User talk:Carfan568

Carfan568, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Carfan568! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Wrong place

Wrong place. Carfan568 (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

I have since added a timestamp on your behalf.

Can you also please take care to indent your comments (as specified here). Thanks, SSSB (talk) 14:35, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Carfan568! You created a thread called New article doesn't show up on Google search at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from All Japan Grand Touring Car Championship into Super GT. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

SFormula listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SFormula. Since you had some involvement with the SFormula redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

May 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Jenson Button, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MWright96 (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@MWright96: Thank you for improving it. However, in my opinion, the edits that I made were made in good faith and were not a clear violation of the manual of style, so simply removing them and calling it "amateurish" wasn't exactly appropriate. Again, thank you for improving it. Carfan568 (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Carfan568: And I apologize for my earlier comment in the comments section which were out of character for yours truly MWright96 (talk)

BRD

Go read this, as you seem unaware: WP:BRD Pyrope 21:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: Did you even read the discussions I cited? Constructor and team are not the same thing. Also, reverting once is hardly edit warring when I cited information which they probably weren't aware of. Carfan568 (talk) 15:50, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Reverting three times on 2019 Formula One World Championship, and doing the same thing on 2018 & 2020 season articles is edit warring. Yes I read the discussions, but I (and others) do not agree with your interpretation of them. Per WP:BRD, please start a discussion about it, I recommend [[WT:F1]. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

The first edits that I did are not reverts. On the 2019 page, I accidentally reverted WOSlinker because he had published edits while I was editing another table on the article. I did not revert anyone on the 2018 page and only once on the 2020 page. Carfan568 (talk) 16:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 24 Hours Nürburgring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernd Schneider. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited WeatherTech SportsCar Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antonio García.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Formula One, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page World Endurance Championship.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary

When you make a change can you please use an Edit summary so everyone else will have some chance of seeing what you are doing? Thanks. Britmax (talk) 15:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Britmax: The "Team" column on the driver results section is supposed to have the entrant name of the team, so I didn't see anything contentious about it. As for the F1 page, I changed the terms because for example Ferrari doesn't necessarily supply engines to itself and constructors are formed of both chassis and engine, but I should have added an edit summary so sorry for that. Carfan568 (talk) 16:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Still not using the Edit summary to tell us anything, then? Britmax (talk) 18:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

@Britmax: I thought it was a fairly uncontentious addition since other pages have that information, so I added a very brief edit summary. I will try to be more considerate with edit summaries next time, but please note that they are not necessarily compulsory for uncontroversial changes. Carfan568 (talk) 18:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but it is still easier to spot non contentious changes with a summary. Britmax (talk) 23:06, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Your support "vote" on the requested move you started

Hi Carfan568. I noticed on Talk:WeatherTech SportsCar Championship#Requested move 20 January 2021 that even though you started the requested move, you also made a comment starting with a bolded support (in fairness it was actually Comment/Support). In case you didn't know, unless you made the nomination neutrally (which you didn't, as is perfectly standard) the nominator should not make a separate bolded "vote" later on in the discussion (see WP:RMCOMMENT, "Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.").

It's not overly important but you may want to consider striking your bolded support. In any case keep this in mind for future discussions. Thanks. A7V2 (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@A7V2: I didn't know that, so thank you for informing me about it. Carfan568 (talk) 06:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Reverting your move of List of Formula One constructors

A heads up that I have reverted your move of List of Formula One constructors as there is a very reasonable arguement that this is the commonname. When people say constructors they more often than not mean car constructors, even though the term refers to the collective. When people mean engine constructors they generally don't call them constructors but suppliers. If you still think the page should be moved please start an WP:RM.
SSSB (talk) 15:26, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Red Bull Powertrains

Red Bull Powertrains is the full name manufacturing, like Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrains. From Bahrain onwards the power unit name is displayed only as Red Bull, as the current case only Mercedes. Source.--Island92 (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Island92: The entry list on FIA's website lists the make of the engine as "Red Bull Powertrains" (source), while Mercedes is just Mercedes despite the full name of the engine division being Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrains. It might be a good idea to wait for more entry lists before making further changes, though. Carfan568 (talk) 18:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Indeed my friend, I've been waiting for the first real entry list of the season, that related to the 2022 Bahran Grand Prix. This is the one based on the 2021 Grand Prix. We are expected to read entrant name "Oracle Red Bull Racing", while the constructor just "Red Bull". As well as we are expected to read AlphaTauri Red Bull rather than AlphaTauri Red Bull Powertrains; this is because we don't read for istance McLaren Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrains, but we rather read McLaren Mercedes.--Island92 (talk) 19:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yuhi Sekiguchi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Naoki Yamamoto.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Honda RBPT

Honda RBPT means [[Honda in Formula One|Honda]] [[Red Bull Powertrains|RBPT]]. Island92 (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

@Island92: We had a discussion at WT:F1 and the consensus was that Honda RBPT is a new entity and the results are not credited for both Honda and RBPT. Linking to both of them violates MOS:SEAOFBLUE and would imply that both Honda and RBPT are considered as the engine manufacturer, even though it is just Honda RBPT. The link to Honda RBPT redirects to the section which covers their history and results. Carfan568 (talk) 18:04, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok.--Island92 (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Not needed to put Honda RBPT in the lead. That is something generic as the practice in previous seasons.--Island92 (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

@Island92: What do you mean by "something generic as the practice in previous seasons"? And I disagree that it is not needed; because Red Bull is only responsible for the chassis, it is only appropriate to mention what engine they have since it also contributes significantly to the results. Carfan568 (talk) 19:13, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Restored.--Island92 (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

"Honda RBPT" should be redirected to Red Bull Powertrains. The "Honda" term is included for its technical support, acting as title sponsor. Power units are supplied by Red Bull Powertrains, RBPT.--Island92 (talk) 13:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Island92: The engines have nothing to do with Red Bull other than some branding, and Honda is still supplying the engines from Japan; the Red Bull name is only there to reflect the official withdrawal. And regarding your recent revert at the 2023 season page, StatsF1 is not a better source to know the engine name than the official websites of AlphaTauri and Honda as well as Autosport. Carfan568 (talk) 13:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I assume you're wrong. The branding is provided by Honda via its technical support, not Red Bull. Honda badge is back on engines and chassis (this since the 2022 Japanese Grand Prix), but power units are supplied by RBPT. Source says "it has been decided that the name Honda will be added to the PU manufacturer's name and power unit name." Red Bull RBPTH001 in 2022, Honda Red Bull RBPTH001 in 2023.--Island92 (talk) 13:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Island92: Read the following from The Race: "Honda officially quit F1 at the end of 2021 but continues to work assembling and supplying engines for Red Bull Racing and AlphaTauri with a slimmed-down team in Japan." And why do you think StatsF1 is a better source to know the engine name than the official websites of AlphaTauri and Honda as well as Autosport? Carfan568 (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I can ask the same about the reliability of The Race website. I match it with Red Bull Racing-TAG Heuer, TAG Heuer acting as branding, with Renault power units. Racing Point-BWT Mercedes, BWT acting as branding, with Mercedes power units. Red Bull Racing-Honda RBPT, Honda acting as branding, with RBPT power units.--Island92 (talk) 14:06, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1967 24 Hours of Daytona

added links pointing to Bob Johnson, Endurance racing, Pedro Rodríguez and Dick Thompson

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Renault in Formula One

Hello. Infoboxes should generally be at the top of the article, but it's the other case. It's article which cover certain aspect of Renault in Formula One, not just the Renault team, so I moved infoboxes to certain sections - infoboxes matched sections. Eurohunter (talk) 17:29, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I think the infoboxes are better at the top of the article even in this case because they supplement the lead section by giving a quick summary of the manufacturer's involvement and results in F1 both as a team and engine manufacturer. Besides that, the engine manufacturer infobox also includes results from the constructor section, so I think it is more accurate to place it at the top. Carfan568 (talk) 17:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)