Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8

Archive 5

The Talk Page became bloated once again....Archive 5 has been created. Any discussion not revisted in the past several months has been moved over. Doctorindy (talk) 18:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing/archive5

You may have noticed that Lightbot is removing links like this: [[1996 in IRL|1996]], e.g. this edit. Am I right in thinking that we don't want these links removed? (I have asked the bot's owner to stop the bot from removing them, but I'm anticipating that they may ask for justification for my request). DH85868993 (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you, it should not be unlinking the year blindly/automatically, only in cases where it actually makes sense. Ditto for NASCAR year articles and other racing series with articles. Royalbroil 23:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

New category

I'm planning to create a new subcategory of Category:Racing cars to hold articles about AAA/USAC/Indianapolis/CART/ChampCar/IRL cars, e.g. Penske PC26, Panoz DP01, Lotus 34, Lotus 38, Lotus 96T, Ferrari 637, etc. But I couldn't decide what to call it. Possibilities I have considered include:

  • Category:American Championship Car Racing cars
  • Category:Indianapolis cars
  • Category:Champ Cars (although I thought people might expect such a category to contain "everything about Champ Car racing", not just articles about the car themselves)
  • Category:Champ Car cars (which would overcome the above problem, and is similar to existing categories "Champ Car drivers", "Champ Car teams", etc, although "Car cars" looks a bit weird)
  • Category:IndyCars (same problem as "Category:Champ Cars")
  • Category:IndyCar cars (which overcomes that problem, but again "Car cars" looks a little weird)

Another option would be to create two categories: one for CART/Champ Car cars (1979-2007) and another one for AAA/USAC (1905-1981) and IRL (1996 onwards) cars. But they would still need names. Thoughts? DH85868993 (talk) 07:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I would go for American Championship racing cars -Drdisque (talk) 16:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
One category should be enough. I'm guessing there's some overlap. I think Drdisque's "American Championship racing cars" is the most eloquent, although "American Champ racing cars" is probably less confusing for someone who doesn't understand Champ car racing. Royalbroil 02:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I've created Category:American Championship racing cars and populated it with the above-listed articles. Thanks for your input. DH85868993 (talk) 13:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Belated comment, good choice on the name, although the "Racing" might need capitalization, if argument ever erupts on whether American Championship Car Racing is the only American class that could be called "championship". --Chr.K. (talk) 05:31, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Indycars is the accepted public definition for this, yes? And Wikipedia is for the General Public first, special interests second, yes? --Falcadore (talk) 20:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
This category includes cars used in CART and the Champ Car World Series from 1996-2007, which are not IndyCars. Categorizing them as such would be egregiously incorrect. Also, the term "IndyCar" did not enter popular usage until the 1970's. Prior to that they were "big cars" or "championship/champ cars". -Drdisque (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Neither point really quashes that this is the modern day publicly acceptable terminology (who still calls the Indy 500 the International Sweepstakes?), but I understand where you are coming from. The point I'm essentially making is that Wikipedia should be readily understandable to 'Joe Average', dumbing it down if you like, but it makes it more easily searchable to the uninitiated, and there is plenty of scope within the article to state 'they are not actually Indycars'. Certainly a redirect from Category:Indycars would be a good idea. --Falcadore (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Category redirects don't really work very well and don't really serve a purpose (after all, who that isn't an editor types in a Category to the search box?) Also, calling a Panoz DP-01 an "IndyCar" is flat out incorrect and regardless of what the "common person" thinks, categorizing it as such would be misinformation. -Drdisque (talk) 01:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Tires

Not sure if I've asked this before, but does anyone have ideas where statistics on who used what tires in AOWR motorsports (Indy obviously first, but others if possible)? Johnson's Indy 500 has references to the winners, but more than once the phrase "several tire makes" for a race means that it's not exacting enough. Are the old newspaper archives the only likely solution? --Chr.K. (talk) 18:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

List of motorsport terminology

Per this discussion at Wikiproject Motorsport I recently created the page List of motorsport terminology. Designed primarily to combat jargon, feel free to drop by and add common motorsport terms (this is going to be a big list). Apterygial 05:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

World of Outlaws merger proposal

I propose merging the article World of Outlaws Late Model Series into World of Outlaws. I know the Late Model Series doesn't qualify as open wheel, but as it stands, that page is a stub and list (and a list from 2007 at that). Any objections?Mustang6172 (talk) 22:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Support. The articles aren't large enough to support division at this time. --Chr.K. (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps

(copied from WikiProject Motorsport) Hello there, the articles Mario Andretti, Gilles Villeneuve, Lewis Hamilton and Mark Webber which fall under the auspices of this Wikiproject, have come under review as part of GA Sweeps and a number of problems have been identified and listed on the talk pages. If these problems have not begun to be addressed by seven days from this notice, the articles will be delisted from GA and will have to go through the WP:GAN process all over again to regain their status once improvements have been made. If you have any questions, please drop me a line.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I have begun repairs to Mario's article. Your assistance is welcome. Note that I disagree with the stock car racing headings issue, so I'll work with the reviewer on it. Royalbroil 05:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

good article reassessment

A. J. Foyt IV has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Showtime2009 (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The most prominent flaws are article flow, suitable references, and up-to-date information. --Chr.K. (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"Races in bold indicate" tagline

It should be removed from each individual page and incorporated into the driver results legend, as not every driver has qualified for pole position. The other potential in-line notations to the driver results tables to are now referenced on the legend, as well. --Chr.K. (talk) 14:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

As there seems to be no disagreement on this, I will now begin eliminating the "Races in Bold indicate..." tags from individual driver pages, leaving only the legend key. --Chr.K. (talk) 19:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Race title sponsors

It's almost impossible to find articles about a certain CART/Indy race, because the article names reflect sponsors and race lengths but not the venue. How about getting rid of sponsors in article names?

We can't keep moving articles every year just because a certain company wants to. --NaBUru38 (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that those proposed names aren't the names of the races. We can and do keep moving the race articles and it hasn't been much of an issue. -Drdisque (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
WP:COMMONNAME though suggests that if possible, a generic name should be used. --Falcadore (talk) 23:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
The problem is that there are no "common names" for those races. They are simply contrived names by one user. -Drdisque (talk) 23:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
I know this stinks, but we have to use the official names. Anything else is original research. We've been having the same problem at WikiProject NASCAR. Royalbroil 04:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Strongly disagree with original request...The best thing to do is actually keep moving the race pages every year to the new official names using the MOVE PAGE utility and the REDIRECT utility. The reason is, because since a particular race will have many "names" over the years, a search or wiki link to the older names will stay active and not become a broken link throughout the name changes. Even the casually experienced Wiki editor should know how to use the simple MOVE PAGE feature, and create redirects. The redirect structure of wiki works quite well for the situation we have with race names. So I say DO NOT CHANGE. In addition, I concur that the names contrived by the user are not real, and are inappropriate to use. Doctorindy (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
In addition, if there really is a problem regarding the old names of CART races, start creating REDIRECT pages with them. For example, create Pioneer Electronics 200 as a redirect to Honda 200 Doctorindy (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Doctorindy, what happens if an old sponsor title (say Firestone Indy 225) returns for a race held in another U.S. state? If you split the article, all that wikimedia magic disappears. If you check the article, you'll find that a third of the titles I listed aren't made up but chopped versions of the full names (St. Pete, Glen, Toronto, Mid-Ohio, Sonoma/Sears Point, Vancouver). Others are old titles (Kansas, Michigan), and the rest appear a few hundreds of times when googled.
I'm making this proposal this because any person unfamiliar with U.S. brands won't find any particular race even if he/she finds this. I believe that descriptive, generic names are better than short-term sponsor titles. For some reason, no Formula One or MotoGP articles on races (neither their categories) get moved every time that sponsors change. --NaBUru38 (talk) 04:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
There have been 2 NASCAR races with the same name. At WikiProject NASCAR, we had to use disambiguous links. I oppose descriptive, generic names. Royalbroil 04:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The point is well made, however, on it being about how easy or difficult it will potentially be for someone to find the race their looking for if they don't know the sponsor name. I myself only know a few of the races' official sponsor names, and for all intents, those two events I think of as St. Petersburg and Long Beach. Someone from outside America trying to follow a favorite historical driver in their 1990s ChampCar career, et al, would not know to look for either PepBoys, Rexall, Northern Lights, or whatever. While the name of the event should be accurate to current titles so that Google, et al, can tie in fluidly, there is a vital need to REDIRECT the myriad of potential terms for races ("St. Petersburg Indycar race") into the proverbial umbrella. --Chr.K. (talk) 01:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree, Chr.K., we need to create many redirects from descriptive and generic names. My point was that the article needs to reside at the current name. The redirects need to be redirected each time an article gets moved. Royalbroil 02:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Fatal accidents list

Though a morbid topic, I suggest a merge of List of fatal Champ Car accidents with those fatalities in the IRL, USAC, AAA years, and move the page to a combined Fatalities in American Open Wheel Racing. Doctorindy (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree - There's a category for drivers who died at Indianapolis, that could easily be merged into a list. Circumstances and information on drivers who died in Championship Car races during the AAA era is a bit sketchy, mainly because it was a fairly common occurrence and not much of a big deal was made of it when it happened. -Drdisque (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment I agree with the merge concept but not the term. The term "American Open Wheel Racing" includes sprint and midget cars. How about Fatalities in American Championship Car racing? Royalbroil 04:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Agree...that is a better proposed title. Doctorindy (talk) 03:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

1977 Formula Atlantic champions

Please read here. --NaBUru38 (talk) 01:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

"Ret" vs. numbers of non-finishing positions, driver and season results tables

As the user Froo pointed out in a recent edit of the 2008 IndyCar Series season page, the unfinishing positions do score points in IndyCar, unlike F1, and as such, the references to "Ret" should be replaced by their finishing position number. While I see the value in this, I also know the Wikipedia manual of style reference that vital information (such as statistics, here) should not explained only via color, as color-blind eyes would not be able to pick it up. However, RoyalBroil made clear some time back, and I concur with him...at least in certain ways...that American open-wheel racing and European are rather different in heritage, no matter how much they overlap in other ways, and it would stand to reason that putting in the numbers only makes sense, to include more precise information. Thoughts? --Chr.K. (talk) 10:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

If people want more detailed information, then they can refer the articles specifically on each race. --Falcadore (talk) 04:27, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
AGREE U.S. Indy-style racing has ALWAYS scored drivers with finishing positions all the way to the end of the field. Just think, "33rd" has meaning at Indy, not "Ret." Doctorindy (talk) 23:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree also--looks like it may have already been completed for the season pages, but would be nice to have the same done in the "career results" sections on individual driver pages also. Chuck (talk) 20:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Current IndyCar race pages

My props to the creator of the 2009 Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach page! The only thing different I would want to see are the qualifying times (from ALL rounds of knockout qualifying). The race pages for the Champ Car events (example) included qualifying times from both days and are as informative as the Formula One pages (example). I would suggest that future IndyCar race pages (perhaps others can be modified this way) be made like the Champ Car pages if possible; just my thoughts.

As a side note on the Long Beach race, the results here show Hideki Mutoh as running at the finish; I thought he parked the car after running some more laps following his early collision. I may be wrong. 97.125.82.156 (talk) 08:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I think they should also be expanded to include a text summary, just like F1 race reports have had. We did that pretty extensively on the 2007 and 2008 pages. However, if we're going to have "report" pages now, text summaries should be kept to a strict minimum for the season pages. Write longer ones for the report pages. My 2¢ Doctorindy (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Rah, Yuk, Doo and Dix

An editor found it appropriate to change all of the drivers' name to three-letter abbreviations for 2009 IndyCar Series season. Please let me know if I'm the only one who thinks this looks rediculous. Doctorindy (talk) 17:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Already discussed on the article's talk page and reverted. I've advised the editor to come here to discuss such changes if he sees fit. -Drdisque (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I've never liked that WP:F1 has done it to begin with. Full names on such lists are just more professional in appearance. The state flags beneath national I could live/go with, however, if a method was made to make sure they didn't shove letters upwards above the line like happened with the STP (St. Petersburg) race abbreviation. Then again, I'm one of those (baseball statistical) individuals who feels there can never be enough exacting detail, if it's a viable and verifiable statistic. --Chr.K. (talk) 13:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Name of Champ Car / CART article

Guys, would really appreciate if people here could join in on the discusion and proposed renaming of Champ Car to CART at Talk:Champ_Car#Requested_move ManfromDelmonte (talk) 22:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

2002 Indy 500 - vandalism watch

With Paul Tracy back at Indy this year, it seems like the CW brigade is coming out of the woodwork. The 2002 Indianapolis 500 receives a fair share of "CW-esque" vandalism at various time during the year, but I expect it to receive a lot in the coming days. It already did today. I suggest those around to help out and simpy be on the lookout for vandalism and revert as soon as its noticed. Doctorindy (talk) 04:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I added the article to my watchlist. Who was CW? If vandalism gets out of control, it could be semi-protected, but it's far from that right now. Race results are a static statistics. Royalbroil 09:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Haha...I was talking about the "Crap Wagon" contingent, who seem to lurk Wikipedia now and them. Doctorindy (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The most prominent of the online motorsports forums that, with such examples as that name to begin with, were and perhaps still are dedicated to vandalistic attacks upon all matters IRL. --Chr.K. (talk) 20:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

CART Series articles

Why are all the articles on CART seasons changing their names? While I understand the the individual CART series had various commerical names, but the articles are title 1979 CART season so they can generically include all CART race for that season and not just those belong to the points chase. There are several non-point races that get coverage under CART season, but d not if the article is re-badged to the specific points season. --Falcadore (talk) 01:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Unless it's somewhere deep in a talk archive, it the reasons for calling the articles "CART World Series season..." were not clear, though "CART World Series" does not seem especially generic as it is effectively referring to a series of championship races and does not satisfy WP:NAME which suggests using the most commonly used name. Moreover, you were already using "Championship Series" in some years and "World Series" in others, adding to the confusion.
I have no problem with you moving the articles elsewhere or back, but normally the common name is used in Wikipedia articles and I can't think of many people that used the title "CART World Series" prior to the CART-IRL split. If you really want a generic name, surely "xxxx CART season" (c.f. "xxxx Formula One Season season", not "Formula 1 World Championship season") would be most appropriate, and perhaps you should leave a note or link on each talk page so that future editors know your reasoning. Hippopotamus (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Point taken. Have no real problem with xxxx CART season, other than it is a bit ambiguous to an auto racing outsider, but I'm not sure that can be avoided, except for the possible use of xxxx Indycar season (which prior to the great split was by a long way the best known public name for the vehicles), although of course that could only apply pre-1996. My primary objection was the tautology (ensure of spelling) of Sponsor Series Name season.
Perhaps then there might be a case for Indycar season for all seasons prior to the split as a better name which could then encompass championship and non-championship names throughout a season? --Falcadore (talk) 23:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
How about "xxxx Indy Car season" for 1979-1996, "xxxx CART season" for 1997-2003, and "xxxx Champ Car season" for 2004-2008? It might also be good to revise the IRL seasons to "xxxx IRL season" or "xxxx Indy Racing League season" for 1996, 1996-97, 1998-2002. Hippopotamus (talk) 21:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I like that, but the rest of the Wikiproject appears to be remarkably quiet. Anyone else? --Falcadore (talk) 02:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I like it too. We need to consider the correct capitalisation/spacing of "xxxx Indy Car season" (i.e. should it be "Indy Car", "Indycar", "IndyCar" or "Indy car"). Note that I'm not sure which one I think is correct; I'm just keen that we think about it before renaming the articles. DH85868993 (talk) 03:00, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I dunno, which is why I kept quiet. Whatever you guys decide is fine, except if I speak up. Royalbroil 05:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that all seasons sanctioned by CART should be "XXXX CART season", regardless of whether it had "IndyCar" branding at the time or if it was sponsored by PPG or FedEx. The official way to spell the word with relation to the Indy Racing League is "IndyCar".-Drdisque (talk) 18:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure which is correct, I guess my vote would be for "Indy Car", but so long as we're consistent I don't mind which we use for the relevant CART years. Hippopotamus (talk) 02:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
IndyCar probably runs into problems with WP:MOSCAPS (which says essentially to use correct language in preference to corporate logos). I think I would prefer Indycar, but I'm also fine with Indy Car. While the word is generally used as you would a single word, language does not place capitals in the middle of words. Also IRL season runs into some problems as IRL is used as an umbrella term, encompassing both Indycars and Indy Lights. Today IRL is pretty much used as though its a sanctioning body rather than just the 4.0 litre V8 series. The IRL articles have been moved a couple of times in semi-recent history so I'm reticent to move them again. --Falcadore (talk) 20:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
On the contrary, it doesn't run afoul of the manual of style. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) at the end of the General Use section on CamelCase. -Drdisque (talk) 20:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Then I have no problem with IndyCar season. --Falcadore (talk) 21:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
IndyCar is much more WP:COMMON than Indycar or Indy Car. Royalbroil 02:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
IndyCar seems appropriate, in my opinion. Cs-wolves(talk) 13:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

From what I can tell from looking at a CART marketing guide from 1995, the series name used "Indy Car", the "brand name" for the sport was "IndyCar", with the generic name remaining "Indy car":

Prize money continued to climb. In 1989, the Detroit Grand Prix became the first Indy car event with a $1 million purse; the next year, six races posted $1 million payouts. [p. 5]

At the start of the 1992 season, "IndyCar"* was officially introduced as the new brand name for the sport, while Championship Auto Racing Teams was retained as the organization's corporate name [...] (*IndyCar and helmet logo are trade marks of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, under exclusive license to Championship Auto Racing Teams, Inc.) [p. 5]

A record 11 races scheduled for live network TV coverage in 1995 and five on ESPN. With new venues, new participants and increased purses, the PPG Indy Car World Series continues its growth, and its attraction to fans, teams, promoters and sponsors alike. [p. 6]

[Emphasis added; source: Andrew Craig et al., "Indy Car Racing - Speed and Spectacle: Sports Marketing Opportunities", Championship Auto Racing Teams, Inc, Bloomfield Hills, MI., 1995]

In the 1980's I don't recall seeing the camel case version very often, if at all, but I'll certainly agree that "IndyCar" is most common now. The trademarking of "IndyCar" dates to 1992, so only covers the later years of the articles in question. Is the criteria for naming based on current usage or contemporary usage? Hippopotamus (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Contemporary, but by the same token, they should all be spelt the same or there will be regular page name move fights and we will have this all over again. --Falcadore (talk) 20:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Seems reasonable. Since there seems to be agreement with "IndyCar" and unless anyone has any last minute objections, I'll move the 1979-1996 pages to "xxxx IndyCar season". I'll also create some redirects for "xxxx Indy Car season". Hippopotamus (talk) 21:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

A. J. Foyt

User:Erika39 has controversially moved the article to Anthony Joseph Foyt. I have decided to dispute the move per WP:COMMONNAME. Please comment with your opinion about the name for his article at Talk:Anthony Joseph Foyt. Royalbroil 12:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

2009 Indianapolis 500 pics

I attended the above race on Sunday with my dad and took a few pics from my seat. Not the greatest pics, but they could be useful in some way. Does anyone want me to upload them for possible use in the article?--WillC 01:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, an easy way to let us pick through the pictures would be to upload them to flickr and either releasing them into the public domain or licensing them using the CC-BY or CC-BY-SA Creative Commons license. Thanks for thinking of us! -Drdisque (talk) 02:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I will do that. Luckily I made an account last week on there. I'll upload the better pics and forget the bad ones. I was sitting at turn 3, so I have just a few good ones.--WillC 02:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

family articles

shouldn't there be family articles? We have political family articles, and other sorts of family articles. Considering the Andrettis, Unsers, Pettys (NASCAR, so not open wheel, but 4 generations). I think there should be articles like Andretti racing family or Andretti family, etc. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 08:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

There is a disambiguation page Andretti which performs a variation of that function. However, the Andrettis, Marco apart, have not really raced as a family and their individual careers are to disparate to be covered by a single article. The same could be just as said of most racing families. Maybe there might be a case for the Pettys of Earnhardts but to an extent that is covered by articles on the family teams concerned. --Falcadore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Family articles had been created for a few families, most of these racing articles were deleted in deletion discussions. Royalbroil 12:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Why were they deleted? I would think that they would pass acceptability standards, if it were say the Unsers. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Al Unser

An anon brought up a good point at Talk:Al Unser#Article name: should the article be named Al Unser or Al Unser, Sr. He went by Al Unser until Jr. became a famous racer. Royalbroil 12:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Either one works in my opinion. If you moved it to Al Unser, Sr. we might want to consider having Al Unser redirect to Al Unser (disambiguation). -Drdisque (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Drdisque, I've copied your comment to Talk:Al Unser#Article name. DH85868993 (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Open wheel lore

I'm considering putting together an Indy car Lore page...much like NASCAR lore and NFL Lore. There have been famous open wheel races over the years with nicknames, and other memorable moments. I'm trying to gather a list to start out. Doctorindy (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

  • "Spin and Win" - 1985 Indy 500
  • "The Corkscrew" - Zanardi passes Herta at Laguna Seca
  • 1997 Texas - Foyt & Luyendyk "fight."

Feel free to add more.

If you're willing to include more Indy 500 stuff:

-Drdisque (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought of another...some called it "Happy Father's Day." At Portland '86, Michael ran out of fuel on the final lap, and Mario won (it was the closest CART road course finish at the time, and stood for a while). dejected Michael looked at his father..."pfftt..Happy Father's Day." Doctorindy (talk) 01:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Other notable Indy 500's - 1982 ("that dang Coogin"), 1977 (the victory lap with Tony Hulman), 1992, 1995 bump day, 2006 Other things I've thought of: Langhorne Speedway, The Hanford Device -Drdisque (talk) 01:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Would you also include superstitions, e.g. green cars being bad luck at Indy; always getting into and out of the car on the left-hand side, etc? Or are they too Indy-specific? DH85868993 (talk) 13:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Johncock&Mears. --Chr.K. (talk) 21:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Old pics

I uploaded some old Indy 500 pics from Library of Congress. There are more available, but dates or drivers and cars are unknown (need to be identified, usually says only between 1910 and 1915): ([1], [2], [3] and more - search for "indianapolis race" here (results are on 2 pages). --Sporti (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Where are the ones you uploaded located on Wikimedia Commons? -Drdisque (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
commons:Category:Indianapolis 500. --Sporti (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

USAC's official name

There's a requested move for USAC's article. Is the sanctioning body the United States Automobile Club or the United States Auto Club? Please comment at Talk:United_States_Automobile_Club#Requested_move. Royalbroil 02:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The change would be correct to make, as commented there. --Chr.K. (talk) 21:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't know, which is why I just commented with a question. I'm not concerned either way. Royalbroil 22:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

DNS, Rpl, Inj

I have a question. In the standings tables in use at present we have the careful thought out and shaded chart breaking down positions, but some of them are surely unneccesary. Obviously I have no problems with race positions, and this is not an attempt at Euro-Revisionism, insisting the placement of DNFs. We have DNQ, self-explanatory; Wth, which I'm iffy on, but OK; DSQ, important obviously; and DNS, again important, indicating a presence at the race meeting but unable to start, a generic title covering a lot of ground.

But... Rpl (replaced), Inj (Injured) - how are those two cases not covered by DNS? If we are going to break down each case of failing to start, why have the generic DNS in the first place? If you are injured at the race meeting or in the case of Bruno Junqueira at Indy, Replaced at the meeting, then surely the situation is covered by DNS. If like Stanton Barrett you are subsequently sacked, and like Vitor Meira you are unable to take part in futre races, then you are not in the entry list and the boxes should be left blank, otherwise for example, why not then fill in every race that Will Power, Paul Tracy and Alex Tagliani (amongst others) with a DNP? The entire table is inconsistent, and I believe the Injs and Rpls should be replaced with DNS or left blank depending on whether the driver was entered for the race or not. We don't detail the reasons for why drivers don't finish races with Acc, Eng, Gbx, Fir, Fue, Idt (Idiot driver), Bnt (Bent toe nail), we let the purple shading tell that story generically and the details are covered by the text which goes with the season article. Thoughts? Am I the clown for criticising the incrimental additions as each new different case emerges? --Falcadore (talk) 02:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, it does sound like overly precise statistics. I never understood WTH either - why not use the American term DNF? DNQ & DNS make sense. Royalbroil 03:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Wth is Withdrawn. Not sure where it's appropriate where DNS isn't. Perhaps an entry that never shows up (which in my opinion shouldn't be shown). I also agree that if a driver is not on the entry list for a race then nothing should be shown for that race. That means getting rid of DNP and Inj. I think that Rpl should be kept solely for instances when a driver practices and/or qualifies a car but the car is raced by someone else (for example Bruno Junqueira this year at Indy or Jon Herb in 2006 at Indy.-Drdisque (talk) 04:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
An example of "Withdrawn" is Tiago Montiero at the 2003 Cleveland Champ Car race. He qualified but crashed in practice on race day, got a concussion and was not allowed to start by the medical team. The official Champ Car box score listed him as "Withdrawn". Some typical Champ Car "DNS"'s were some of the lower quality Dale Coyne pay drivers crashing out during the pace laps before the green flag (see 2003 Vancouver race). So DNS to me means, qualifying and then getting into the car on raceday but not making it to the green flag for whatever reason. Racing doesn't have "injured reserved" lists I know, but I do like notating absences because of injuries with something other than "blank" even though the drivers weren't on any entry lists for those events. I just recently updated the 2002 CART season driver table to include injury notations for Adrian Fernandez who was mighty unlucky that year. All in all, Withdrawn is pretty rare but does show up on occasions in the box scores.Apmiller (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Further confusing things is the last Champ Car Milwaukee race in 2006, when Alex Tagliani destroyed his only car in practice, didn't qualify, but was listed in the box score as DNS, not DNQ. Cristiano da Matta also didn't officially set a time in qualifications but still was allowed to start and presumably Tagliani would have been similarly allowed to start had his car been repairable or he had a backup available (the lack of which would lead to the famous Tracy/Tags fist fight later in the season). Apmiller (talk) 17:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
However, this year when a nearly identical situation occurred with Stanton Barrett at Milwaukee when he crashed his only car in practice, he was listed by the league as "DNS" and given half points even though he didn't come anywhere near the car after Saturday afternoon. -Drdisque (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
My beliefs, regarding box coloration:
If a driver is on contract with a team, something should be in there, instead of a straight blank. However, simply writing "DNS", with a white background, doesn't go to the level of detail I believe is attainable, without much difficulty, in this medium. Did Not Start the race after being on the starting grid, al la Roberto Guerrero at Indianapolis, 1992 (pole-sitter, no less), or Did Not Start because another driver had replaced him in the car, al la Bruno Junqueira, 2009? These differences mean something to some of us, or at least me. It is my belief that the following standardization should be followed:
  • Blank boxes, no color at all, should be used when a driver did not actually participate in any of the prerequisites needed to drive in a race. Definition of the potential reasons why this happened should be given, if possible. If a driver is simply no longer driving for any active team, for whatever reasons, then it should be completely blank; the template gives such, without any abbreviation to include, as simply "Not competing". If the driver is contracted to a team, however, then the team itself HAS to be competing by definition; an explanation for why he was not there is then called for. "Inj" obviously means injuries were the cause, and "DNP", Did Not Participate, stands for currently unknown or miscellaneous reasons...i.e., anything else. "NH" is something that is quite easily the most rare case of all, where an entire event is canceled by a series or track, for reasons to be specified in the race report page.
  • "Rpl" is an interesting case, and one I might favor switching from blank to something else, whatever it might be. For awhile, it has stood for both the case of a Junqueira, wherein he qualified but was then replaced on the line, but also for a John Andretti of 2008, where team owner Marty Roth changed drivers between one race and another, and "Rpl" was/is included so as to explain why he stopped racing for him. Frankly, upon consideration, I agree with anyone who has a problem with inexact standards of how to apply a label such as that; if Roth fired him (for being a better driver than Roth, humorously enough), it should just be blank, since Andretti did not sit in the car at any time for the next race that bears the "Rpl" label. That said, if you sit in said car, then you're doing better than the blank color, because if another driver hadn't gotten in instead, you'd at least make it to "white", DNS status, at the very least...barring the potential utterly morbid entry, "Ftl" (or similar abbreviation), to be used for any and all fatal accidents in practice or competition, such as Rahal-Letterman driver Paul Dana at Homestead or Menard driver Scott Brayton at Indianapolis. Sensitive matters to consider; and I have no idea what colors to use, thus far, for either if they should be "approved" for new ones.
Further thoughts, such as on the confusion of statistics in more modern times, as thoughts warrant. --Chr.K. (talk) 02:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
These tables should not be used to flesh out the text. Some of these explanations, like on contract drivers not driving in every race, is already annotated in the driver lists in the first table linking drivers and teams. Also, instances of sacking, Castroneves trial, are all likewise annotated in the team list up top.
We are doubling up our annotations. The ones in the result table should go. The exceptions, like Castroneves are detailed, in multiple places elsewhere in the article. Inj where it occurs at the race meeting is a DNS. Or do we then details each and every DNS, liek crashing the teams only car. If the car is injured instead of the driver, why does the driver get a separate annotation? If a team pulls out of a meeting ahead of time because they ran out of dollars why does that a separate case to when a driver can't pass a medical? In both instances the team cannot start for reasons beyond their immediate control. What about all the teams currently not racing because they don't have money? Do they all get DNPs? There is an inherent double standard.
Fatal accidents do not need to be annotated in the results table. It will be detailed that a driver was killed in the accompanying text. DNF/Ret suffices. The tables should not be trying to do what text should be doing. --Falcadore (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Falcadore, statistics are a supplement to the text. This is an encyclopedia, not a statistics database. Let the text explain the details. If there even are statistics in an article, then they should be real generic. See WP:NOT#STATS for the policy. Royalbroil 11:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Can we form any kind of consensus here? with the exception of talk, no-one has made much of a case for keeping Inj that on the basis that if a driver is contracted to do those races but does not attend because of injury then Inj should be used. The question I have is have do we know which drivers were contracted, and the details of those contracts? And why would we make an exception for driver injury compared to say when a team sits out a race because they are building a new car, still contracted, still absent. Can we lose Inj?
Much of the rest of the discussion centres on what constitutes a DNS or a DNP and if Wth has a place. Rpl it appears can be lost. So, delete Inj and Rpl to get things moving? --Falcadore (talk) 02:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I think we can remove DNP as I don't see how it's relevant. I also don't like Inj. I think Rpl should only be used when a driver practices and/or qualifies but another driver drives his car in the race. DNS should be used in any instance when the car practices and/or qualifies but does not start in any instance that is not a DNQ (this would include driver injury, car damaged beyond repair, mechanical failure on the grid, or team withdrawing or being asked not to start the race due to lack of pace). So the only things that should be used are blank, DNS, DNQ, Ret, or a result. -Drdisque (talk) 03:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
DNP is unnecessary, just leave the places blank. Same for Inj. Rpl is needed in the case of a driver change during the weekend, for example Alex Tagliani replacing Bruno Junquiera in this year's 500. DNS is specifically use by the IndyCar Series in some occasions, like Stanton Barrett at Milwaukee this year, but it cannot be used generically, as DNS's still earn half the points they would have otherwise scored had they finished in that position. Wth is also probably still needed, if you think back to Graham Rahal at Homestead last year, having to pull out of the race weekend after crashing his only car in practice. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 19:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
There should be a way to identify the differences between entries that: successfully qualify for events and are on the grid on race day, but do not start the first lap due to mechanical failure (Gary Bettenhausen, Indy, 1989) or accident (Roberto Guerrero, 1992), i.e. the original meaning of the white DNS entry; entries that at least attempt to qualify but fail (DNQ), entries that were part of the event but were pulled before/regardless of the time remaining to potentially achieve it (Wth), and drivers that DO qualify, but another is put in the seat after qualifications (Rpl). Inj and DNP have been included because the WP:F1 standard seemed to think them important enough to warrant mention; I can probably accept lumping those into blank, since they're not there. If a driver IS "on site", though, the statistics should identify their "accomplishments" for the race, no matter how slight. Participation on any level should count for something (or to put it another way...when was the last time YOU qualified for a highest-class American open-wheel motor race?). --99.50.140.5 (talk) 21:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
WP:F1 do not think Inj should be included. And F1 DNP might be Did Not Practice, rather than Did Not Participate. --Falcadore (talk) 21:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone is simply going out and getting rid of the references such "Rpl" and mixing them into "DNS", which basically means that crashing before the start like Guerrero at Indy in '92 and being replaced as a driver before the race like Junqueira in '09 is the same thing. I am completely against it, but I get the feeling that such may be shouting into the void. --Chr.K. (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Surely such a distinction is for the text of the report rather than the table? The tables should not be used as a catch all substitute for writing out the detail. --Falcadore (talk) 07:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it's about time an infobox template for the IndyCar Series was created for the... three seasons that actually have a decent looking results table. I've started one off at Template:IndyCar driver results legend, although I would like to figure out a way for people to add more inline notation explanations when calling the template... Either way, better to start editing the infobox, and then using it inside the pages. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 20:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation

As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

American Indycar series

I'm trying to collect some information and stats about the old American Indycar Series (AIS) which was founded by Bill Tempero. Buddy Lazier, Jaques Lazier, Johnny Unser, etc., were all graduates of that minor league. I might serve as completement to the Indy Lights information. It's not longer in operation, and information is scarce, but anything is helpful. I'm putting together stuff on my sandbox. Doctorindy (talk) 18:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It didn't have much to do with Indy Lights. The league basically used old IndyCar chassis. I have no clue what engines they used or what tracks they ran at. -Drdisque (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to start a page American Indycar Series, with what limited information is to be found. With hope, over time, more information will be discovered. Doctorindy (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

(UN-INDENT) After a few days searching, information is slowly starting to come to light. Many, many sources can be pieced together. The official sites are dead, but the internet archive waybackmachine has several versions still live. Slowly, I will try to get the information and results cited as well. Doctorindy (talk) 18:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

  • I worked at one AICS race when they came to Shangri-La Motor Speedway in the 80s. Old Indy-car chassis with American V8s similar to Winston Cup engines of the period. Sorry, I don't have any citeable source materials. Barno (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Team Motorola

The articles Andretti Green Racing currently states: "In 2001, Michael Andretti joined [Barry Green's] team in a separate effort headed by Kim Green, known as Team Motorola." I haven't found any other description of the squad in Wikipedia. Should we make Team Motorola a redirect to AGR? --NaBUru38 (talk) 03:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes. --Falcadore (talk) 03:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_American_Open_Wheel_Racing/Archive_6&oldid=1140132879"