most that are spammed on Wikipedia. I think we can all agree that biased quotes from tabloids and twitter have no place on a Wikipedia entry trying to argue a point. Also, the claims about “new evidence” being released are completely false, as the quotes mentioned can be founded in a video on the official F1 YouTube channel posted about 4 days after the race, in addition to F1TV Pro almost immediately after the race, as previously mentioned in this section. Any help from Wikipedia editors who know what they’re doing would be greatly appreciated! 207.148.176.36 (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd never come across the article before and I have to agree its content is really, really poor. The importance of the Abu Dhabi incident is obvious, but this is entirely built on WP:RECENTISM and can hardly be considered a biography, which is what it should be. The section should be deleted or cleaned up.

As for the content of it, I find it quite stupid to be perfectly honest. A simple YouTube video isn't that significant—especially for an FIA investigation— and it's full of excessive, repetitive, irrelevant sources. The wording is also pretty biased, in the sense that it makes it look like letting lapped cars overtake was a unique, scandalous occurrence when it's literally what always happens under the SC. I could easily find team radios from half of the grid asking when they'd do it and then expressing surprise at the message saying they wouldn't. The whole controversy came with a) Masi contradicting himself by letting lapped cars overtake when he'd said he wouldn't two laps before, and b) only some lapped cars (specifically the ones between Hamilton and Verstappen) being allowed to unlap themselves. The section fails to reflect that. MSport1005 (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

In my edit yesterday I've already tried to remove maybe 70-80% of the old, useless and obviously biased content in that section, leaving behind only the sourced/widely reported information and whatever is absolutely necessary behind. I'd have taken it out entirely if not for me potentially also getting accused of pro-Red Bull bias (I don't even like Red Bull, both the drink and the racing team.) Personally, I have no idea why this is only gaining traction now when I distinctly remember watching that particular video back in December. But if there's news coverage of this from major sources and if there's an actual FIA investigation underway, it's hard to argue against notability. For now, I'm in favor of waiting for any concrete outcomes of an investigation to see whether it's worth keeping or if it's really just a bunch of hoopla. PritongKandule-✉️📝 04:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

You've done a decent job cleaning it up but I still see it a tad excessive. The article should talk about the incident for a paragraph or two, but it shouldn't focus on a random YouTube video and especially not to that extent. It should also dwell on some other events from the 2021 season (Baku, Jeddah, Interlagos) that brought Wheatley into prominence. MSport1005 (talk) 10:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

While the events on the last lap in Abu Dhabi are controversial, the part Jonathan Wheatley played in this matter is not controversial in itself. Throughout the season, team principles and other team members constantly are in radio contact with the race director, and various requests are done. Not all of these radio messages are broadcasted. Jonathan Wheatley did not make any requests that interfere with the rules. Wether or not race director Masi carried out anything Wheatley requested, does not mean that Masi would not have carried out those directions without Wheatley's request. 217.121.101.124 (talk) 15:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

The removal of this section entirely by @F1V8V10V6: is whitewashing an important incident in this person's career. I'm not saying the text that was removed is correct (I haven't read it word for word), I'm saying it needs to be covered in the correct way. Mark83 (talk) 11:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)