User talk:4u1e/archive1

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello 4u1e/archive1, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed nobody had said hi yet... Hi!

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

You might like some of these links and tips:

some General guidance.
Tutorial and the Manual of Style.
Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Add yourself to the New user log and a regional notice board
Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
Use the Show preview button
Provide an Edit summary
Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
Take a look at Consensus of standards
Create a User page

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, -- Alf ^melmac 10:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from fellow F1er

Hi I've seen you floating round the F1 sites so I thought I'd just stop by :) I've signed up for the F1 Wikiproject,and lately I've been mostly working on race summaries mainly for the late 1980s-early 1990s(this section seems to be pretty thin at the moment)-hope these have helped the articles. Looks like we've got a problem with some anons changing the driver names in the result boxes-I've checked with the official race results and the original text was correct-hopefully this won't be a permanent vandal. Keep up the good work-anything else that needs work let me know and feel free to drop by my talkpage any time if I can help! Lemon martini 00:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Copersucar FD04 1976.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Copersucar FD04 1976.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Nivus^(talk) 07:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted - I think! 4u1e 00:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Moda Formula

Thanks for your kind correction. I made a silly misunderstanding. :) The article title is now reverted.

No worries. Many thanks again! 4u1e 18:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French F1 championship

I recently read something about it. There was a very successful French "Grands Prix" serie in the fifties. As far as I know it was raced with F2, I don't think it was ever raced with F1 When the World Championship for driver was also raced with F2s, the French GP serie was in many way as prestigious as the World Championship. The series had more race than the World Championship, and the Works Ferrari 500s entered all the races as well as (less suprising) the Gordinis, while the British teams also ran most of the races. With the French privaters (the most notable being Louis Rosier with private Ferrari 500) there was often more competitors than in World Championship races.

BTW : Thanks.

Ericd 16:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Eric. On that basis, I guess it ought not to be included, then - not being an F1 series. 4u1e 18:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should not be included altought it seems it was the probably the only national serie that rivaled the World Championship it wasn't F1. Ericd 22:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken it out (I put a copy of your response above on the F1 talk page, hope you don't mind. 4u1e 06:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Copersucar FD04 1976.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Copersucar FD04 1976.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Hunter 07:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - eventually worked out the reasoning behind this - rather cryptic though. Delete away, it's an extra copy that I inadvertently left on site. 4u1e 20:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article for F1 Portal

4u1e said: The F1 portal (in which I assume you have some degree of interest, as your name is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One) is intended to have a regular rotation of a 'featured article'. I've swapped a few in and out over the last couple of months, but I think it would be better if there were more of a community attempt at deciding this, proposals, votes, that kind of thing. So - why not pop over to Portal_talk:Formula_One#Suggestions_for_Featured_Article: and make a suggestion. Ta.

Actually, that's pretty good news. We've got comprehensive and long information on many drivers, grands prix, circuits and other figures, and this should be sustainable for quite a while.

Thank you for informing me. I will see what I can contribute to this section. Bobo . 03:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you also for the invite. The random nature of it in the past is not the best situation. I'll take a look at the suggestions. Regards --Mark83 10:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lisencing for This Pic

Hello - Thanks for the help with the Hill article...Much appreciated :) - To hepp with the article I found this picture from the 1994 Australian Grand Prix, Pic, I was just wondering what lisencing I should use for it... --Skully Collins 12:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, well that would depend! Where did it come from? If you can provide details, I might be able to help, but remember that Wikipedia basically wants pictures to be 'free use', so they need not to be commercial pics or ones where it's not clear who they belong to. 4u1e 01:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thumb image size

Hi. I noticed you set the size of a picture on Jacques Villeneuve a couple days ago, with the edit comment pic a bit bigger. Did you know that if the size is not specified in the page, it can be set in the user preferences? For me, you made the picture smaller. To choose what size pictures should appear for you, go to "my preferences" / "files" tab / then set the "Thumbnail size" to one of the six choices from 120px to 300px. Help:Images says:

The default thumbnail width can be set in the preferences, so typically it is better not to specify "px", in order to respect the users' preferences (unless, for a special reason, a specific size is required regardless of preferences, or a size is specified outside the range of widths 120-300 that can be set in the preferences).

--Scott Davis ^Talk 11:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. Although I may need to think about it for a bit before it really makes sense! ;-) 4u1e 21:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the ability to set that preference is relatively new, so older pages have the size set, and longer-time editors don't know it's there (I only found it a few months ago). It's not worth removing the size unless you're updating the page for some other purpose. If you mention thumbnail size preference in the edit summary, the news will spread. There are exceptions: some wide pictures need to be explicitly made bigger to look balanced (or tall ones narrower), and highway signs usually need to be specified smaller, for example.--Scott Davis ^Talk 01:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Brabham

Okay, no problem 4u1e. Please try to login if you can ;) Cheers, Tangot a ngo 13:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC) ~Not always as simple as that..... :) 4u1e[reply]

Formula One featured article etc.

4u1e said:
Hello again.

I dropped notes round a while back to those who have listed themselves at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One to ask for suggestions for selected articles on portal:Formula One. There was a pretty good response, both in terms of how it might work and of articles suggested. Damon Hill came out with the most support and was brought up to Good Article standard after a lot of work by Skully Collins before going on as the F1 portal selected article a couple of weeks ago. It is now at Featured Article Candidates as a Featured Article candidate (why not drop by and see if you can help polish it further?).

Several people who responded to the original request suggested that a monthly or bi-weekly 'Selected Article' could act as a catalyst for an improvement drive to get more articles up to a higher standard. Although it wasn't quite what I had in mind when I started, this seemed to work pretty well for the Damon Hill article, so I've drafted up a process for doing this more regularly. See Portal_talk:Formula_One/Management_of_selected_articles for details. Essentially the suggestion is that we vote for an article to improve every couple of weeks and at the end of the improvement process the article goes on the portal as the new 'Selected Article'. I'd be grateful for any comments on how this might work - I'm sure some of you are more familiar with things 'Wiki' than me - as well as your votes for the next candidate (by 16 July).

You may also want to help with the article Gilles Villeneuve, which was the next most popular after Damon Hill. The idea is to try and get it up to GA standard by 16 July and then put it on the portal as the 'Selected Article'. I hope you can help!

That's some good work we've done on Damon Hill, he's certainly one of the most important men to bring up to featured standard in terms of the fact that he's a British former World Champion..

I'll definitely have a good research regarding Gilles Villeneuve, after I've completed my current work, which will only take me up to the end of this weekend. The link is looking particularly good and I'll see what I can provide.

This is one of the most useful article processes, and will hopefully come out with a good result in the end. Thank you for informing me, I'll get over there ASAP. Bobo . 15:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minardi GA drive

Thanks for the message about this. Minardi date back to about when i first became interested in F1 so I'll certainly contribute wherever I can. --Jsydave 22:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gilles Villeneuve

I did some edits to Gilles Villeneuve, and am looking for some feedback. Cheers Cs-wolves 14:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of results added. Cs-wolves 14:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WilliamsF1

Regarding your comments on the WilliamsF1 article, I must say that they are much appreciated :), sadly the WP:F1 doesn't have a article standards for driver's and constructors :(. One thing that I'm worried about is the fact that WilliamsF1 has been active since 1976 and the "Full F1 Stats" sections is gonna be massive and expand what is already a huge article (compared to our earlier work with Damon Hill). Although I'm more then willing to do this on my own, you of all people should know that my grammer is only just good enough for article use and that a lot of copy editing should be done after I feel that I've covered EVERY fact, so can I ask you to do that for me? ;). --Skully Collins 09:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had an idea that I could just have the last 5 years of results for the main Williams article and have "Main Article: WilliamsF1 Full Grand Prix Results at the top of the section... --Skully Collins 06:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depends...when did Brabham first start? --Skully Collins 07:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and welcome

Thanks for your comments at Peer_review/Community. I agree with your theory on reciprocal peer review. If you need "views from non-motorsports fans" I certainly fit the bill! I know close to nothing about that topic, but so far what I've seen at Brabham Racing Organisation looks well organized and developed. I'll continue to look and post comments at Peer review/Brabham Racing Organisation once I know a bit more. Thanks again! CQ 11:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Pictures

Hello. What I do is not actually tidying up titles, but deleting images on Wikipedia where a copy on Commons exists. When that copy has a different name, I have to adjust the image links so that they aren't broken. I see what you're talking about; thank you for the warning. Ideally the description should be on the image page, not in the title... Conscious 08:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minardi Results Table

Hey! Thanks for noticing. Will start working on the Minardi article from tomorrow. I also think the Senna article is really good just that it has way too much unwanted trivia and needs to be streamlined. I still getting used to the policies before I start editing actual articles. This is why I started off with results tables. Cheers. -Aprithvi

I think you're probably right about the Senna article, but you may find it has some quite protective editors. Not that I'm ever protective of 'my' articles, of course! :-D 4u1e 19:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just had a quick question...How do you want to represent a mid season Driver change in the Team results table? I would suggest having 1st and 2nd driver rather than actual driver names

- Aprithvi 05:42, 30th July 2006 (UTC)

I've given my response at talk:Minardi, might as well do it there! Cheers. 4u1e 06:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damon Hill

Thanks for the prompt response to the citation request on Damon Hill. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 07:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hill

Hey, just wanted to say congrats to you and Skully for Damon Hill getting on the front page! Seems like you two did the bulk of the work on it... and incidentally I also think it's the first article that I've made any edits to that's made it on there! But congrats for getting it to the front - always good to see that kind of article make it there! Seb Patrick 08:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rallying

Hi there, just noticed you've done a decent review on Roy Keane for GA. I also noticed your racing interest and wondered if you fancy taking a look at Rallying? I've added a pic to the article and tidied the refs. I've nominated it for GA but it's probably borderline. However it would be good to have someone more familiar with racing review it I reckon. Cheers SeanMack 02:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality of Brabham team

Brabham was registered as a British Team. But the Repco engine was Australian. --Andreasu 08:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

I tried out your template on the Ferrari 248 F1 (hope you don't mind!) and it looks really good. using it on others cars sounds like a pretty good idea. Thunderous503

I agree. I've put it on Ferrari F1-2000 and it's a good way to standardise the complicated world of racing cars.--Diniz 17:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ta muchly

Truth be told, I spent far too long editing student magazines for my eyes not to be fairly eagle. I've got a particular affection for Brabham and was vaguely considering writing an article myself until you beat me (very comprehensively) to it, so I'm happy to be of any service. I'll try and get it all subbed in the next few days. James von Mann 22:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More t-crossing and i-dotting

Right, I've done down to Ecclestone's departure. One question, though (displaying my general lack of F1 technical knowledge): you mention Brabham pioneering a "carbon-carbon braking system" in 1976. Could this more clearly expressed as "carbon-on-carbon"? I ask because I don't really know what it is.... James von Mann 00:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the carbon-carbon explanation – I hadn't realised there was more about it below, so just linking to that seems sensible. If the quote about MRD is as it is in the book, then fair enough: I suppose I shouldn't take it upon myself to retrospectively sub-edit stuff that was published years ago....

As for race, I italicised it because the preceding sentence was about JB being the first person to win a championship in his own car. He was also the first to win a race (as distinct from a championship) in his own car. Perhaps this is overkill: I don't know.

I'm afraid I don't know about non-breaking spaces. I'll educate myself about them and then do whatever the consensus is! James von Mann 15:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alain Prost

Hey 4u1e - Enjoyed your break? Anyway, sorry about creating the copy-vio on the Prost article, I'm not trying to make excuses but I was kinda in a rush and copy and pasted it without thinking. Anyway, can you check what I need to do before I can nominate it for an FA, to make it the second out of our partnership :-). Thanks.--Skully Collins 12:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grands Prix

thanks mate, ive looked this up myself and also found that Grand Prix, Grands Prix and Grand Prixes are all acceptable plurals of the word. --Dan027 14:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Briatore

You agree he's a fruitcake? You aren't keen to see him take over from Ecclestone then? Some seriously believe that's possible. In a way Briatore is a rare "sane" mind in F1. He understands that F1's success is as much about being a pure spectacle than a science and strategic game (though personally I find the strategy and technical aspect very interesting). His interview in F1 Racing is quite funny; "Why [are races] always [at] 2.00pm? It's a stupid time - because, to watch a grand prix, you have to f*** up your whole Sunday. You can't go out to lunch. You can't go to the beach. Why not 11.00am? Or midday? The world is changing. Life is changing. People lead their lives differently." and "our business is racing, yet what we're presenting is everything else except racing". Breath of fresh air IMHO. Mark83 14:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the thing though, I totally agree about letting the teams get on with the business of actually building fast cars. Flav, who declares that he has not a lot of interest at all in the technical aspects of the cars (I'm paraphrasing), has built a team that has won the WDC and WCC on one of the smallest budgets of the big teams and has every chance of winning one or both again this weekend. In stark contrast, Ron Dennis (who is supposed to be a technical-orientated guy) has spent so much of his time and his company's money on the McLaren Tech. Centre that the team seems to have totally lost its way. Having said that I admire Dennis. I think you, me and Flav all agree "what [F1 is] presenting is everything else except racing". Regards Mark83 17:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was Eddie Jordan who said he should have sold up wasn't it? Then again neither Honda or Toyota (who have had more time) have been crowding the podium! Cheers for the insight(s). Mark83 18:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Schumacher

I just wanted to say well done, you've done a lot of good work analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the article. I'll try and help out as much as I can. Mark83 14:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Schumacher talk about controversy and such

You've been helping a lot and now we were talking at the talk page for Michael Schumacher about remaking the section. I did it. Check User:Serte/schumicontroversies. I really think it couldn't be more unbiased than this. Of course, these are just the facts, there are not many opinions there, because it's hard to do that, and it can be manipulated to whatever use you want. Contribute there if you want. Say what you think about it. Thanks --Serte 21:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be totally OK with you contributing on the page. You have shown you are a responsible editor and any additions to what I've done would be good, so we could replace that section of the article which is very weak in the original. Unless you prefer that I replace the part of the article with mine right now and then you'll work on the section in the article itself. I hope I've made myself clear. Cheers--Serte 13:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't say anything in the last few days, so if you don't say nothing soon, I'll copy what I have already done to the article and then everybody may work it in there. The article has been improving a lot in the last few days and this is one of the major things to do, so I just want to see it as a FA as soon as possible :P Cheers--Serte 00:08, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the work you did on making the thing more simple. Anyway, I still think there should be two sections there, one for the championship deciding collisions and other for the others as the 1994 and 1997 caused much much more controversy and the difference they made was very important. I'm copying it to the article and let's see what editors will do there anyway. Cheers and Thanks. --Serte 09:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You just made a change in Michael Schumacher, so I assume your online. If you feel you have any work to do on User:Serte/schumipl, go ahead. Otherwise, I'll copy it into the article and see what people do there as well. Cheers--Serte 01:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schumacher/Hill

Hi. Are you referring to this edit? I just made up the 62% figure to make a point (note the date of the "poll") - I was saying that "many F1 fans believe that Schumacher caused the accident intentially" is weasel words and that to include it you would need a verifiable source such as "a poll by F1 Racing (September 2010) found that 62% of readers believed it to be a deliberate attempt by Schumacher." I don't know for sure but I think you'll find two opinions

Schumacher deliberately drove into hill
It was a racing incident, not deliberate.

I think there are not many who would subscribe to the view that it was Hill's fault. However if there is, then I agree let's get it in the article(s). As for last night, eh.. no comment. I'm getting more than a little tired of these mammoth rows every week. Mark83 15:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and fixing the ref was no problem. Mark83 15:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]