Talk:Scuderia Toro Rosso STR13

Formula One Low‑importance

This 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.

View the task list
Discuss the project
Help out with Portal:Formula OneFormula OneWikipedia:WikiProject Formula OneTemplate:WikiProject Formula OneFormula One articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article name

The team appears on the entry list as "Scuderia Toro Rosso-Honda". The sporting regulations state that the chassis name must incorporate the constructor name. Therefore, the name of the chassis is "Scuderia Toro Rosso STR13" regardless of whatever name(s) previous chassis have used. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 19:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Prisonermonkeys: Can you point me to the part in the sporting regulations where it says that "the chassis name must incorporate the constructor name"? Looking at the version of the sporting regulations from 7 Dec 2017 (from https://www.fia.com/regulation/category/110), I can see that it says (at 8.2 b) that "The name of the team ... must include the name of the chassis", but that's not exactly the same thing. DH85868993 (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, even if the "official" name of the car (deliberately avoiding the term "name of the chassis" because that has a specific meaning in the regulations) is "Scuderia Toro Rosso STR13", I don't believe that necessarily mandates the name of this article. It can be argued that it makes sense to use the official name for the article title, but I don't believe it's mandatory - English Wikipedia has its own policy regarding article names. DH85868993 (talk) 21:20, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of COMMONNAME. However, we cannot go naming an article differently to the name given by the team. Especially when the article deals with a specific subject rather than a broad concept or else we'd wind up calling it the "Dave STR13" simply because of sources. Considering that the team changed their constructor name for 2018, I don't think we can reasonably assume that the old naming convention still applies. Especially since @Speedy Question Mark is not just moving this article; he's changing the constructor name in the 2018 driver table and the Toro Rosso article as well. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason I changed them to "Toro Rosso" was because for the past 12 years the cars have been under that exact name, also considering COMMONNAME and consistency with past articles. Speedy Question Mark (talk) 23:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the past twelve years, the constructor name has been "Toro Rosso" and the chassis name "Toro Rosso STR(XX)". But in 2018, the constructor name is "Scuderia Toro Rosso"—that's how they appear on the entry list. Given that Section 8.2b of the Sporting Regulations states that there is a relationship between constructor name and chassis name, we cannot assume that the chassis will continue to be called "Toro Rosso STR(XX)" now that the constructor name has changed. Drawing on COMMONNAME is questionable because we're not naming the chassis. Toro Rosso is, and so the name of the article should reflect the name given to the chassis by the team. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:36, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prisonermonkeys, as I have already stated, Section 8.2b of the Sporting Regulations does NOT identify a relationship between "constructor name" and "chassis name", it identifies a relationship between "the name of the team" and "the name of the chassis", which is not the same thing. Unless you're reading a different copy of the Sporting Regulations than I am. DH85868993 (talk) 07:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me examples of chassis that are not named for the constructor. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 09:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "named for", do you mean the "real world" name of the vehicle such as, for example, the team might refer to it, or the name of the Wikipedia article? Also, can you provide evidence that STR's 2018 constructor name will be "Scuderia Toro Rosso(-Honda)"? I don't we believe we can necessarily assume it will match the "Name of the Chassis", as listed on the pre-season FIA entry list: consider that the 2017 pre-season FIA Entry List gives STR's "Name of the Chassis" as "Scuderia Toro Rosso" (the same as the 2018 pre-season FIA Entry List), but the FIA Entry List for the 2017 Chinese Grand Prix lists "Constructor" as "Toro Rosso". DH85868993 (talk) 22:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DH85868993 — I'm going by the 2018 entry list. I'm aware that there are occasional contradictions, such as the 2017 Chinese GP entry list, but in those cases the season entry list should take priority because they relate to an entire year of competition whereas individual entry lists only refer to one race (and we really only use them to substantiate participation in individual races anyway).

As for the "named for" question, I'm thinking in terms of Wikipedia articles. There are very few—if any—instances where the name of the chassis has not been related to the name of the constructor. Even when Spyker bought out Midland and used Midland's chassis (and when Force India bought out Spyker and used that chassis), the team renamed the car. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only examples of which I'm aware where an F1 car article name doesn't match the "Constructor" column in the corresponding season summary article are Red Bull RB12 (the season summary article lists "Constructor" as "Red Bull Racing-TAG Heuer") and Red Bull RB13 (the season summary article lists "Constructor" as "Red Bull Racing-TAG Heuer"). Regarding my reference to the 2017 Chinese Grand Prix entry list, my recollection is that the FIA consistently used "Toro Rosso" as STR's 2017 constructor name (as formula1.com did) - the 2017 Chinese Grand Prix entry list was just the first FIA document I found which specifically listed "Constructor".

Even though I think we don't yet know STR's 2018 constructor name (noting that the FIA Entry List only lists "Company Name", "Team Name", "Name of the Chassis" and "Name of the Engine", not "Constructor"), I'm happy for the article to retain its current title until we know for sure (e.g. when the Constructors' Championship standings are published after the first race of season). If it turns out that the FIA consider the constructor name to be "Toro Rosso(-Honda)", will you be happy for the article to be renamed to "Toro Rosso STR13"? DH85868993 (talk) 09:39, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DH85868993 — absolutely. My main concern was that @Speedy Question Mark moved the article amidst a range of other changes (such as the constructor name in the 2018 championship article) that weren't reflected in the season entry list. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I moved them because we've never used "Scuderia" in the cars article title before, I did it out of good faith. Speedy Question Mark (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then you need to start reading the sources before editing. The championship article has had a hidden note for some time, clearly stating the entry list uses "Scuderia". Don't make assumptions. If in doubt, ask on the talk page. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do read the sources but for the past 12 years we have just used "Toro Rosso" in the car titles despite the FIA sometimes calling the cars "STR" or the full "Scuderia Toro Rosso". Speedy Question Mark (talk) 19:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, you didn't read this source or the note attached in the article. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 20:41, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm telling you that I did! Speedy Question Mark (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And yet you didn't see the note next to the constructor name. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is with you and starting arguments with users? Speedy Question Mark (talk) 00:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just bemused that you repeatedly made the edits. Either you didn't read the source and the note like you claim to have, or you did and you assumed you had some kind of authority to override the source and the consensus (which you don't have). You took it upon yourself to make the changes regardless—you didn't even stop to ask for clarification. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 03:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I made them out of good faith because of how we have done things in the past, this will be my last post on this subject because its getting irritating and not worth my time. Speedy Question Mark (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not questioning the intent behind the posts. I'm questioning whether or not you read things before making decisions. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did read them I always do, now end this conversation. Speedy Question Mark (talk) 22:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you read them, why make the changes? The note in the season article makes it clear that it should not be changed. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 06:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, DH85868993, there are links to many of the entry lists for the the Grands Prix of the 2017 season in the 2017 article's teams and drivers table's source row.T v x1 22:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tvx1: Thanks for the info. DH85868993 (talk) 22:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]