User talk:4u1e

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User_talk:4u1e/archive1

User_talk:4u1e/archive2

[edit] Jack Brabham results

If Brabham's Maserati is shown as a private entry, shouldn't Stirling Moss's early Maserati races be the same? And his later Cooper and Lotus results be shown as 'Rob Walker'? Sorry if I've missed a discussion on this. -- Ian Dalziel 23:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monaco Grand Prix

Do we really need two circuit maps in the article? I removed the second one because we already have one in the infobox. Readro 09:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't we move the more detailed one to the infobox and get rid of the other one? Would that work? Readro 00:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:A-Class Formula One articles

The category you wrote, Category:A-Class Formula One articles, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related categories. Eli Falk 12:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Formula BMW

When I failed it, I did eventually see that he was on wikibreak. Just renominate it again and I'll pass it right away, it looks good. For the 17-year-old, I thought that was common usage. When I googled the phrase it came up more often than 17 year old. It may be the second case for European English spellings, but I'm pretty sure that's how it's properly spelled in the U.S. Whatever you want to stick with is fine, I just wanted to point it out to be sure. --Nehrams2020 23:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input into this article, 4u1e. It has GA status now. Regards, Adrian M. H. 23:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kimi

Hi. I just wanted to run something by you. I read Martin Whitmarsh's comments in Autosport a few weeks ago subtly contrasting Räikkönen's detached attitude with Alonso's engaged attidtude. itv-f1.com has just quoted Jacques Villeneuve: "He reserved one of his most caustic assessments for Raikkonen, who he says is simply too one-dimensional a driver to deliver consistently top-drawer results. 'Kimi is overrated as a driver package, because apart from jumping in a car and going fast, he really doesn’t care about the rest'"[1] My point is I think the Whitmarsh comment alone is worthy of comment, but given the JV comment it is even more an issue. However I can see how some would disagree and would welcome any comments you had. Mark83 00:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. If it's ever a toss up between taking a few days to reply or giving such a full answer, I'm happy to wait. :) Thanks for so much effort. I agree with what your saying. Another issue is the veracity of my two citations. Villeneuve is a highly erratic commentator in my opinion which taints his analysis somehwhat. As for Whitmarsh, he's open to the "well he would say that" defence - given that it seems from pre-season testing that Alonso & Hamilton's closest competitors seem to be Massa & Räikkönen! The alternative in-depth analysis of so many sources isn't one available to me right now either! Thanks again. As always, let me know if I can return the favour. Mark83 20:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Monaco Grand Prix at WP:LoCE

Hi there! Our general policy with FAC copyedits is to remove them from our list if they are not ready for a copyedit. Since you mentioned your article needs more work, I'm going to remove it for now. Please feel free to re-list it when you've resolved all other issues and are ready for copyedit. Galena11 18:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rushing headlong...

Hi. No, I think head on only refers to the person doing the crashing. From what I read in Blick the truck driver just felt a large thump from the rear. He left the cab and found Regga's car embedded in his bumper. After all, you can charge head on into a wall, and unless that is some special wall you have there, it isn't charging back at you. If there were two parties you would have to say thay they drove head on into each other, so if you need to qualify it then it must make sense standing alone. Similar constructions can be used for crashing sideways (he slid sideways into the river...) or in reverse (crashed backwards into the armco...) both of which involve inanimate objects. Pyrope 09:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, English Language was never my best topic as school. But as for the collision, the Blick article explicity states that the truck was hit from behind. With a photo. Pyrope 10:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota F1

Hi, you've asked for Toyota F1 to be assessed on the Motorsport assessment page. I'm going to do it solely against the Motorsport assessment guidelines. This is the 1st time I'm doing this so there might be some slight errors, I apologise if I make a few. Anyway, here we go.

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]

Label	Criteria	Pass/Fail	Reasons Why
FA {{FA-Class}}	Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles.	Fail	More info needed.
A {{A-Class}}	Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard.	Fail	Introduction needs to be extended, however their are many headings and external refences. Could be peer-reviewed in the future. No copyright problems. I dislike the "Statistics" and "Drivers Past and Present" sections - they are not really needed. No copyright problems that I can see of.
GA {{GA-Class}}	The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise good. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class.	Pass	Satisfactory sections - no big spaces, OK to read.
B {{B-Class}}	Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles.	Pass
Start {{Start-Class}}	The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following: a particularly useful picture or graphic multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic a subheading that fully treats an element of the topic multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article	Pass
Stub {{Stub-Class}}	The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible.	Pass

Everybody has different opinions, so somebody else may rate Toyota F1 differently, but it seems like I've given it GA. I have not yet put the rating on the talk-page in case I've made a mistake. Hope this is useful, though! Reply with any queries. Davnel03 19:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Now listed as B-Class on the article talkpage! Cheers! Davnel03 17:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I will, but it was you in the first place that requested it to be assessed, and I thought it would be better to talk to you through our own talk pages. Davnel03 21:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota F1 - Featured Article Standard

Thankyou very much for your advice!

I'll try the methods out. Lradrama 15:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brabham page references

Hi, I notice you have added some references to Henry (1985) to the Brabham page back in December 2006. It seems that some of the content (including footnotes) has been copied to the Alfa Romeo in motorsport page. The question I have is this, do the references to Henry (1985) in the Alfa Romeo in motorsport page, match the same source that can be seen in this edit in the Brabham page. In other words, can I assume it is correct to add the following book to the References section of the Alfa Romeo in motorsport page?

• Henry, Alan (1985). Brabham, the Grand Prix Cars. Osprey. ISBN 0-905138-36-8

Thanks in advance. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 05:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:1978_Brands_Hatch_Ferrari_312T3_Gilles_Villeneuve.jpg

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:1978_British_Grand_Prix_Brands_Hatch_Fittipaldi_F5A_Ferrari.jpg

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:1978_British_Grand_Prix_Brands_Hatch_Lauda_Brabham_BT46.jpg

[edit] Re:F1 images

"Copyright is held by Barry Boor who has kindly allowed their use on Wikipedia." - that is insufficient because Wikipedia is mirrored by many other websites (who may or may not be commercial operations by the way). If you wish to upload them, you should convince Mr Boor to release them under a free license such as {{gfdl}} or one at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Free licenses. enochlau (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

They also happened to be listed at on CAT:CSD under WP:CSD I3. If you can point to where he has granted permission, not specific to Wikipedia, then I am happy to undelete them, but for the time being, they do fall under the CSD I3, and will remain deleted. Sure you can't convince him to release them under the GFDL? It practically doesn't take any more rights away from him compared with the license the images had, and will save everyone a lot of trouble. enochlau (talk) 10:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding, and I hope it comes out well. enochlau (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1995 Pacific Grand Prix

Many thanks for doing what other users have done and just completely removed the block of text that I copied. I'm going to start writing out my own reports for other races - if you want to try the same you can. You might want to watch the Pacific page, in case somebody reverts the edits. Davnel03 20:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brabham BT19

Hi, I've just noticed you've made a ton of edits to this page - I'm just curious were you got all this information from as I want to create one or two car articles, but fear, like with Wolf WR7 that they'll br deleted. Which websites did you get this info from? Davnel03 12:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that; I'll probably try and get a clear picture of the car's specification before inserting it into a article! Davnel03 18:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota F1 content dispute

Thanks for providing your views on the matter. You see, it seemed the most obvious one to replicate for the time being, but seen as it's caused such an uproar, it'll probably go within a few days.

I'll probably get the 'Sponsorship' section improved next - it looks pathetic being a small paragraph and could be so much more. Thanks Lradrama 17:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

OK Thanks (yes, I admit, 'uproar' was rather a strong word to use...  ;-) ) Lradrama 17:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notes you put on the Toyota F1 talk page. Lradrama 19:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 5 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brabham BT19, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 09:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)