Wikipedia talk:WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] F1 specific Indy page

I've worked up an F-1 specific Indy page. I suggest that the F1 races link to pages like this rather than try to cram the F-1 square peg into the "500" round hole. Take a look here.--Mycroft.Holmes 22:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with the layout you propose in itself, but I think it would probably be subject to a merge proposal pretty quickly. It's the same race, after all, so having a separate page seems like overkill. I floated the idea above of having an inconspicuous extra column in the Indy race results for F1 points scored. If not that, a small section towards the bottom of the page could give the same information. 4u1e 17:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd prefer a separate section to an additional column. Some drivers have careers that span the 40's, 50's and 60's. I'd like to use one format for all Indy drivers and for all Indy races. But, that's just my opinion.--Mycroft.Holmes 17:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
My view is that a column would look better - but that's just my opinion, too. It wouldn't really change the format noticeably, as currently written for the 1952 Indianapolis 500, for example, it's the furthest right column anyway.
I'm not as knowledgeable about American racing as I should be. More recent races have counted towards (one of) the major American open wheel championships and have therefore carried points, which perhaps should be recorded in the race results. I imagine that the points schemes have changed from year to year, and that in some years the race did not count towards any championship. If this is true, then the results tables are not going to be completely consistent anyway, and for some years should perhaps include a 'points' column, although in different years it might be an F1, a CART or an IRL column. Just a thought. 4u1e 17:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
How about including a points column on ALL Indy 500 pages. You could leave it blank (or use N/A) if it doesn't apply. Make it title of the points column flexible so that the it could work for whatever series applies. Royalbroil T : C 01:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure that USAC or AAA or the "real" sanctioning body of the "500" awarded points in addition to those awarded by the FIA. Are we gonna add another column for that? The vast majority of "500" results will have N/A in the "F1 points" column. I'll work on a table toady to summarize F1 participation for a driver, summarizing wins, podiums, poles, fast laps and points. We can put that in a separate section AFTER "Indy 500 results". I'll also work up a table to summarize points for each race. We can put that AFTER the official results for the F1 years.--Mycroft.Holmes 13:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Are you proposing to make a separate table to the right of the Indy 500 table? Sounds good. As long as you don't add a table below the 500 table. I don't have a strong opinion about how to formulate or format the table, as long as it looks good. The pages should look simular, but don't need to use the exact same format IMHO. Royalbroil T : C 14:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just a note

I started this page, Fastmasters, but it could use a lot more information. It's not really open-wheel related, but racing nonetheless. Doctorindy 22:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indy F1 Summary

Take a look at User:Mycroft.Holmes/Indy_F1_Summary. This is a test page containing a summary of F1 participation at Indy from 1950 to 1960. The table does NOT include shared drives and fast laps (yet). Take a look and comment. I'd like to put this somewhere, but I'm not quite sure where.--Mycroft.Holmes 22:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the purpose of the table, so I cannot comment. I ask you some questions to further the discussion. Why should someone care how drivers did at Indy during the F1 years only? What data are you trying to communicate or summarize? Royalbroil T : C 04:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Though this may sound controversial to some, the answer should be self-evident: F1 is considered by given to matter more than Indianapolis, and thus the stats during the F1 points-paying era (NOT to be confused with being sanctioned by F1 itself) mean more to such people who hold that belief. As it stands, I myself can justify such a list, even though I am quite averse to the belief of fundamental F1 superiority-to-everything-else, on the grounds of supporting lists detailing, for each racing series, statistics for each track as long as a certain event supported/paid points/was sanctioned by...that given group. Then again...in the case of Indy, and its occasional-independence from a specific motor racing series (the early days, and then 1981 and 1982, after the USAC/CART schism)...the 1950-1960 race pages could simply have an extra column in the box scores, showing how many points were paid out by F1, alongside the those paid by AAA and USAC. --Chr.K. 13:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USAC

I started a discussion on the USAC page at Talk:United States Automobile Club about how I think that each of the touring series should have its own article. Please join the discussion there. Royalbroil T : C 03:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old race results

I started working on some "old" race results, but few seemed to warrant their own page. I decided it seemed appropriate that old races from AAA/USAC/old CART years that were held in the same city (sometimes loosely interpretated) can merge well with a current race in the same city. For example, I added the following:

  • The Tamiami (Miami GP) CART race results to the Homestead-Miami Indy 300 list, both have Miami in common. Also, I added the 1995 Miami race, since it was actually of the same incarnation of the Homestead race.
  • The lone Fuji result to the list of Indy Japan 300. They both have Japan as a location in common.
  • Detroit 100 winners to the list of Detroit Indy Grand Prix, both have Detroit in common.

I don't think there will be much objection, since there really isn't any other place for most of those other older race results to be, short of creating an unecessary new page. I'm going to look at some others, and do more if it seems worthwhile. Doctorindy 20:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need for a WikiProject: Motorsport?

Do we need a WikiProject Motorsport for collaboration on topics that affect all motorsport articles? I came across Wikipedia:WikiProject_Rugby - the purpose of which is to "maintain its children Wikiprojects: Rugby league and Rugby union as well as recognising, organising and improving the common areas between the codes." Now we have a lot more Motorsport WikiProjects covered than two and I sometimes think stuff such as the UK country discussion on the F1 Wikiproject applies across several others. I'm posting this on the F1, WRC, NASCAR, American Open Wheel Racing, A1GP and IROC to get people's opinions. Your comments are welcome! Alexj2002 21:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm in. I am a member of three of the WikiProjects (IROC, NASCAR, and American Open Wheel). I am knowledgable and often work on areas of racing that lie outside these specific genres, like midget cars, off-road racing, sprint cars, non-NASCAR stockcars, national series that tour local tracks in the United States, and other national series in the United States. These "missed" areas could be managed/organized by the meta-WikiProject. A meta-WikiProject to encompass all types of racing is needed. Royalbroil T : C 02:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm in too. I'm already a member of several relevant WikiProjects (F1, A1GP, British Motorsport and MotoGP) and I agree that there is a lot of overlap between all of these and an umbrella project would be helpful in co-ordinating style and approach, especially where drivers are in more than one series in their careers. Justin Wilson is a good current example - he gets infoboxes for both Champ Car and F1 and they don't really sit well on top of each other.--Jsydave 11:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Should the proposed WikiProject be restricted to racing with motors, or should in encompass all forms of organized racing? Or should there be two WikiProject created, one to oversee all forms of racing, and one to oversee all motorized racing? Gray areas include: bicycle racing (both road and off-road), horse racing, dog racing, track and field, cross country running, skiing, swimming, other animal racing, other human-powered racing, etc. Royalbroil T : C 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
There have also been issues between this WikiProject and F1 on how to present the 1950 to 1960 Indy 500 results since the race was a combined event. A meta-WikiProject could facilitate how to deal with the inter-WikiProjects' problems. Royalbroil T : C 12:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Racing with motors - there's little overlap between, horse racing or swimming and F1 for example, whilst there's much overlap between F1 and Champ Car. A WIP is available at WP:MOTOR - please help improve it as you see fit. Alexj2002 11:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need for WikiProject American Motorsports or WikiProject North American Motorsports?

I think there a need for a WikiProject about all motorsports in America that are not covered under other existing WikiProjects: WP:NASCAR, WP:IROC, WP:American Open Wheel Racing, Sports Car Racing, etc. The WikiProject would be similiar to Wikipedia:WikiProject British Motorsport in scope. The introduction would be "WikiProject American/North American aims to create, expand, update and standardize Wikipedia articles related to Motorsport in the United States/North America." Other WikiProject would replace the article marking template with their own as a driver moves up through the ranks.

I propose a WikiProject would encompass all motorsport articles in the United States, and I am asking for input if it should include Canada and Mexico. There is a fair bit of border hopping into Canada by NASCAR (especially with the new NASCAR Canadian Tire Series), and I would like to see the Baja 1000 included in the WikiProject.

It could be either organized as a parent of WikiProject NASCAR/WikiProject IROC, or as an equal. It would not do oversight of the WikiProjects, as that is covered by the new WikiProject Motorsports. Applicable articles would include notable racetracks, drivers, halls of fame, sanctioning bodies, etc. A sample of specific articles would include: ARCA, American Speed Association, IMCA, UMP, World of Outlaws, CORR, SODA (series), USAR Hooters Pro Cup, National Dirt Late Model Hall of Fame, National Midget Auto Racing Hall of Fame, Mike Eddy, Manzanita Speedway, Knoxville Raceway, Lake Geneva Raceway, Crandon International Off-Road Raceway, Berlin Raceway, Bonneville Speedway, Knoxville Nationals, Dirt track racing in the United States just to name a few. I have been spending much of my time recently improving this part of Wikipedia.

What does everyone think? Does anyone else have interests in some of these areas? Royalbroil T : C 15:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I officially proposed it here. I amended it slightly. Please add your name there if interested. Royalbroil T : C 15:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Driver profiles

Completed all i/500 driver profiles up to the 1941 race. There should be no broken links from 1911 to 1941.--Mycroft.Holmes 06:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Willard Prentiss is being considered for deletion

Add your voice of support to Willard by adding your views here - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Willard Prentiss. Readro 16:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indy 500 Drivers

We were having a discussion on Mycroft.Holmes talk page about the Indy 500 category. I have copied the following text between the lines from there to get concensus from project participants. The discussion is whether to add all winners of the Indy 500 category to the Indy 500 drivers category. This link has the guideline: Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories .

Surely since "Indy 500 Winners" is a sub-category of "Indy 500 Drivers" you don't need to add both? -- Ian Dalziel 12:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Good question. When I looked looked at the Indy 500 drivers category under "U", I found only Robby, Jerry, and Johnny Unser. I expected to see all of the Unsers in that category. Same with Mario, Michael, Marco and the rest of the Andrettis.--Mycroft.Holmes 15:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Blowed if I can get it to work - I thought it should automatically include members of the subcategory. In which case Danny Sullivan would appear in "Indy 500 Drivers" - but he doesn't! I'll keep fiddling with it. -- Ian Dalziel 16:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I was just hear to tell you the same thing. You need to stop adding polesitters, winners, etc. to the driver's category. All of Wikipedia is set up that if something is in a child category, it is automatically included in the parent category (and grandparent, etc.). I am positive. Do you want me to find and quote the policy or guideline? Royalbroil T : C 19:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Here's the guideline: Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. Since it is a guideline, it should be broken only occasionally and with strong justification. If you think you have an exception, you should probably discuss it at Wikipedia:WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing. Cheers! Royalbroil T : C 19:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
That guideline seems to say that both categories should be applied.
The example given is "Often an article could belong in more than one subcategory of a major category, but not all of these subcategories will necessarily exist. For example, actor Marlon Brando is in Category:Best Actor Academy Award winners and its parent Category:Film actors." -- Ian Dalziel 21:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Both Ian and I have tried subcategories. Specifically, take a look at Danny Sullivan. He's listed only as an Indy 500 winner. The winner category is a subcat of Indy 500 drivers. However, Sullivan is not listed as an Indy 500 driver. I would expect to see Sullivan displayed in both categories. --Mycroft.Holmes 19:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with the exception, as a Category:Indy 500 drivers should include the winners. I don't normally see thing done this way in Wikipedia, but I think this is a reasonable exception. We should change the description on the category page to say that it includes winners too. Should we nominate the winners category for deletion as unneeded? My thought is no, but I thought this should be discussed. I have a bot (see WP:AWB), so please don't waste your time doing each one by hand. Royalbroil T : C 00:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you've gotta a category for winners and pole-sitters. --Mycroft.Holmes 01:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'Indy' constructors category

As part of a discussion on the Formula One constructors category over at WP:F1, the question arose of whether there should be a category for 'Indy' constructors. Since 'Indy' would plainly be the wrong thing to call them, the best I've come up with so far was 'Constructors for American Open Wheel Racing series'. The slightly cumbersome construction is to avoid the implication that the constructors themselves are necessarily American. A decision on this is probably best taken by this project, however, so over to you! This would probably also help with the Indy constructors currently listed as F1 constructors (analogous to the situation with Indy drivers 1950 - 1960). There's a discussion on this topic here. Cheers. 4u1e 12:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I am in support of this notion, but we need to establish a method by which we work on it. Will we backtrack into the past, as has begun to be done with the driver's box scores for multiple seasons, or will we start at the beginning, i.e. 1909 on, and work forward in presenting the history of them? Thoughts? --Chr.K. 02:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
One approach would be to create an all-encompassing category (maybe called "American Championship Car Racing constructors", following the lead of American Championship Car Racing) with sub-categories (e.g. "Champ Car constructors", "IRL constructors", etc) if/as desired, noting that constructors could appear in multiple sub-categories. I recognise 4u1e's point about the ambiguity if the category name starts with the word "American", but I think if you explain what the category means within the category itself, you should be OK. An alternative name would be "Indycar constructors", but that has its own ambiguities. -- DH85868993 03:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy with DH's proposal, provided the regulars here are content that 'Championship Car Racing constructors' is sufficiently broad. What about manufacturers of Midgets or other dirt track cars, which I would consider to fall under 'open wheel'? Regarding the direction of work, I'd say start with 2007, which is the easiest (Are there only two this year - Panoz and Dallara?) and probably the most often looked at and work back. By the time you get to the 1950s there look to be hundreds (I exagerate a little!) 4u1e 17:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

Archived the first portion of the Talk page, the above link shows it. The size was well over 55k. Although it says that it should not be changed, I think a few small comments can still apply to those topics within reason. Doctorindy 22:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

And they can always be restored by anyone later if needed. Royalbroil T : C 01:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2004 Champ Car World Series

I have just created this page here. The results table needs formatting in line with our standard and some other info needs adding. If anyone would like to help please feel free.--Jsydave 01:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added the table with the list of teams and drivers, but I've only added the drivers who were in the first race of the season. Someone still needs to check for driver changes during the season and add them to the table. Gasheadsteve 20:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I've already done this work, but have not yet been able to add to the page --Jsydave 10:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Racing car

There exists a template for racing car types: {{Racing car}} . Royalbroil T : C 15:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] F1 driver template design

Very effective, and is used already for several CART/CCWS driver-performance stats I've seen. The color-coding of the positions makes sense, and is much better, in my mind, then simply giving a bold-lettering only for pole position or victory; using it also makes it simpler for international fans to quickly grasp the situations as the seasons for drivers unfolded. Does anyone else concur? --Chr.K. 04:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

And while I'm at it, this kind of color-coding for the 500 performances, only with slight changes, possibly in both templates, in making the bluish "also ran" color for all cars outside of the top ten, not the top eight. --Chr.K. 04:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Is this the template that you are talking about: {{F1 driver}} ? Royalbroil T : C 05:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
No, the complete F1 results, and the color coding for given positions, as shown in, for example, Clark's, "Complete Formula One results." --Chr.K. 03:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
It looks good to me, and it would be good to be consistent with a standard in a simular genre of racing. Royalbroil T : C 16:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I've started on a few, mainly Vasser and Junqueira. Like with all things I do it will take time to make everything up to date. Manwithaduck 05:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Here's the thing: I want to apply it to all forms of grade-1 American open-wheel, IndyCar/IRL as well as CCWS/CART, starting with the modern drivers and then backtracking to the days of USAC and AAA. For the color scheme, I say fourth through tenth should be green, for a top ten finish; blue should be the remainder of the running cars, and purple should be, per the F1 project standard, for cars gone out; if an Out car finishes in the top ten, though, it should be marked with the number as well as a "Ret", and be purple all the same. Any problems with this? --Chr.K. 09:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indy 500 annual infobox

I'm going to take a stab at creating an annual infobox for each Indy 500, much like the info box shown here Super Bowl XLI. Should be up soon Doctorindy 14:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

We need to go backtrack with them, I think. Working out such details for 1919 is going to be a lot more difficult than 2005 or '06. --Chr.K. 10:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indy 500 Winners Template

I created this, now it should be added to each winner's page...

v • d • e
Indianapolis 500 winners
Four-time
Three-time
Two-time
One-time

Harroun · Dawson · Goux · Thomas · DePalma · Resta · Wilcox · Chevrolet · Murphy · Corum · Boyer · DePaolo · Lockhart · Souders · Keech · Arnold · Schneider · Frame · Cummings · Petillo · Roberts · Davis · Robson · Holland · Parsons · Wallard · Ruttman · Sweikert · Flaherty · Hanks · Bryan · Rathmann · Jones · Clark · Hill · Andretti · Donohue · Sneva · Sullivan · Rahal · Villeneuve · Lazier · Cheever · Bräck · Montoya · de Ferran · Rice · Wheldon · Hornish · Franchitti · Dixon

Doctorindy 18:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Great job! Royalbroil T : C 18:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 1990 CART World Series Season/Temp

Is there any particular reason why the details of the 1990 CART World Series Season are documented in 1990 CART World Series Season/Temp, with 1990 CART World Series Season being a redirect to that article, rather than actually having the information in 1990 CART World Series Season ? DH85868993 00:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Simply because it isn't finished. I've had some people in the past msg and abuse me for having an unfinished article on a standard page. Any article of mine that is redirected to a temp page is still under contstruction. Manwithaduck 05:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. FYI, WP:SP suggests that draft versions of pages should be created in the Talk namespace, not the main article namespace. DH85868993 06:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
I remember seeing and using a template that marks that the article is in the process of being written. It is green. I can't remember the name. That works to keep people off your back. Another alternative is to put a nearly blank article in the right place, and mark it as cleanup. You can add a note explaining your progress that doesn't display using a comment like this: . Another alternative is to start it in your sandbox, but then you risk someone else writing it while you are developing it. Royalbroil T : C 13:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes in Templates

Hi, I'm currently making some changes over on the WikiProject Motorsport Assessment Page. Look in the statistics section. Only 240 articles have the template WikiProject Motorsport on it. I'm thererfore going to propose something (I think this has been discussed a while back). Can every single Motorsport article have the template on it's talk page. My reasoning for this is that some drivers have only the Formula One template on the article. However, surely (by the way, this goes for virtually all articles), they haven't got to Formula One someway. They haven't just been thrown into F1, I don't think any drivers done that. They've gone through other forms of Motorsport. Therefore, surely the Wikipedia Motorsport template is needed for every single Motorsport article?. I'm going to do a vote on this (on this page, plus the Motorsport project and all the child projects) so we can get a decision on this. By the way, don't bother voting on different projects, as only one of your votes will count! Davnel03 16:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Agree


  • Disagree


  • Leave Comments Here

New discusssion on Motorsport talk page. Davnel03 17:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panoz DP01 Image

Link to image page.
Link to image page.

I've added an image of the new Champ Car chassis, but I'm having some troubble figuring out the licencing for this. Now as a guide I've been using the WDC trophy image on the F1 article, but for a licencing, I selected "Found this somewhere". Since this is the best image I could find, I'd hate to run into copyright problems. How do I proceed from here?Mustang6172 01:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Since you copied it from someone's website, they would some how have to release it under GDFL or Creative Commons license, which is next to impossible. What you did will never stand up here in Wikipedia. You can find the policy here: Wikipedia:Image use policy. I suggest you paste the tag {{db-author}} to the image. That enables you as the author to have the image speedy deleted. It will save the discussion and wait times. I've seen it happen dozens of times. Sorry. Royalbroil T : C 03:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Aren't copyright images acceptable when public domain images are not available? I've credited the photographer, the website, and the copyright holder. I've added the {{fairusein2}} tag, and provided fair use rationale. Doesn't this meet the fair use criteria?Mustang6172 21:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen a fair use rationale image that doesn't get quickly deleted for probably a year. Here is the policy: Wikipedia:Fair use. One way is to prove that it is impossible to reproduce (like in an unreproducable event such as the late Alan Kulwicki's Polish Victory lap). This is not the case in an image of an IndyCar that someone else could take a picture of if they went to a race. I stay FAR away from fair use rationale. It's a slippery slope. Good luck! Royalbroil T : C 03:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation of IndyCar

User:PaddyM has recently completed the sizeable task of disambiguating most (all?) of the links to IndyCar. In most instances, the links were disambiguated to point to Indy Racing League or Champ Car, which seems perfectly reasonable. Some of the links to IndyCar, however, were disambiguated to point to Open wheel car. IMHO, this actually adds ambiguity - to me, the term "Indycar" implies top-level, American open-wheel racecars, whereas "Open wheel car" could mean anything from karts to Formula One, anywhere in the world. What do others think? DH85868993 02:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with what you said about open wheel being a quite ambiguous term. Would you list specific examples? Royalbroil T : C 03:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll construct a list within the next 12 hours. DH85868993 06:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I haven't had time to do a complete list, as I had hoped/planned, but here are a few examples of "IndyCar" linked to Open wheel car: Chris Amon, Bill Cantrell, Team Lotus, Swede Savage. DH85868993 00:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
There were about 200 links pointing to IndyCar, and while I am an amateur when it comes to racing, I feel as though I have learned a little bit while going through the various articles. That being true, I can only think of a few instances where I linked to Open wheel car as it seemed to be the appropriate place. In any case, I wholly support the members of this project keeping the link-list clean for future reference and will not be in the slightest offended if you find some of my disambiguations to be a mistake and want to correct them.
As an aside, there is an extreme problem of over-linking in almost every one of the articles I reviewed for the disambiguation. "IndyCar", "Champ Car", "IRL", etc., are linked excessively in each article and as an outsider looking in, I can tell you that it makes things more difficult . . . so, just something this project should keep in mind when editing their articles. Cheers, PaddyM 04:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with DH that these are all examples of incorrect disambiguous linking. I doubt that there are any links from IndyCar that should be made to Open wheel racing, as open wheel also includes Formula One, midgets, sprint cars, etc. I can see why PaddyM used a few of the links since he/she is an outsider. I think that the disambiguous should probably be done by this WikiProject or someone with a strong knowledge in racing in the future. Royalbroil T : C 04:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's a complete list of all articles where "IndyCar" is linked to Open wheel car (not necessarily all created by PaddyM). Feel free to delete or strikeout articles as they are addressed. DH85868993 03:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have completed the list. I asked DH85868993 to review my changes. Thanks for compiling the list! Royalbroil T : C 15:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 19xx in motor racing

I've recently created Category:1950 in motor racing - Category:1968 in motor racing. So, feel free to add any relevant articles or subcategories into these new categories. -- DH85868993 12:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of champ car circuits

Just to let everyone know, I have completed a list page of champ car circuits used since 1979 based the Formula one track list. We are currently lacking circuit maps/diagrams for 75% of the tracks if anyone can help out. Any other improvements are welcome as well. -- Manwithaduck 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IRL race results

We're going to need access to all IRL event statistics, both for the individual events and for reference to driver career templates; IRL should have one just as much as CART. Anyone have any websites where such info is stored? --Chr.K. 12:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, the IndyCar page seems to be adequate for the task. --Chr.K. 12:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Completed the first one, for Hornish. Since every position gives points, unlike F1, I've decided to go with green standing top ten finishers outside the gold/silver/bronze first three; as for when to use blue or purple, blue is still running, but outside top ten, and purple/retired is for anyone who falls out, whether or not they finish ahead of a running car. Hope the system works. --Chr.K. 17:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

racing-database.com has IRL results too. Also, the yearly pages for IRL are named, for example 2007 in IRL, not 2007 Indycar Series season as you currently have it. Manwithaduck 03:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think such names are very encyclopedic, but very well...adjustment made. --Chr.K. 10:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean but hey, to each their own. I was just pointing it out. Manwithaduck 03:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I actually support the use of "IRL" (or "Indy Racing League") rather than "Indycar" in the titles for the IRL season summary articles, due to the ambiguity associated with the term "Indycar". -- DH85868993
I have a strong opposition of using the term "IndyCar" in the title for IRL. I spent many hours disambiguating links to the article IndyCar. Royalbroil 13:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
And yet it is now the Indycar Series that owns the rights to the name IndyCar. --Chr.K. 15:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Completed Driver Race Results

[edit] AAA sanctioning

[edit] USAC

[edit] IRL

  1. A.J. Foyt IV
  2. Buddy Rice
  3. Dan Wheldon
  4. Danica Patrick
  5. Dario Franchitti (IRL stats)
  6. Darren Manning
  7. Ed Carpenter
  8. Hélio Castroneves
  9. Jeff Simmons
  10. Kosuke Matsuura
  11. Marco Andretti
  12. Milka Duno
  13. Sam Hornish
  14. Sarah Fisher
  15. Scott Dixon
  16. Scott Sharp
  17. Tomas Scheckter
  18. Tony Kanaan
  19. Vitor Meira

[edit] Champ Car

- Current Drivers -

  1. Alex Figge
  2. Alex Tagliani
  3. Bruno Junqueira
  4. Dan Clarke
  5. Graham Rahal
  6. Justin Wilson
  7. Katherine Legge
  8. Mario Domínguez
  9. Matt Halliday
  10. Neel Jani
  11. Oriol Servià
  12. Robert Doornbos
  13. Ryan Dalziel
  14. Sebastien Bourdais
  15. Simon Pagenaud
  16. Tristan Gommendy
  17. Will Power

- Former Drivers -

  1. A.J. Allmendinger
  2. Andrew Ranger
  3. Charles Zwolsman
  4. Cristiano da Matta
  5. Dario Franchitti (Champ Car stats)
  6. Jan Heylen
  7. Jimmy Vasser
  8. Juan Pablo Montoya
  9. Mauricio Gugelmin
  10. Nelson Philippe
  11. Nigel Mansell
  12. Ryan Briscoe
  13. Timo Glock
  14. Tom Gloy

[edit] Indycar Career Results Template Discussion

What should be the standard abbreviations for the races? RIC, for example, in my opinion should not be used for Richmond, but RIR, which is used on its own website. STP or SSP for St. Petersburg and WGL or WGI for Watkins Glen I can see as a toss-up, but I suggest using a combination of different formats, with the International Airline code for airports, of all things, being what is used most often (i.e., CHI for Chicago(land) instead of CHL)...unless that official code would make something look weird, like a FOW (apparently) for Ft. Worth, but everyone actually calling it Texas (TXS). Thoughts? --Chr.K. 11:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, RIC stands for Richmond are RIR is for Richmond International Raceway, so I guess it comes down to whether you are abbreviating the location or the track name. I don't think it matters too much which one you decide to use, but as long as there is consistency others will be able to follow & understand. Manwithaduck 03:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I recommend establishing an agreed set of race abbreviations early on. Over at WP:F1, we created a lot of results tables before reaching agreement, resulting in a significant amount of rework. We eventually reached agreement via a vote, which seemed to work quite well. -- DH85868993 10:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

On the ChampCar side, with use of the same template, I have seen green used several times for positions outside the top ten, because they are "point positions." The problem with this is that in American Open-Wheel of present time, everything is a point position, similar to NASCAR, and there could be no blue at all, in that manner of thinking. Thus, I say that green should be 4-10, and blue outside the top ten. Thoughts? --Chr.K. 16:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not so much that all positions are point-paying positions, but in Champ Car (and the Atlantics) the top 20 get points. If there were more than 20 cars in the field the would be some that didn't earn points. --Manwithaduck 04:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Very well, then the top 20 for CART getting green, or the top ten. Vote, I suppose, I in favor of the latter, the car count being what it currently is (and let's avoid any blame, things are what they are now period, this merely concerning color coding). --Chr.K. 19:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I am infavour of the current system, as seasons 1981-2003 in Champ car had the top 12 recieving points only. You are currently suggesting we change a system that works fine for 23 years of results to better suit 4 years of results. I can see your point, but it all seems to be a lot of work for not much gain. Green means points, blue means no points. Simple. --Manwithaduck 01:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Points begin to mean little when most every entry gets them. There should be some way to distinguish what is roughly the first half of the field from the second. Champ's point system realignment in 2004 messed up that differentiation. --Chr.K. 04:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I have been sitting back since I it doesn't really matter to me either way. Is the current system green = points paying finishing position? If so, then I would have a weak preference to use the current system, even if it means everyone get marked green. There are no nice criteria in the IndyCar series for a high finish (unlike NASCAR's Top 10/Top 5 and Formula One's points finishing position). Royalbroil 13:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
For a series in which every car is getting points (17 cars started Long Beach today), what's the point of everyone green? Having a 15th/16th with a green square looks, imho...questionable. --Chr.K. 21:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not disagreeing that the current system is far from ideal due to the current field size, I'm simply looking at the overall picture for the sake of continuity. As for distinguishing the first half of the field from the second, I'm not quite sure what you're geting at. I thought that having the position included in the reuslt did that for us? --Manwithaduck 06:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The reasons for the color code, what I mean. Yes, one is to distinguish between points and no points; but at the same time, making green a 4th place finish, the same color given to a 19th, kind of makes of the color being there at all...superfluous? In F1, where this template originally comes from, a points finish is truly "an accomplishment"...not so much of one when more than twice as many people start getting it. --Chr.K. 18:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
What is your opinion of a cutoff for a finish that would be an accomplishment both now and back in Champ car's best days? Unfortunately a Top 10 or Top 5 finish never had the weight that a NASCAR Top 5 or 10 finish did/does. Royalbroil 03:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
To me, top tens would be that, as back in the days of 20+ cars in a CART race, to finish in top ten was to be better than 50% of the competition. Paul Page made reference in the 1989 500, in turn, to certain cars having a good day, running in the top ten, indicating it was a mental concept back then as well. I would completely do away with the NASCARish Top 5, because open-wheel goes by podium thinking. Also of note, I would not see this, or try to trumpet it, as an "IRL way of looking at it" to impose on CART/CCWS, but an American way of scoring (as opposed to European), and something to be taken all the way back to the early days of the AAA, etc. In other words...I would make it this way for tradition, not in spite of it. --Chr.K. 20:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Porsche motorsport article

Following discussion on the Porsche talk page, Porsche in motorsport has been created. Please consider whether any AOWR-related links to Porsche need to be changed to Porsche in motorsport. -- DH85868993 14:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linking of "G-Force"

I was surprised to find that many/most instances of "G-Force" are linked to Panoz. Personally I would have thought that G-Force was worthy of its own article, or, failing that, that it would be more appropriate to link "G-Force" to Élan Motorsport Technologies rather than Panoz. Just an observation. -- DH85868993 03:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

In favor of the latter for both names, so that any other chassis they ever make could be put in there as well. --Chr.K. 20:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Standard width for driver infoboxes

There are numerous driver articles which contain multiple infoboxes, for the different series the driver has competed in. One issue is that the various driver infoboxes are different widths, which means that the infoboxes don't always "stack" neatly - contrast Olivier Gendebien (all infoboxes the same width) with Julian Bailey (different width infoboxes). The current infobox widths are:

  • 25 em: F1 driver, A1GP driver, V8 Supercar driver, WRC driver
  • 24 em: Former F1 driver, Former Champ Car driver, Former F3 driver
  • 22 em: BTCC driver, BTCC alumnus, DTM driver, Junior series driver, Pickup Truck driver, Infobox racing driver
  • 270px (which is very close to 24em): all the NASCAR driver infobox templates

I propose that we standardise the width of all driver infoboxes at 24em, to improve the visual appearance of articles containing multiple infoboxes. Please leave comments here. DH85868993 14:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Since no one has commented on this in about two weeks, I'll chime in and say I approve. --Chr.K. 10:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Following broad support at WP:MOTOR, all motorsport people infoboxes have now been changed to a standard width of 24em. -- DH85868993 12:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)