Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject Formula One This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
<< 1 < Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 > 8 >>

Contents

Team/constructor infobox templates

1. template:F1 team appears to be geared towards currently active teams/constructors. Pyrope has created an alternative infobox template (template:Former F1 constructor) which I believe is more appropriate for defunct constructors - see it used in Team Lotus). I propose that defunct constructor articles which currently use template:F1 team be changed to use template:Former F1 constructor instead.

2. If we're only going to use template:F1 team for active teams, then does it still need the (recently added) "Final race" field (which I think is only populated for a couple of teams)? One option would be to change the text "Final race" to "Last race" (similar to "Last Grand Prix" in template:F1 driver), which could then be interpreted as "Latest race" and updated on a race-by-race basis; another option would be to just remove "Final race" altogether. A third option would be to add code so that "Final race" is only displayed if it's populated (like "First Win" and "Last Win" in template:F1 driver. Thoughts? DH85868993 02:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

There's also (template:Former F1 team), as used on Brabham. Oops. We don't need both, obviously (Actually - see below). Differences seem to be as follows:
a)Former F1 constructor (FFC from now on!) has 'Founder/s' and 'Designer/s' where Former F1 team (FFT from now on) has 'Notable staff'. The former is more specific about what people did (good), the latter allows for people like Charlie Whiting or Jo Ramirez who are notable enough to have their own articles, but aren't founders or designers.
b) FFT has 'notable drivers' as well, I think this is relevant.
c) FFC has 'engines', FFT does not. I don't feel strongly about this either way.
d) FFC has 'entrants', FFT does not - that makes sense actually, but see below.
e) FFC uses 'official name', FFT uses 'full name'. Trivial difference.
We can merge the two with just a little discussion about what goes in - I would suggest that the 'notable staff' and 'notable drivers' lines are useful too. 'Entrant' is only needed if you are talking about a constructor, not an entrant.
We're back into the 'entrant' vs 'constructor' thing though, aren't we? (This is the 'see below', by the way). It would be legitimate to have both tables, since both categories exist, but for a majority of the entities we are talking about we would have both tables and they would largely overlap. Do we need two separate tables? I didn't think so, but it occured to me that the differnces between the two versions curently in existence are down to their names, so I guess it's worth thinking about. 4u1e 08:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Good points all. Personally, I reckon it might be a case of excluding information that is duplicated between the two boxes, rather than combining the two together. One of the reasons that I haven't rolled out the FFC box more widely is that I appreciate the need for a parallel FFT/E/whatever box. I've been meaning to start this discussion for ages! Cheers, anyway...
1) Some constructors only ever built cars to order (e.g. Alta or, arguably, Lola) and so would need only the FFC box.
2) Most also ran as entrants, but with significant differences between the design team and the race team (e.g. Rory Byrne, while a significant part of Ferrari on the construction side, isn't really heavily involved come race day). These I would argue should retain both, especially as for some (e.g. Cooper) the racing entity folded before the last appearance of one of their cars in a GP (as I know you are itching for the precise instance: Vic Elford at the 1969 Monaco Grand Prix was entered by Antique Automobiles Racing Team, not Cooper ;-). Or conversely Frank Williams Racing Cars, which started out as an entrant only, and became a true constructor with the FW04, a good few years after Frank started out.
3) However, there are loads of defunct entrants who never built a car of their own. These would only need the FFT box.
Personally, I don't regard the drivers as a significant part of a constructor's history, that information is far better attributed to the entrant history. Similarly, the designer (e.g. Rory Byrne) is a distinct entity from the team pricipal (Jean Todt to continue this example) or technical director (Ross Brawn etc etc).
I also don't think that there is too much duplication elsewhere in the tables. The number of victories for Team Lotus will be different from the number of victories for Lotus cars, for example (yes, so maybe Lotus needs the FFT box added... hmmm). To fly with Lotus for a while, I also think that there is a distinction between the official constructor name and the full entrant name (some variation on Team Lotus). The only duplication (apart from basic stuff that has to remain if the two boxes are to be able to be used independantly) is the inclusion of Constructors' Championship victories in template:Former F1 team (entrants don't win the Constructors' Championship after all), and possibly Drivers Championship victories in template:Former F1 constructor, for similar reasons, although arguably the number of drivers championships is of interest in a manufacturer history: discuss...
Finally, in summary (shut up self), I reckon that both boxes should be retained. FFT needs a title, and we need to compromise on the width of the box, but I think the two are complimentary, and not conflicting. Retaining both, but highlighting the differences therein, will also serve to distinguish what we mean when we refer to a constructor or an entrant/team. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pyrope (talk • contribs) 13:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC).
Ah yes... idiot. Sorry. Pyrope 14:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Well... having read all that, I think I'll have to leave you two to decide! ;-)  Adrian M. H. 16:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, here are my thoughts. (Sorry, it's a bit long). I think there are 6 different types of entrants/constructors we need to cater for:

  • "regular" constructor/entrants, who only ever raced their own chassis and never supplied their chassis to anyone else (e.g. Jordan, Ligier, Amon, Prost, Coloni, etc)
  • constructors who never ran a works team and only supplied chassis to others (e.g. Dallara)
  • entrants who only ever ran other people's chassis (e.g. Scuderia Italia)
  • constructor/entrants who ran their own chassis plus other people's (e.g Hill)
  • constructor/entrants who ran their own chassis and supplied them to others (e.g. Lotus)
  • constructor/entrants who ran their own chassis, supplied their own chassis to other people and also ran other people's chassis (e.g. Tyrrell)

I think we do need the two different infoboxes (i.e. FFT and FFC). For "regular" teams, where the "as an entrant" numbers and "as a constructor" numbers are the same, I think it makes sense to only have one infobox on the page.

Here are the fields I think we need in each template:

  • FFT: Full name, Base, Founder(s), Notable staff, Notable drivers, Constructors, Debut, Last race, Races competed, Const Champ*, Drivers Champ, Race victories, Pole positions, Fastest laps
  • FFC: Full name*, Base*, Founder(s)*, Designer(s), Engines, Entrants, Debut, Final race, Races competed, Const Champ, Drivers Champ, Race victories, Pole positions, Fastest laps

(* = field is only displayed if it populated)

Sample populated templates:

"Regular" team - FFT only:

Former F1 team: Jordan

  • Full name: Jordan Grand Prix
  • Base: Silverstone
  • Founder(s): Eddie Jordan
  • Notable staff: Mike Gascoyne
  • Notable drivers: Damon Hill
  • Constructors: Jordan-Ford, Jordan-Yamaha, Jordan-Hart, etc!
  • Debut: 1991 US GP
  • Last race: 2005 Chinese GP
  • Races competed: 250
  • Const Champ: 0 (best finish: 3rd in 1999)
  • Drivers Champ: 0 (best finish: frentzen 3rd in 1999)
  • Race victories: 4
  • Pole positions: 2
  • Fastest laps: 2

"Entrant only" - FFT only

Former F1 team: Scuderia Italia

  • Full name: BMS Scuderia Italia
  • Base: somewhere in Italy
  • Founder(s): Beppe Lucchini
  • Notable staff: ???
  • Notable drivers: ???
  • Constructors: Dallara-Ford, Dallara-Judd, Lola-Ferrari
  • Debut: 1989 xxx GP
  • Last race: 1993 xxx GP
  • Races competed: ???
  • Const Champ: 0 (best:...)
  • Drivers Champ: 0 (best:...)
  • Race victories: 0
  • Pole positions: 0
  • Fastest laps: 0

"Constructor only" - FFC only

Former F1 constructor: Dallara

  • Full name: Dallara Automobili
  • Base: Parma, Italy
  • Founder(s): Gian Paolo Dallara
  • Designer(s): ???
  • Engines: Ford, Judd, Ferrari
  • Entrants: Scuderia Italia
  • Debut: 1989 ??? Grand Prix
  • Final race: 1992 ??? Grand Prix
  • Races competed: 64
  • Const Champ: 0 (best finish: 10th in 1992)
  • Drivers Champ: 0 (best finish: xx in xx)
  • Race victories: 0
  • Pole positions: 0
  • Fastest laps: 0

"Constructor/entrant who ran their own chassis, supplied their own chassis to other people and also ran other people's chassis" - FFT and FFC

Former F1 team: Tyrrell

  • Full name: Tyrrell Racing Organisation
  • Base: Ockham, Surrey, UK
  • Founder(s): Ken Tyrrell
  • Notable staff: "race team people"
  • Notable drivers: Jackie Stewart, Francois Cevert
  • Constructors: Matra-Ford, March-Ford, Tyrrell-Ford, Tyrrell-Renault
  • Debut: 1968 xxx Grand Prix
  • Last race: <whenever it was>
  • Races competed: xxx (total races competed by the Tyrrell team, as opposed to 430 competed by Tyrrell the constructor)
  • Drivers Champ: 3 (1969, 1971, 1973)
  • Race victories: xx (total wins by the Tyrrell team)
  • Pole positions: xx (total poles by the Tyrrell team)
  • Fastest laps: xx (total fastest laps by the Tyrrell team)

(Note: "Const champ" field not populated/displayed)

Former F1 constructor: Tyrrell

  • Designer(s): Derek Gardner
  • Engines: Ford, Renault
  • Entrants: Tyrrell Racing Org, Eddie Keizan
  • Debut: 1970 xxx Grand Prix
  • Final race: <whenever it was>
  • Races competed: 430
  • Const Champ: 1 (1971)
  • Drivers Champ: 2 (1971, 1973)
  • Race victories: 23
  • Pole positions: 14
  • Fastest laps: 20

(Note: "Full name", "Base" and "Founder" fields not populated/displayed)

Notes:

  • I realise that "Const champ" doesn't really make sense for an entrant, but it needs to be there if we want to be able to use just FFT for a "regular" team.
  • (I think) the word "Constructors" looks a little bit weird in FFT, but I couldn't think of a better word. I considered "Chassis", but I thought if I called it that, people would put in things like EJ14, EJ15, etc

Thoughts? DH85868993 09:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you should sleep some time ;-) Anyhow, that all (and how) seems to make sense. So long as we can standardise the width of the tables and make sure that there are titles for each it should work. It looks analagous to the way that [[John Surtees]'s motorcycle and car career summary tables have been added. In keeping with this, I suggest that the company logo only be used on the upper table (whichever that is) to try and make the two appear to run together. Pyrope 14:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've made substantial changes to template:F1 team, template:Former F1 team and template:F1 constructor (formerly template:Former F1 constructor). The deal is:

DH85868993 13:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Grand Prix country codes

Was a definitive decision ever reached regarding country codes in results tables? It was discussed here but there doesn't seem to be a definite conclusion. I'm planning to update some driver results tables soon, and I'd rather do it once rather than twice... DH85868993 11:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my misunderstanding, but are we talking about Template:Flagicon? Because you don't need to put the country code in, you can just put the country name in. Anyway, sorry if that wasn't what you meant...--Skully Collins Edits 12:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
No, what I'm asking about is: in a driver or constructor career summary table, should "German Grand Prix" be abbreviated to "GER" or "DEU"?; should "South African Grand Prix" be abbreviated to "SAF" or "RSA"?, etc. DH85868993 13:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
The latter, because we need to take into account the people that read these articles for interest but don't have specific knowledge in the subbject. Besides we're not governed by the FIA on Wikipedia ;-).--Skully Collins Edits 13:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Can you point me to a list of the agreed abbreviations for all GP countries (and "non-countries" such as Las Vegas) that I can use as a reference? Thanks. DH85868993 13:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I've had a go, but I'm not sure if you'll like it:
  • Aregtinina - ARG
  • Australia - AUS
  • Austria - AUT
  • Bahrain - BRN
  • Belgian - BEL
  • Brazil - BRA
  • Britain - GBR
  • Canada - CAN
  • China - CHN
  • Holland - NED
  • Europe - EUR
  • France - FRA
  • German - DEU
  • Hungary - HUN
  • Indy 500 - IDY
  • Italy - ITA
  • Japan - JPN
  • Korea - KOR
  • La Vegas - LVS
  • Luxembourg - LUX
  • Malaysia - MAS
  • Mexico - MEX
  • Monaco - MON
  • Morocco - MAR
  • Pacific - PAC
  • Pescara - PES
  • Portugal - POR
  • San Marino - SMR
  • South Africa - RSA
  • Switzerland - SUI
  • Turkey - TUR
  • United States - USA
    • West - USAW
    • East - USAE
I made sure that the non-country ones didn't cross-over with a country. Neat table coming soon ;-).--Skully Collins Edits 13:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I would start by using the international standard abbreviations (3-letter, not 2-letter, of course), which you pretty much have done. Except that Morocco doesn't have an A in it, so it should be MOR. Adrian M. H. 14:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
We didn't ever reach a proper concensus on this before, but I always think that, this being an English language Wikipedia, Germany should be "GER", Switzerland should be "SWI", Morocco "MOR" and Netherlands "NET". There's no logical reason to use German for Germany, French for Switzerland and Morocco etc instead of English if we're not going to use a set system borrowed from somewhere else. I don't see why Bahrain shouldn't be "BAH" as I think it is on the tables now (there's never going to be a Bahamian GP) and the Indy 500 is down as "INDY" on the tables because it's easier to understand at a glance. Likewise "MAL" for Malaysia. Bretonbanquet 20:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Spain isn't on that list - I guess we have a choice between "ESP" or "SPA". Even though "ESP" is not English, in this case I would go for that because "SPA" may confuse with Spa-Francorchamps. Bretonbanquet 20:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I strongly believe that the international 3-letter codes should be used - they almost always are (generally speaking). That means DEU, CHE and ESP. SUI is an acceptable alternative, but not SWI. It's not as if their meaning is obscure. See ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 for a pretty complete list. - Adrian M. H. 21:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Adrian_M._H. here. Makes sense to be entirely systematic as far as countries are concerned. Not sure what to do about the others - EUR seems fair enough but i'm not keen on the inconsistency between USAE/USAW and Las Vegas.Spute 22:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
You think "CHE" for Switzerland is not obscure? Casual readers of the articles will simply not know what that means. The ISO system is not logical in any sense. If Germany is "DEU", why is Hungary not "MAG"? Or Austria "OST"? Under what normal everyday circumstance is that system used? Quite apart from the fact that many of the codes we will have to use aren't included in the ISO list. Why on earth is "SUI" OK, but not "SWI" - where is the logic? Bretonbanquet 23:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

This is obviously an emotive issue. Should we vote on it perhaps? You can show your support for various options in the table below. ISO abbreviations are highlighted in bold. Feel free to add any options I've omitted and/or move races from the "non-controversial" table to the "ones we need to decide about" table. DH85868993 01:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Non-controversial ones (hopefully!)

Grand Prix Abbreviation
Argentine ARG
Australian AUS
Austrian AUT
Belgian BEL
Brazilian BRA
British GBR
Canadian CAN
Chinese CHN
European EUR
French FRA
Hungarian HUN
Italian ITA
Japanese JPN
Luxembourg LUX
Mexican MEX
Pacific PAC
Pescara PES
Swedish SWE
Turkish TUR
United States USA

Ones we need to decide about:

Grand Prix Abbreviation Support
Bahrain BAH DH85868993(weak), Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Davnel03
BHR GURoadrunnner, Spute, Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Readro, Pc13
BRN
Dutch DUT Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet (weak), User:AAFL
HOL
NED GURoadrunnner, Majin Izlude, MTC, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Pyrope, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
NET
NLD Readro, Spute
German DEU Skully Collins, Spute, Davnel03
GER GURoadrunnner (also support 'D'), Majin Izlude, MTC, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Pc13
Indy 500 IDY Skully Collins (Let's keep it to 3 letters, where possible, please?), MTC, Kingjamie
IND Davnel03
INDY DH85868993, GURoadrunnner, Bretonbanquet, Spute
500 Diniz, Readro, User:AAFL, Majin Izlude, Gasheadsteve, Pyrope
Las Vegas LVG Majin Izlude, Gasheadsteve, Readro, MTC, Kingjamie
LVS GURoadrunnner, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Pyrope, Davnel03
VEG
Malaysian MAL GURoadrunnner, Majin Izlude, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
MAS MTC, Gasheadsteve
MYS Diniz, Spute
Monaco MCO Spute
MON DH85868993, GURoadrunnner, Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
Moroccan MAR MTC, Gasheadsteve, Spute, Pc13
MOR GURoadrunnner, Majin Izlude, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Davnel03
Portuguese POR DH85868993, GURoadrunnner, MTC, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Majin Izlude, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
PRT Spute
San Marino RSM Readro
SAN GURoadrunnner, User:AAFL
SMR Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Spute, Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Pyrope, Pc13, Davnel03
South African RSA GURoadrunnner (split), Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Spute, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Readro, Pyrope, Kingjamie, Davnel03
SAF GURoadrunnner (split), User:AAFL
ZAF Pc13
Spanish ESP GURoadrunnner (España), Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Spute, Diniz, Gasheadsteve, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
SPA Readro
Swiss CHE Spute
SUI GURoadrunnner, Majin Izlude, MTC, Skully Collins, Gasheadsteve, Kingjamie, Pc13, Davnel03
SWI Bretonbanquet, Diniz, Readro, Pyrope, User:AAFL
USA East USAE GURoadrunnner, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Gasheadsteve, Readro, Davnel03
USE MTC, Diniz, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Majin Izlude, Kingjamie
USA West USAW GURoadrunnner, Skully Collins, Bretonbanquet, Gasheadsteve, Readro
USW MTC, Diniz, Pyrope, User:AAFL, Majin Izlude, Kingjamie, Davnel03

Take it easy, Bretonbanquet. To answer your question, SWI is not used, because it would be anglicised, but SUI is commonly accepted because it represents "Switzerland" in the country's biggest spoken language. The ISO standard is precisely that: an international standard, which no doubt was not the work of a moment and was intended to prevent confusion or debate. Take RSA for example. Stands for the Republic of South Africa, and is in universal usage. I have never seen SAF in official usage. Adrian M. H. 16:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I am taking it easy. My earlier post was not intended to display anger at anyone here, I just can't stand ISO systems. I understand the use of "SUI" for Switzerland, but as I pointed out, the same rule does not apply for many other countries, hence my question of where the logic is in the ISO system. As you say, it probably wasn't the work of a moment, but it was, in my opinion, a time spent lacking any clarity or common sense. I haven't seen "SAF" in general usage either, and I'm not advocating its use here. I would just prefer to distance this project from the ISO system, which is not only a shambles, but not suited to our purpose, lacking as it does many codes which we have to devise ourselves. Bretonbanquet 20:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Can I just put in a plea to seriously consider not using 4 letter abbreviations. Space in these tables is seriously limited in most cases, even before wasting space by forcing three or four results columns to be uselessly wide. Pyrope 22:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: the 4 letter codes - I think there's less of a problem with the "USW" / "USE" codes than the "IND" code - especially if there's ever an Indian GP... Diniz added "500" after I voted, but I think that's not a bad compromise. Bretonbanquet 22:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I see your point about India. Who knows where Bernie will take us next. I have adjusted my vote accordingly. I still see 4-letter abbreviations as a no no. As for other locations, perhaps we ought to start debating the Abu Dhabi round (or Abu Durbi as the BBC website had it for a while)? If we start now we might reach a consensus by 2009! Pyrope 08:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

My preference is to use IOC country codes where possible in sport-related articles, even if they're not Olympic sports. It makes sense to be consistant with abbreviations accross all sports. Gasheadsteve 09:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I've put all the current IOC codes in the second table in italics. Majin Izlude talk 10:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Are all the votes in? If so, we could decide on these and start amending the tables as we find time. Bretonbanquet 11:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think everyone's had long enough. The "winners" are:

Grand Prix Abbreviation
Bahrain BHR
Dutch NED
German GER
Indy 500 500
Las Vegas LVS
Malaysian MAL
Monaco MON
Moroccan MOR
Portuguese POR
San Marino SMR
South African RSA
Spanish ESP
Swiss SUI
USA East USE
USA West USW

giving a complete list of:

Grand Prix Abbreviation
Argentine ARG
Australian AUS
Austrian AUT
Bahrain BHR
Belgian BEL
Brazilian BRA
British GBR
Canadian CAN
Chinese CHN
Dutch NED
European EUR
French FRA
German GER
Hungarian HUN
Indy 500 500
Italian ITA
Japanese JPN
Las Vegas LVS
Luxembourg LUX
Malaysian MAL
Mexican MEX
Monaco MON
Moroccan MOR
Pacific PAC
Pescara PES
Portuguese POR
San Marino SMR
South African RSA
Spanish ESP
Swedish SWE
Swiss SUI
Turkish TUR
United States USA
USA East USE
USA West USW

Go forth and update! DH85868993 01:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

That's great :o) Can't believe we've finally sorted this out.. haha Thanks to everyone who gave their opinions. Bretonbanquet 16:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Lotus 107

I've just noticed something which I wanted to bring up. The Lotus 107 article starts like this:

The Lotus 107 was a Formula One car designed for the 1994 Formula One Season, it brought in a final, frustratingly limited and short-lived period of competitiveness for the legendary Team Lotus in Formula 1.

However, in the 1992 season article, it says the Lotus 107 is used for this season. For the 1993 season, it says the Lotus 107B is used for this season. For the 1994 season, it says the Lotus 107C is used for this season.

Which version is right? Davnel03 17:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The latter. The article even refers to 1992. Changed it. -- Ian Dalziel 17:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Scuderia

Currently, Scuderia is a redirect to Scuderia Ferrari. I agree with the comment on the "Scuderia Ferrari" talk page which says that it should not. But I wasn't sure what to do about it. Would it be better to:

  • nominate Scuderia for deletion
  • change it into an article about the "Scuderia" magazine (listed here but about which I know nothing further]]),
  • turn it into a disambiguation page, listing "Scuderia" magazine and Scuderia Ferrari (and all the other "Scuderias", i.e. Scuderia Toro Rosso, Scuderia Italia, Scuderia Centro-Sud, etc?), or
  • something else?

DH85868993 02:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

A diambiguation page sounds like a good idea, with a brief definition in the intro. Something like "Scuderia means stable in the Italian language. It has enetered English usage manily through motorsport, where many Italian organisations use the term." Not too well phrased, but you get the point. Then you can do the usual diambig thing. Pyrope 10:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for the guidance. DH85868993 13:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


Last/Latest/Final race for current F1 teams

What do we want to see in the infobox for current F1 teams?:

Noting that:

  • we could use the word "Final" instead of "Last" (whichever we choose, we should probably make template:F1 team and template:Former F1 team consistent])
  • if we go for the "Latest race" option, then every current team's article will have to be updated after every race (but they will anyway, since their "number of races" will have changed)
Latest for currently active teams, and Final for defunct outfits would leave little room for confusion. Pyrope 10:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Done. DH85868993 13:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Formula_One_Archive_8_325f.html"