User talk:Doctorvee
Formula One GP pages
[edit]Doc - see my response to your comment at Talk:Formula One. Welcome to Wikipedia! Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 03:58, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
McLaren
[edit]Hi, I noticed you jumped in pretty quick after my McLaren contribution so I was just wondering what you thought of the Johnnie Walker branding? I've only followed F1 since about 1998/99 so its hard for me to imagine a McLaren in any colours other than silver & black, should be interesting. Mark 10:56, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Mark. I've been following F1 since about 1995 / 1996, so I can (just about) remember a time when McLaren wasn't silver. The thing about the silver McLaren livery, though, is that it is a Mercedes thing, not a West thing (I can't be certain about this, but I don't think any West cigarette packaging is silver). So I'd be surprised of the new McLaren livery were to be radically different. I did see a Photoshopped version of what a Jonnie Walker McLaren livery might look like, and it had a bit of a gold tint to it. I think the changes will probably amount to little more than the word 'West' being replaced with the words 'Johnnie Walker'. Which is just as well because I think the McLarens look beautiful! doctorvee 13:07, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't consider the Mercedes influence on livery, that's a good point. I have to agree, I think it would be a shame to lose one of the most (if not the most) attractive liveries. I think I read too much into the ITV-F1 report: "The Woking team is then expected to switch to the branding and colour scheme of its other major sponsor, whisky producer Johnnie Walker."
- I notice Ron Dennis lost his cool today when Montoya hit the wall, that's a rare sight! Mark 20:16, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- So much for the hype! The "Johnnie Walker" livery is miniscule. Any idea what they're going to do with the position formerly occupied by West? I notice they ran with "Kimi" and "Juan Pablo" decals this weekend instead. Mark83 00:24, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
- Indeed. I didn't even see it at first! I reckon they might just keep the "Kimi" and "Juan Pablo" bits as they are until perhaps the end of the season, or until they get a new sponsor. Having the drivers' names on the sides of the cars and helmets is a bit of a McLaren trademark, and you can see it in other formulae, and with drivers who are simply backed by McLaren. They've changed the font now though (much nicer now in my opinion)! So perhaps they'll be like that for the forseeable future. doctorvee 01:06, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
- So much for the hype! The "Johnnie Walker" livery is miniscule. Any idea what they're going to do with the position formerly occupied by West? I notice they ran with "Kimi" and "Juan Pablo" decals this weekend instead. Mark83 00:24, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
2005 USA-Race
[edit]DNS stands for when a car does not take a a race start. Makes sense. By having Ret listed that mean the driver has actually started in that race and will count a race starts towards the driver race start tally.. The formation lap does not count as a lap at all as it is not added towards the race classification. For when does a driver 'start' a Grand Prix? To my mind he does so only if he is on the grid when the flag drops or light goes green at the final start. Should a driver have failed to compete the formation lap, for instance (as was the case with Prost at Imola in 1991), he cannot truly be said to have started the race. In the case of restarted events such as the British GP in 1986, poor Jacques Laffite certainly did start the race, but this was declared null and void and he was not presented to take the restart, which is the only one that counts. For true official race results is best to get them off www.forix.com as they receive their race results from the officials. Yes I know formula1.com is official but not 100% official in statistics. If you decide to leave it as Ret then you must give all the drivers a race start count!
I have spend hours in researching and asking many F1 statistician who are famous and know more on Grand Prix. All the statisian I have contacted and got back told me it is actually DNS not Ret, they also have mention the formula1.com is not very accurate with their race results. The formula1.com is incorrect as listing as ret instead of DNS for 2005-USA. This were the responses from the following people. Renowned F1 statistians, like David Hayhoe or Autosport's Peter Higham agree that all Michelin drivers were DNS in 2005-USA, but consider a RET if a driver didn't made a re-start, for example. That was the common view in the past - no contemporary source listed Lauda as a DNS in 1976-Germany - and they simply ignore the current "null and void" FIA rule. I totally agree to change it as DNS not Ret as they didn't take part on the first lap.
Here is a intersting fact. Button will start his 100th race start in the 2005-China race. But according to wikipedia when doing the math by adding all Button race starts it would be his 101st race start in China as Button has been listed as Ret instead of DNS for this year 2005-USA race. Does this make sense to you. That means wikipedia will have an extra race start for all the drivers who have no started in the 2005 USA race have an extra race start which wouldn't be official to the drivers stats.
I am trying to help you all to have accurate data on Formula 1 on wikipedia. I DO beleive the formula1.com site doesn't not give out accurate race classifications. As I have been involved with FORIX and autosport.com for many years as my job is to look for incorrect data on their server. Andreas 04 October 09:36
- Okay. Why don't you edit it then? I'm not the one who put 'Ret' under USGP 05. \•/ doctorvee » Talk 14:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
F1 portal featured article
[edit]The F1 portal (in which I assume you have some degree of interest, as your name is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One) is intended to have a regular rotation of a 'featured article'. I've swapped a few in and out over the last couple of months, but I think it would be better if there were more of a community attempt at deciding this, proposals, votes, that kind of thing. So - why not pop over to Portal_talk:Formula_One#Suggestions_for_Featured_Article: and make a suggestion. Ta. 4u1e 00:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Selected articles on Portal:F1
[edit]Hello again.
I dropped notes round a while back to those who have listed themselves at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One to ask for suggestions for selected articles on portal:Formula One. There was a pretty good response, both in terms of how it might work and of articles suggested. Damon Hill came out with the most support and was brought up to Good Article standard after a lot of work by Skully Collins and others before going on as the F1 portal selected article a couple of weeks ago. It is now at Featured Article Candidates as a Featured Article candidate (why not drop by and see if you can help polish it further?).
Several people who responded to the original request suggested that a monthly or bi-weekly 'Selected Article' could act as a catalyst for an improvement drive to get more articles up to a higher standard. Although it wasn't quite what I had in mind when I started, this seemed to work pretty well for the Damon Hill article, so I've drafted up a process for doing this more regularly. See Portal_talk:Formula_One/Management_of_selected_articles for details. Essentially the suggestion is that we vote for an article to improve every couple of weeks and at the end of the improvement process the article goes on the portal as the new 'Selected Article'. I'd be grateful for any comments on how this might work - I'm sure some of you are more familiar with things 'Wiki' than me - as well as your votes for the next candidate (by 16 July).
You may also want to help with the article Gilles Villeneuve, which was the next most popular after Damon Hill. The idea is to try and get it up to GA standard by 16 July and then put it on the portal as the 'Selected Article'. I hope you can help! 4u1e 15:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
[edit]Hello Doctorvee! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Chanoch Nissany - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Future of Formula One
[edit]An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Future of Formula One. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Future of Formula One. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Non-free rationale for File:Rktic.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Rktic.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)