HiMSport1005! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest atthe Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors likeMissvain (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered byHostBot on behalf of theTeahouse hosts 17:05, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I note that you have reverted my unlinking ofGerman,Argentine, andDutch in our articles ofNico Göhler,Kas Haverkort, andFranco Colapinto respectively. My edit summary for removing these links was "Unlinking common words and/or phrases (and repeated linking of uncommon ones) - seeWP:OVERLINK". For your information, that policy reads:

"the following are usually not linked: ... This generally includes major examples of: countries (e.g., Japan/Japanese, Brazil/Brazilian) ... nationalities and ethnicities (e.g., British, Chinese, Turkish, African-American, Nigerian"

Therefore, I will be reverting your changes.Edwardx (talk)17:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice the title says "Whatgenerally should not be linked". Normally, motorsport articles and biographies follow their own MoS. F1 driver bios usually link toFormula One drivers from {country}, while others simply link to the nationality/ethnicity page. Just minor details anyway, but there's a custom. I reverted once and won't revert anymore.MSport1005 (talk)17:52, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I can see that we haveWikipedia:WikiProject Motorsport, but cannot find anything like a specific MoS that you refer to. In any event, I cannot see howWikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking would not take precedence over any custom and practice that might have evolved for motorsport. Also, I will be removing flag icons, perMOS:INFOBOXFLAG, particularly as drivers compete on behalf of non-national teams, rather than their country.Edwardx (talk)18:26, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. Drivers represent teamsand nations. Teams also represent nations. That's why they always have a flag/country code next to their names in official documents, and why the national anthem of their country (or country represented, rather) is played on the podium. This is a strangely common misconception – you won't be the first user to try remove flag icons from driver infoboxes. This is a matter that has been discussed multiple times. Bear in mind you will be reverted, either by me or by another user.

There is a policy regarding the use of flag icons in motorsport-related articles, which obviously prevails overMOS:INFOBOXFLAG. SeeMOS:SPORTFLAG, the documentation for {{Infobox racing driver}} and itstalk page.MSport1005 (talk)19:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking atWikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons, this matter does appear to be under active discussion, so I will stop removing flags. Sorry about that.Edwardx (talk)19:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for your understanding.MSport1005 (talk)19:27, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect2021 Berlin ePrix. The discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 15#2021 Berlin ePrix until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
SSSB (talk)14:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop yourdisruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an articlecontent dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or thearticle's talk page, and seekconsensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia'sdispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of therelevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia'sAdministrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did atAbbi Pulling, you may beblocked from editing.Unexplained reverts are disruptive.Drmies (talk)01:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My revert was due to poorly-justified content removal ("doesn't meet notability because I say so", in a way) by an IP user which seemed to be making a number of unconstructive edits. I'll make sure I explain all my reverts in the future. Sorry for any inconvenience caused.MSport1005 (talk)10:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's not about inconvenience--it's about explaining edits in a collaborative environment. BTW, there isnothing "essential" aboutthe nationality parameter. The name, it seems to me, is the only thing that is essential. And I know, you pointed at the RfC--but that RfC is tremendously flawed, and the practice of putting these little lollipop flags everywhere is tremendously distracting. No one gains by deflating the value of the MOS.Drmies (talk)15:13, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I find it very disrespectful of you that you basically reverted my edithere that was meant to further explain and reference an issue that was contested in the past without contacting me about it first.Miggie H (talk)13:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My edit, as the summary explains, was a copyedit. There's no need to over-complicate the text, it was already clear ('Liechtenstein' works as an adjective too, if that's your point) and that is how these footnotes are generally written. It was not a revert in any way, and I maintained the source you provided as it is useful. I don't get the 'disrespectful' bit, nor your complaint. I don't think I need to notify every user whenever I make an edit.MSport1005 (talk)14:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that my sentence was a bit over-complicated, but I maintain that it was still concise enough for a footnote. Replacing it with the exact sentence that was there beforeis reverting,not copyediting, regardless of the fact that you kept the source that I added, and I would expect you to acknowledge that in your edit summary, if you don't feel like "notifying every user whenever you make an edit." My point had nothing to do with Liechtenstein as an adjective, but with clarifying the reasons for the Swiss flag, since it seemed to have been unclear to some users in the past, who even replaced it with the flag of Liechtenstein. Sorry for the "disrespectful" bit, I admit that it was unnecessary.Miggie H (talk)16:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I understand my edit was technically a partial revert and I probably should've specified that, apologies. As for the content of the edit, my view is that "under a Swiss licence" conveys the same meaning as "under the Swiss flag because her licence was issued in Switzerland" in considerably fewer words, and in a simpler but clear manner. I think users changing the flag was down to them thinking it was a mistake and not spotting the footnote.MSport1005 (talk)17:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your view regarding the content of my edit. I'm glad we sorted this out. Best regards.Miggie H (talk)17:30, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onKush Maini requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following adeletion discussion, atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kush Maini. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.Mccapra (talk)21:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed aspeedy deletion tag fromKush Maini, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says:Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your caseon thetalk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.SSSB (talk)21:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, my bad.MSport1005 (talk)21:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please have the courtesy to leave2021 24 Hours of Le Mans alone until I've finished my copy edit. (One of your "edits" is grammatically incorrect, by the way.) This will help to avoid edit conflicts. Thanks!Twofingered Typist (talk)13:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, feel free to let me know when you're done.MSport1005 (talk)13:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MSport1005: My c/e is complete. TfT— Precedingunsigned comment added byTwofingered Typist (talk •contribs)20:22, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will kindly ask you to revert your edits to the Deutsche Tourenwagen Masters season articles. You will note that individual team articles are not preceded by their commercial (sponsor) names as we usecommon names, and if you look at the majority of other series (for example,2021 Supercars Championship or2021 NASCAR Cup Series) teams are not referred to by commercial name – and those that do not require changing. Formula One is vastly different from other categories as the constructors are the common names, and in the past various entrants could operate a constructors' chassis. The only time this practice cannot be avoided is when a team is owned by a commercial entity (for example,WPS Racing) or if a common name cannot be sourced.MSportWiki (talk)09:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The point here is that one thing is the team (i.e. the structure that operates the cars) and another the entrant (often coloquially and rather imprecisely referred to as 'team'). The name that has to appear in the championship's article is the official name under which the entrant is registered, and that should include the title sponsor if there is one. This is why inF1 2021 we see Uralkali Haas F1 Team linking to Haas' page, inF2 2021 we see UNI-Virtuosi Racing instead of simply Virtuosi and inFIA WEC 2021 there's Alpine Elf Matmut and not just Alpine—or Signature. Similarly, also in WEC the championship's article shows Realteam Racing while the linked page is called TDS Racing, and inWTCR 2021 we distinguish Comtoyou Team Audi Sport from Comtoyou DHL Team Audi Sport (same team different entrant, much like Team Abt Sportsline and Team Abt in DTM) instead of merging them or naming them "Comtoyou (#16, #22)" and "Comtoyou (#17, #32)".
Long story short: individual team articles indeed use common names and never commercial names (unless the team actually belongs to an existing brand, likeRed Bull Racing andRowe Racing), while pages of specific championship seasons use the formal name under which each entrant competed that year.MSport1005 (talk)14:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

what is the problem? the information was outdated and I updated the points' championship. I thought only those two tables were out of date, that's why I only modified only those two. And they are still out of date. --Nordschleife 00 (talk)21:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merging the rows to just put a question mark is a bit... i don't know, weird. In any case, that's not the issue. I'm currently updating all 4 championships but your revert resulted in an edit conflict, which is quite problematic, so I'd kindly ask you to stop doing so. I can use an {{In use}} in the future if you want me to but it's not like the page is undergoing major edits anyway.MSport1005 (talk)21:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re[1] etc, please discuss atWikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Use_of_bold_and_italics_in_the_legend_for_a_table.Mitch Ames (talk)23:10, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I'm saying. Discuss before editing, and for crying out loud,stop reverting. See edit summary at[2].MSport1005 (talk)17:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re[3] (and possibly other similar) - please readMOS:HEADCAPS. "Use sentence case, not title case, ... The same applies to ... table headers". The word "Laps" is not aproper noun nor is it the start of a new sentence, so it ought not be capitalised.Mitch Ames (talk)23:25, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's very little room for discussion on this one. If it was "fastest lap" it should not be capitalised, but it's not. F/laps complicates readability and accessibility, F/Laps is preferable.MSport1005 (talk)17:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

F/laps complicates readability and accessibility — Agreed. Not because of the capitalisation, but because theslash is the wrong punctuation mark. It is "most often used to representexclusive orinclusive or..." but presumably the heading is not intended to be read as "fastest and/or lap".

F/Laps is preferable — Disagree. I suggest that "F laps" of "F. laps" is preferable (assuming that "Fastest lap" takes too much space). In both cases "laps" is not capitalised because it is not a proper noun or a new sentence. The use of the full stop in the second case denotes anabbreviation; it is not a sentence delimiter (nor is the slash, in the current usage).Mitch Ames (talk)02:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleJoshua Dufek is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Dufek (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk)15:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MSport1005. In future, please do not make copies of articles nominated for deletion in the draftspace, as you did with for exampleDraft:Alex Connor duringWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Connor. You may have seen (I did ping you initially) the discussion where I asked for advice regarding this onWikipedia talk:Requests for history merge#Appropriate action for drafts created as copy-paste moves of articles nominated for deletion, but in summary I was told I should ask you not to do this in future. Have a look atWP:EDITATAFD (which says you should not try to circumvent the result of the AfD, but instead propose draftifying, for example) andWP:COPYWITHIN (there is an issue where if the draft is recreated, the original edit history is lost) also. Thanks.A7V2 (talk)23:35, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no problem, I've given up on that practice already. Thanks for the input.MSport1005 (talk)00:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will be listingDraft:Levente Révész,Draft:Jonathan Browne (racing driver), andDraft:Alex Connor for repair atWP:Requests for history merge. You do not need to take any action, but you may see the deletions and restores in your watchlist.Flatscan (talk)05:28, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...for keeping up with the post-race penalties in F4 UAE and FRAC. "MarinanGOAT" had me laughing, didn't expect it!Jovanmilic97 (talk)20:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, no worries! I wasn't expecting a reaction to it tbh, glad you liked it!MSport1005 (talk)21:05, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can we stop RxxingAddict from adding driver numbers without any source? He seems to like edit wars and I have better things to do..H4MCHTR (talk)12:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@H4MCHTR: I really don't know but it's getting annoying... He appears to be a teenager with a lot of spare time and no concern for wikipedia's rules, who sees edit wars as a game ("ur turn lol"). But all he does is just add random driver numbers and unsourced content, nothing in the way of vandalism—so I don't see any basis on which to block him yet.MSport1005 (talk)13:07, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What I experienced (e.g. at2022 GB3 Championship) was that after some time, he starts to get angry and adds nonsense, which could be a basis to block him because of vandalism.H4MCHTR (talk)13:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I did it wasn't just because of the entry list, he's often mentioned as Max in sources:[4] (tons of other Scout articles),[5],[6] (even the team he was driving for as).Jovanmilic97 (talk)12:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After a quick revision on Google I'd tend to agree with you, but the fact that he still uses "Maksim" on social media and especially for his logo leaves me undecided. In any case, it doesn't really matter for now—if he ever gets to the point where he's eligible for a Wiki page the distinction should be clearer.MSport1005 (talk)20:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Since I saw you editing the page, thought I might as well look for advice. In the Sauber Karting Team, there are two drivers (Monza and Wiśniewski) that don't seem to be under Sauber anymore checking their social media, they aren't using their suits nor mentioning Sauber Karting Team anymore. Sauber Karting's official account only mentions Costa and David too. What should I do in this case, as there's no way to find sources about moves like these sadly? As usual, Sauber's completely outdated for their Junior teams, so it's impossible to use that. Regards,Jovanmilic97 (talk)13:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I've noticed that[7] mentions Sauber Karting Team will field only David and Costa.Jovanmilic97 (talk)15:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: Hi! Sorry, I wasn't available. I see you cleared your doubts yourself. Personally I would have removed them even without the existence of a source explicitly confirming their departure. If Sauber only talks about Costa and David when presenting their academies then we should only list Costa and David; it is enough to deduce that Monza and Wisniewski aren't with them anymore—even more so when other signs point towards it too.MSport1005 (talk)17:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think you nailed it all. Hard to track Sauber Academy, because it's so, so, so out of sight and without any consistent info, discounting Pourchaire. It's actually good wefinally got an update on their academy. But (again), they seriously need to hire someone to update their website for once...Jovanmilic97 (talk)18:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: There's a reason people call it the Pourchaire Academy! Certainly doesn't look like they're taking the single-seater side of the academy too seriously, neither mediatically nor sportively... Faria probably just paid his way in, I'd assume.MSport1005 (talk)20:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed you recently added a section to my talk page reporting an edit I made to your talk page as vandalism. I apologize for making the mistake of adding the (EastEnders) disambiguation to theLuke Browning link. However, this simply does not constitute vandalism. This is such a minor mistake it can simply be corrected and moved on from. It's not like I attempted to deface the page, mock it, make it into a joke, or put in false information. In fact, the linked page to vandalism specifically states any good-faith edit is not vandalism, as my edit was. I had recently requested (and gotten accepted) a move fromLuke Browning (racing driver) toLuke Browning, and was fixing directed links. The old page linked to a character from the show EastEnders, and I guess I accidently added back the EastEnders tag when fixing those links. Vandalism is narrowly defined as intented to "obstruct or defeat the project's purpose". It is an impossible claim to make that my edit is intended to obstruct or defeat the purpose of the page. Please do not report people for vandalism where no vandalism occurs.Debartolo2917 (talk)16:50, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. Your edits didn't strictly constitute clear-cut vandalism, which is why I only used the {{Uw-vandalism2}} warning. I didn't report you and you're not at risk of getting blocked. In this case it being one of my sandboxes was an aggravation, but mistakes can happen and we're here to fix them.MSport1005 (talk)17:53, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I've read about Rosso retiring so I went to see his wiki page, but this... seems like a notability issue case. Doesn't meetWP:GNG norWP:NMOTORSPORT and the only coverage he got was routine announcement signings. I wanted to check up on your opinion before bringing it toWP:AFD, but it looks like a clear and cut case to me. Regards,Jovanmilic97 (talk)10:45, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jovanmilic97: Hello! I actually disagree. The article itself lacks non-routine sources, but I see there are more than enough to choose from on the internet, mainly in Italian. Rosso is also a fairly accomplished driver considering his short career, despite always being in mediocre machinery. Lack of budget has hindered him but he was one of the standouts, most promising kids out of the current crop of Italian drivers, alongside the likes of Minì, Fornaroli, Antonelli, Pizzi... He evidently hasn't made it far enough to get toWP:NMOTORSPORT, but he's a GNG pass for me. I plan on working on the article as soon as I can, possibly tomorrow. Regards,MSport1005 (talk)18:22, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, knew it! I was kinda scared to start an AFD on this one, because I had a hunch on this response, and I don't really have enough free time right now to fully invest on non-straightforward discussions. I'll too look into sources myself (though I have to admit I wasn't impressed from some cursory search I've seen). Thanks for replying as always,Jovanmilic97 (talk)18:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently editedAndrea Rosso (racing driver), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageJack Doohan. Such links areusually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles.(Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)06:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect2022 Rome ePrix and has thus listed itfor discussion. This discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 10#2022 Rome ePrix until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.SSSB (talk)13:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The section atList of Formula One driver numbers is unsourced, so it's correct to tag it as such. It may be "easily verifiable". but someone should actually verify it then. Because the numbers for the practice drivers seem like they'll be hard to source after all.Joseph2302 (talk)21:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All are easily verifiable on the F1 website.MSport1005 (talk)21:43, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Formula Regional European Championship race report has beennominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Jonesey95 (talk)16:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onCasper Stevenson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following adeletion discussion, atWikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Casper_Stevenson. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.Alexandermcnabb (talk)10:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Apologies for the incorrect editing. However, I was somewhat confused as to what you meant. If they only ran at Le Mans, does that mean that the races results should not be added, despite the fact that they still ran during the season? Thanks!Nascarbball24 (talk)02:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nascarbball24: Just look at the standings at2022 FIA World Endurance Championship, you'll understand it easier. Le Mans is a special event in that it combines entries from WEC with entries from other championships. Those entries from other championships (the one-offs) are omitted in the WEC standings. So for example Alpine finished 5th in Le Mans behind the #709, but they're deemed to have finished 4th by the WEC standings because the #709 was a one-off.MSport1005 (talk)16:50, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The LMP2 class of the European Le Mans Series needs specifiying despite being the top class in terms of the cars pace because unlike the former LMP1 class of the FIA World Endurance Championship or the Pro class of the GT World Challenge Europe, the LMP2 entries in the ELMS are classified in an LMP2 championship and not an overall championship, which leaving out the LMP2 specification implies.Formula Downforce (talk)23:16, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how that argument holds itself... In WEC pre-2020 there wasn't an overall championship, it was the two prototype classes and the two GTE classes being combined to form the world championship, as well as the separate LMP2 and GTE Am (plus private LMP1 back in the day) trophy standings. If you consider prototype and GT independent, then you might as well not specify the LMP3 class when editing Le Mans Cup... Meanwhile GTWC is a completely different case because the cars between classes are the same, there's no BoP, the difference is made by the drivers. As such, it makes obvious sense to show both the overall and class results.MSport1005 (talk)08:09, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get why LMP3 in the Le Mans Cup should be specified but the LMP2 in the ELMS shouldn't?Formula Downforce (talk)18:03, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

?MSport1005 (talk)18:05, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop yourdisruptive editing.If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did atFabienne Wohlwend andList of female racing drivers, you may beblocked from editing.Unexplained reverts are disruptive.110.149.133.143 (talk)23:01, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AsUser:Formula Downforce told you in reply to the identical message you left on theirtalk page, you are the one being disruptive. We are reverting your unconstructive edits and explaining them in the edit summary, so try think of a better argument.MSport1005 (talk)19:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have seen that a few months ago they deleted Santiago Porteiro's article because it was almost empty of information. I have created it in the Spanish wikipedia (and I have completed Felix Porteiro's article), in case you want to recreate it in the English wiki by translating the spanish one.Sentoan (talk)17:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! That's a great job, I have to say. Ultimately it comes 4 months after the deletion though, and new (or old but unexplored) SIGCOV doesn't seem to have appeared, so... I don't think we have grounds to recreate it. I still believe an article on Porteiro Motorsport would be more useful.MSport1005 (talk)22:48, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in anedit war according to the reverts you have made on2022 24 Hours of Le Mans. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected tocollaborate with others, to avoid editingdisruptively, and totry to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article'stalk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at anappropriate noticeboard or seekdispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate torequest temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, youmay beblocked from editing.Miniapolis16:36, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Miniapolis: There is no edit war. I literally only reverted once. What on earth are you talking about?MSport1005 (talk)16:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yourevert things like vandalism, not good-faith edits;EnthusiastWorld37 hadrequested a copyedit in preparation for a GAN, and no one (including you)owns an article. Auto-racing articles are difficult to copyedit because they're usuallyoverlinked, overly detailed and violate guidelines such asMOS:FLAGCRUFT, and mindless reversions with uncivil edit summaries make good editors think twice about bothering with them.Miniapolis16:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is frankly inappropriate. The fact that you warned me for an edit war that hasn't even taken place was already ludicrous—but an excusable mistake. But the fact that you're now doubling down and accusing me of unconstructive editing is not acceptable.2022 24 Hours of Le Mans is an article I've had on my watchlist for almost a year, and if I see edits (whether vandalistic or good-faith) that make it worse —and more specifically, distort the meaning of certain sentences and present grammar mistakes— then I will 100% revert them. Could I have worded the edit summaries a bit differently? Possibly, but it was late at night and at least I took the time to fix thecopyedits. Feel free to explain to me how that is a "mindless revision".You revert things like vandalism, not good-faith edits? That is blatantly false and a contradiction of Wikipedia's guidelines.MSport1005 (talk)17:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful with reversions to edits likethis one. It was not vandalism like you claimed and your reversion restored quite a bit of side-by-side linking that should be avoided perWP:SEAOFBLUE. --Falcadore (talk)20:17, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. This IP user replaced official team names with made-up names. If a team is entered as (example) "Mercedes-AMG Team GetSpeed" we can not replace it with "GetSpeed Performance". It's fictional and unconstructive. In such cases,WP:SEAOFBLUE is almost inevitable. Another user has already reverted your revert of my edit, and I urge you not to revert further. I'd rather keep an eye onthis IP, as it has continued to vandalise articles in similar fashion.MSport1005 (talk)17:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is neither fictional nor unconstructive. You are just refusing to make a choice and thus link everything. You link to the team and not the sponsor. Because linking to the sponsor does not contribute to increase knowledge of the motor racing team. One of the purposes ofSEAOFBLUE is to assist with concise writing. Not only do you not have to link everything, it is preferable to only link to one article. A link like [GetSpeed Performance|Mercedes-AMG Team GetSpeed] is easily achievable and I suggest you do this going forward instead of bloating articles with links that do not assist with explaining the subject. --Falcadore (talk)02:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mercedes-AMG is not a sponsor.MSport1005 (talk)02:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to expand on my reply: no one's making this about SEAOFBLUE except you. And while I think it is fair that you bring this issue up, this IP user wasn't just changing the links. They were literally changing the text. They were replacing the actual team names with randommade-up names they come up with. That's exactly what the word fictional means. Now I'd like to know why adding fiction to Wikipedia isn't unconstructive.MSport1005 (talk)02:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I only saw your comments just now, I am new to Wikipedia editing and therefore don't know much about the format of this branch of the website. Reading the edit back again I can understand your perspective, I will remove the post and make any necessary alterations before reposting, if indeed I do repost.2001:8003:325F:9801:D946:88CE:89F2:A155 (talk)02:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MSport1005,

Whenever draftify a main space article, please useTwinkle to tag the original page for speedy deletion, CSD R2. It will help bring it to the attention of administrators so they can delete the cross-namespace redirect. Thank you.Liz^Read!Talk!02:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion! I'll have a read on how Twinkle works to use it in the future.MSport1005 (talk)14:09, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mate I was in the process of adding points jeezRxxingAddict (talk)16:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can do that in a single edit. I've encountered unupdated points standings —or even random DNFs in races that are still ongoing— way too much in the last year or so. If you do multiple edits in your sandbox it's fine, if you do them in a live article it's annoying.MSport1005 (talk)16:24, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do it separately to avoid edit conflicts, it is easier for me so my page doesn’t accidentally reset.RxxingAddict (talk)16:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you didn't have to remove my whole edit just change wurz's number?User:RxxingAddict (talk)13:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was avoiding an edit conflict.MSport1005 (talk)13:52, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I wanted to thank you for your work on this page. It has been a great help for his career. Is it possible for you to update the page to include his recent podium at the Spa 24 hours in the Pro-Am category, this is a notable result from his 2023 season. I wish to add it but my WIKI skills are non existent. Thank youGeoF3 (talk)17:18, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's best if a deletion review ofJoshua Dufek's page is started.62.165.255.150 (talk)16:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline I think? But the community will decide. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦16:40, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MSport1005,

Please reviewWP:DRAFTIFY for guidance on when it is appropriate to draftify an article. It can happen as the result of an AFD discussion but is primarily for newly created articles. You draftified an article that was several years old which is inappropriate. Please seek other solutions if an article has problems like a) work on improving the article yourself, b) tag it noting any problems that exist or c) pursue one of the accepted forms of deletion.

If you have questions about draftifying articles, please bring them tothe Teahouse. Thank you.Liz^Read!Talk!06:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it in February 2022, it's been almost two years and nothing (and I meannothing) has changed. The main contributor, who's extremely unconstructive and seems closely linked to the subject, even had the audacity to remove the tag recently. But thanks anyway. I might go for AfD when I have time.MSport1005 (talk)20:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's got nothing to with wether I like edit wars, which is a stupid thing to say anyway. I am just going by the latest one I saw.S (talk)19:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what I gather, Emely de Heus is also part of the Red Bull Junior Team alongside the Al Qubaisi sisters. So I feel Red Bull should be mentioned in the supporting teams section with a note as I did.D4R1U5 (talk)12:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere do the announcements state any of the 3 drivers is joining the Red Bull Junior Team. This isWP:OR.MSport1005 (talk)12:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then I would like to know why we mentionChloe Chambers under theHaas development program orTina Hausmann under theAston development program. Neither of their sources state they are in the respective academies.D4R1U5 (talk)12:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike Red Bull's junior team, Haas' and Aston Martin's driver development programs haven't been publicised as such for a while – Haas since the Delétraz days, Aston since the Drugovich announcement. Those tables list affiliated/development drivers, as a more general concept. I concede the section name is misleading though.MSport1005 (talk)13:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see your point.D4R1U5 (talk)13:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wurz was involved in a collision with Rifai which took him out, this was after they restarted the race?S (talk)15:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Therace 1 classification has Wurz as (what I assume is) a DNS and Abuzenadah as a DNF, but it should be the other way round. Will fix that now.MSport1005 (talk)15:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you claiming that Sportscar365 is not a good enough source, as compared to dailysportscar?

IMHO, they are both as good as each other. I see no reason why a sportscar365 source should be removed?JustCharlie99 (talk)17:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both are as good as each other – I favoured DSC in this case because S365 focused too much on Niederhauser. Also the page heavily relies on S365 articles so a bit of variety is necessary.MSport1005 (talk)17:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MSport1005!

• TheNew Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet theguidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly readthe tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on theproject talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please considerapplying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk)15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my draft pages won't even see the light of day, so what's the point? I have no idea how it's a issue, it makes the pages look ugly imo.

I also have learning difficulties so that's why I English isn't on point.

Don't take any of this the wrong way, I'm not slightly frustrated. It's not written it the rules and Wikipedia is a volunteer run website.BurningBlaze05 (talk)20:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most wikipedia pages have introduction OVER the infobox page. Or does it only apply to draft pages, if so then sorry.BurningBlaze05 (talk)20:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All BLPs have infobox over introduction. That's the only way to align them both at the top of the page. CheckBarack Obama,Bob Marley,Michael Phelps or any page you like — you'll see the order is 1) maintenance tags and templates, 2) infobox, 3) introduction. Same applies to articles of events, such asRussian invasion of Ukraine or2024 Formula One World Championship.

It's a mere aesthetical detail, but yes, the purpose of my edits was to conform your drafts to wiki style. And yes, I spent some precious time doing that. And my arm hurts!

You also don't need to apologise. At Wikipedia we all learn as we go. Take care.MSport1005 (talk)20:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I'm still not caught up with wikipedia etiquette. I can get worked up over small shit.

(I'm a Eurovision, Tennis and Geography fan too)BurningBlaze05 (talk)21:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.MSportWiki (talk)04:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave a message on the currentWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page.— Precedingunsigned comment added byDriverDatabase1 (talk •contribs)14:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MSport1005,

I wanted to let you know that I just taggedLola B07/17 for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is an unlikely search term.

If you don't want Lola B07/17 to be deleted, you cancontest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note onmy talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

DrowssapSMM02:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MSport1005

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the usernameDrowssapSMM and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirectLola B07/17, created by you. Your comments are welcome atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 31 § Lola B07/17.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with{{Re|DrowssapSMM}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

DrowssapSMM19:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some drivers last year had a three digit number and were not TCR world tour entries?S (talk)16:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know there are exceptions. Three-digit numbers were already a frequent thing in TCR Australia, and Losonczy used #264 in his part-time TCR Europe campaign. But in general numbers from 100 to 200 are reserved for TCR WT entries (apart from Taoufik, who has #212 because #112 is taken). At Marrakesh they certainly are, as it's a stand-alone event. A few of the entries are coming over from Italy or Europe and therefore take 2-digit numbers – Bennani thoughhasn't raced since WTCR 2022, and as you can tell he's sporting #125 even though his traditional #25 is free...MSport1005 (talk)17:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MSport1005,

Please do not redirect AIX Racing to PHM Racing again as they are completelyseparate entities now. Please see the talk page message I left on theAIX Racing pagehere.

Thanks!SteeledDock541 (talk)17:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that isn't accurate. First of all, this seemingly AI-written press release does nothing but promote AIX and 'We Are The Future' through presumptuous and overused adjectives. Nowhere does it state they're separate entities. If it were to be a separate entity, then in accordance to F2 and F3's regulations AIX Racing would not be allowed to rebrand and inherit PHM's entries and results. Remember Formula One in2018, when Racing Point was considered a new entrant entirely. Or GP2 Asia in2008–09, when Ocean took over BCN's assets mid-season.

A key aspect to point out here is: AIX Racing has acquired ownership ofthe team. It has not bought its entry, nor its assets, nor its operations. The differences have to be clear. It is exactly the same situation asVirtuosi Racing earlier in the year, with Invicta purchasing a majority ownership stake and renaming the F2 structure, but Virtuosi staying as is in F4.

Thirdly,Paul H Muller remains AIX's team principal andRoland Rehfeld remains its sporting director. Knowing several of the mechanics and engineers personally, I can tell you nothing's changed in the staff. A lot of them often move around between the F2/F3 team and the F4 team and will continue to do so. Your own assumption that "PHM has no involvement in the F2 and F3 program anymore" is incorrect. You can imagine why AIX Racing still holds a German licence despite AIX Investment Group being Emirati-based.

Fourthly, on your talk page message you present that"Paul Muller, PHM Racing's owner, no longer has an ownership stake in the F2 and F3 teams, thus AIX Racing is now its own separate entity." This is not based on facts or published sources, and rather constitutesWP:OR.

Lastly, it takes a lot more than this toWP:SPLIT two articles, especially with such aWP:RECENT event. Consider this: until 2022, Prema had two different entities racing in feeder series: Prema Racing and Prema Powerteam. They were still combined in the same article –Prema Powerteam (sincemoved to Prema Racing). Splits are generally highly contentious edits, so it's advised to start a discussion before being proactive and performing it yourself. For instance, there is still anongoing debate on whetherRodin Motorsport and Carlin should be split into two. And that's a far clearer case than this, as the Carlin family has no presence in Rodin anymore.

I hope everything is clear. I really appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, but please proceed with caution before making such changes. I'll now redirectAIX Racing toPHM Racing, and I urge you not to revert back. You're free tostart a splitting discussion if you so want. Thank you.MSport1005 (talk)18:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I won't revert the pages back buthere is just one of sources that mention Muller selling his stake in the team to AIX.

Also, you stating that"Knowing several of the mechanics and engineers personally, I can tell you nothing's changed in the staff. A lot of them often move around between the F2/F3 team and the F4 team and will continue to do so." is just based on your word and no real evidence to support it. PHM Racing itself bought Charouz Racing System's F2 and F3 teams, and Muller did not change any of the staff or the relocate the base in Prague. While the main team's base in is Berlin, the F2 and F3 teams still remain in Prague.SteeledDock541 (talk)20:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muller selling his ownership stake does not make AIX Racing an entirely new entity. And as I said, he remains the team principal."Muller did not change any of the staff" is categorically not true. The Charouz team managers stayed, a lot of the mechanics stayed, but the engineers are new. Some of their current F3 engineers were actually on loan at Jenzer last year.

Also note how PHM's profiles on theF2 andF3 websites have simply been renamed to AIX. Back when Charouz was taken over by PHM, their profiles ([8][9]) became unused.MSport1005 (talk)21:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, my bad. I accidentally removed the part with Stenshorne and Tsolov, because I wanted to make the Zagazeta change visible, so I wanted to move the other two paragraphs below the Zagazeta change, but I forgot to add the paragraphs later on.BryOn2205U (talk)17:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good!MSport1005 (talk)17:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FromMOS:LINKSTYLE;

General points on linking style

When possible, do not place links next to each other, to avoid appearing like a single link, as in chess tournament (chesstournament). Instead, consider rephrasing the sentence (tournament of chess), omitting one of the links (chess tournament), or using a single, more specific link as in chess tournament (chess tournament).

That directly refutes your claim there is nothing to fix. It could not be clearer. It even gives you a specific example that mirrors my editting. Now will you revert or will I? --Falcadore (talk)13:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"When possible". As I said, nowhere doesWP:SEAOFBLUE state side-by-side linking shall be avoidedat any cost. Most of your changes fall under this – a couple are avoidable, so I will revert partially.MSport1005 (talk)15:20, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you are going to use "When possible" as an excuse, despite the example showingchess tournament instead ofchesstournament? The intent is obvious. You can very very easily find a link to Ferrari from AF Corse. Don't pretend otherwise with this "at all costs" nonsense. This is hardly new, wikipedia is decades old now and you're not an inexperienced editor. --Falcadore (talk)01:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HeyMSport,

I noticed that you are the one that often moves drafts. Thank you for your work on Wikipedia, it is much appreciated. I was just wondering if you could take a look at some of my drafts to check if they are ready for mainspace? I understand that most of them will not be ready due to notability but I’m not 100 percent sure on the rules. Drivers likeMacintyre who have wins to their names in Formula Regional spring to mind? Anyway I’ll leave it for you to judge if you have the time. Thank youCertified Formula Neek (talk)08:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be keeping a close eye on Macintyre and Sharp. Thanks for the suggestion.MSport1005 (talk)14:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you!Certified Formula Neek (talk)16:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What gives?Andy Dingley (talk)23:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few weeks ago this user set about transcluding full results keys into F1 drivers' and teams' articles, contrary to the consensus which is to link them (to avoid cluttering up the pages).User:Pyrope duly reverted a number of these. I reverted the rest (all 100+ of them) today. Took me an hour. All done now.MSport1005 (talk)23:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a terrible idea. The proper way to do it is to embed them by transclusion, but to make them collapsible (we do this withlots of similar stuff).

But hey, some projects just work really hard to break things. I can't be bothered fixing it.Andy Dingley (talk)23:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for help with the edits and revision for this article. I appreciate it a lot with the rewordings, and new sources.Thfeeder (talk)12:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Appreciate the comment.MSport1005 (talk)13:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well,User:DarmaniLink explained itin their edit summary.Drmies (talk)14:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth, there were 6 additional reverted edits prior to the sockpuppet's edits, and this user restored a version by an IP to continue working from there, if the edit summary is anything to go off of. (Although he did seem to restore some of the other edits as well, which he is free to do if he finds them constructive)DarmaniLink (talk)18:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I can see the rationale behind each revert individually – even if the nature of the edits wasn't unconstructive. I was more so perplexed that (in over a year) no one realised that the subject had passed away.MSport1005 (talk)19:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MSport1005. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:2022 London ePrix, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)14:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a Commonname issue. I am in the fortunate position to know Matt. Matt is not a shortened version of Matthew. His birth certificate says "Matt". --Falcadore (talk)07:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...okay? I was adding to your edit, cause you forgot the one in the infobox. That's all. Feel free to change Matt's page too as that still says "Matthew".MSport1005 (talk)14:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was just curious where you found that the IMSA AF Corse LMP2 entry had been reverted back to just AF Corse? I can't seem to find that anywhere, is it on their Instagram or other social media?SteeledDock541 (talk)21:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Entry list posted today.MSport1005 (talk)22:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok. Thanks!SteeledDock541 (talk)19:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Lazer-kitty (talk)17:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Thanks for adding maintenance tags to articles. OnNPP we suggest that maint tags should be limited to the 3 most egregious problems in the article. e.g. In this particular article, the verifiability and original-research tags are unnecessary since the article is already tagged as having 0 sources. Happy editing! -MPGuy2824 (talk)09:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why are you continuously taking down and messing with the Invicta Racing page? All its sources are backed, and Virtousi is a concrete backbone of Invicta racing since it was purchased from them. Invicta Racing needs its own page, why do you need to take it down and mess with it? I think we can resolve this here, instead of continuously going back and forth. Cheers.AviLalo (talk)13:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We're not messing with anything. The proposed version is nowhere near Wikipedia standards, it's not well sourced, it's uncategorized – it's a mess, likeUser:Bbb23 said. Their edit was justified,you reverted leaving no edit summary so I restored it. If anInvicta Racing article is ever created, it shouldnot be a copy-paste of theVirtuosi Racing one. I suggest opening aWP:SPLITTING proposal if that's what you're looking for – but frankly, the core of the team is still Virtuosi Racing and all is covered in that article.MSport1005 (talk)13:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MSport1005,

I wanted to let you know that I just taggedWang Zhongwei for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to anamespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Wang Zhongwei to be deleted, you cancontest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note onmy talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Adamtt9 (talk)12:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced driver ratings to drivers, as you did atNick Yelloly andCem Bolukbasi. Bolukbasi can't have been a bronze previously as he's still under 30.2001:8003:268E:A800:7515:2DD0:AEB:E96F (talk)10:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bolukbasi was a bronze until 2020, as provenhere. Young rookies with no racing experience are often bronzes. Thomas Laurentwas, Phil Hansonwas, Finn Gehrsitzwas. The "under 30" rule (which is actually 27, not 30) doesn't apply.MSport1005 (talk)15:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, you need to provide public sources forall of the changes you have made; otherwise you are actively breakingWP:OR. To my knowledge, the only publicly available ratings are current ones on theFIA portal. That portal doesn't cover previous seasons, you need to be able topublicly source past lists.2001:8003:268E:A800:7515:2DD0:AEB:E96F (talk)23:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I need an IP user's guidance on this. Firstly, please review what constitutesWP:OR and what doesn't. The lists are public and easilyverifiable – the yearly changes are reported by DSC, S365 and E-I. It is generally discouraged to include citations in infoboxes – but if contested, I have no issue providing them. As I just showed.MSport1005 (talk)00:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying that you actively treat IP users with less respect than anyone else? That's one way to get reported. I also note that you claim to have industry contactshere - 1) you editing motorsport articles is possible breach ofWP:COI and 2) it would be a shame if said industry figures saw how you treat others in your hobby and acted accordingly. Have a nice day.2001:8003:268E:A800:7515:2DD0:AEB:E96F (talk)10:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please be honest. You're throwing out unfathomableWP:OR andWP:COI claims and telling me I'll get reported for merely stating I don't need your guidance. Especially when these[10][11][12] are some of your edit summaries – all in the last month. There's nicer ways to go about things on Wikipedia.MSport1005 (talk)14:05, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While the sourcing isn't so much an issue, I don't really see the purpose in adding licenses that no longer apply. It verges on a case ofWP:DIB. The purpose of the parameter is to be informative of the restrictions placed on that driver in FIA-sanctioned events, not to tell a career path. FIA licenses are a notoriously poor way of informing the reader of a driver's quality / advancement in the sport, especially when the ranges are given simply as "untilx". The parameter shouldn't be used at all for retired drivers. With regards to the formatting, "(2024–)" or similar incomplete date rangesshould never be used.MB243701:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actively trying to stayaway from retired drivers – a lot of the pros of yesteryear are now silvers or bronzes. Otherwise, I very much think it's informative and paints a better picture than just "current" licence, in the same way an article discusses a full career and not just the current season. For what it's worth, I began working on this after seeing it used onSarah Bovy's andJohnny Mowlem's pages.MSport1005 (talk)01:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The articles do not discuss careers in terms of FIA licensing, they're told in terms of series entered and their respective achievements, which are given in theprev series,titles andawards parameters.

Such a widespread change should probably be brought toWP:MOTORSPORT for consensus, especially given the controversial nature of the licensing system which potentially makes it an unreliable metric to gauge driver achievement.[13][14]MB243701:47, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You keep bringing driver achievement to the fore –"FIA licenses are a notoriously poor way of informing the reader of a driver's quality" – it's not their purpose. See, firstly, this is about FIA Categorisations – not standard FIA licences likeFIA Super Licence, ITA or ITB. These categorisations aren't pertinent to every motorsport, only sportscar racing – and they're a key part of it. They determine eligibility, drive time, they change overtime and therefore impact a driver's progress in the sport. To paint a full accurate picture of a sportscar driver's career, you need to know their categorisation. I think this little parameter is a fairly innocuous way of showing that.MSport1005 (talk)02:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "untilx" is purely because the first global, public FIA list came out in 2015 – before then, categorisations existed, but there were separate lists for FIA WEC and FIA GT3 (and they're harder to dig out). And sometimes it can be hard to pinpoint when exactly a driver entered the list.MSport1005 (talk)01:44, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I wanted to ask you about the new Genesis Magma Racing program. I was thinking of potentially started a new article or draft about Genesis Magma Racing because the new Genesis program is separate fromHyundai Motorsport. In the Hyundai Motorsport article, thesection about the new WEC program reads as if the whole operation is being run by Hyundai when sources indicate that is not the case.Cyril Abiteboul was announced as heading up the new Genesis project in conjunction with his wider Hyundai Motorsport related role. I know Genesis is a subsidiary of Hyundai, but Genesis is still its own company. So having information about Genesis Magma Racing under the Hyundai Motorsport page doesn't really make sense. I just wanted to ask you what your thoughts about it were. I feel like having these two being separate will make it easier in the long term and ultimately less confusing, but maybe that's just me.

Thanks,SteeledDock541 (talk)15:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think the most prudent option for now is to cover it inGenesis Motor#Motorsport. If the program grows enough in the future then wecould consider a split, but it'sWP:TOOSOON. Bear in mind other (more established) brands likeCadillac,Lamborghini or evenAudi don't have standalone motorsport articles.MSport1005 (talk)16:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair. Maybe in the meantime there could a racing team infobox under themotorsport section instead, similar to how there's one for each ofToyota Gazoo Racing Europe's programs. This would just be for general information with some stats about Genesis Magma since it is a factory effort from Genesis.SteeledDock541 (talk)18:07, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That could be useful, yeah.MSport1005 (talk)18:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok cool.SteeledDock541 (talk)19:51, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with you? Do you nowWP:WARring with already achieved consensushere?83.142.111.2 (talk)10:19, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was an accidental revert and I just restored your previous version. Stop abusing users on their talk pages.MSport1005 (talk)10:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.83.142.111.2 (talk)10:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear MSport1005,

I am reaching out because I would like to create a new and separate page for Invicta Racing, which now operates as an independent FIA Formula 2 team following its full acquisition by Invicta Watch Group.

I have attempted to create a page for Invicta Racing in the past, but it was taken down by yourself. I was wondering why it was removed and what steps I need to take to ensure that the Invicta Racing page is not flagged or taken down in the future.

Below are some key details supporting the justification for Invicta Racing to have its own page.

Previously known as Virtuosi Racing, the team has undergone a complete transition, with Invicta Watch Group acquiring 100% ownership and fully integrating the team into its brand portfolio. This acquisition has resulted in a distinct identity, separate leadership, and a new branding strategy. As a result, Virtuosi Racing no longer exists as a team, and Invicta Racing now operates under a new name, structure, and ownership.

To ensure accurate and up-to-date information on Wikipedia, we propose creating a dedicated Invicta Racing page that reflects these significant organizational and structural changes.

The transformation of the team has been well-documented by official press releases and news sources, confirming the ownership change and the new leadership team. Below are some key sources that verify this transition:

Official Press Release - Invicta Watch Group Acquires 100% of Invicta Racing (March 5, 2025)

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/invicta-watch-group-expands-invicta-racing-reach-with-complete-team-ownership-302393201.html?tc=eml_cleartime

This press release officially confirms the acquisition and outlines the new structure of the team.

Official Team Announcement - New Leadership Structure (March 4, 2025)

https://invictaracing.com/post/invicta-racing-announces-new-senior-leadership-structure-for-2025-season

This article details the new leadership appointments, including James Robinson as CEO & Team Principal and Geoff Spear as Team Manager, further distinguishing Invicta Racing from its previous identity as Virtuosi Racing.

Official Website – Invicta Racing

www.invictaracing.com

The team’s official website provides further details about its current drivers, operations, and branding under Invicta Watch Group.

I am happy to provide additional references and work collaboratively to ensure the Wikipedia page meets the platform’s notability and sourcing guidelines. Please let me know how best to proceed with this request.

Thank you for your time and consideration.Rytannehill17 (talk)16:19, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for reaching out. First of all, this message reads quiteWP:PROMOTIONAL – in case you're closely connected to the subject, please keepWP:COI in mind and remember articles have to beneutral andverifiable, preferably byindependent sources.

The old version of the Invicta Racing article was reverted (not initially by me) not for notability concerns, but because its content wasn't up to Wikipedia standards. It wasn't properly sourced, it was uncategorized and it branched way beyond the team's scope – refer toWP:MOS here.

That said, if you're unsure how to proceed, I'd strongly advise heading toWikipedia:Articles for creation.

However, given that Invicta is aVirtuosi Racing offshoot, the best course of action might actually be to open asplitting proposal on that article'stalk page.

I hope you found this helpful.MSport1005 (talk)17:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed yesterday there was a new edit to the invicta Racing page, but this morning it was edited again by you. As a fan I am curious to why, when on the fomrula 2 website they team debuted in Formula 1 in 2018. You can see it here.https://www.fiaformula2.com/Teams/225/Invicta-Racing And why all the history was taken down, this doesn't make sense to me because they have been with the team clearly seen in Formula 2's website. It is like any Formula 1 team that transitions to a new ownership, they still have history included on all their pages. I think this isn't right. Let me know. Thanks mate.AviLalo (talk)14:43, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not a formation of a new team it’s purchasing an existing one, the history should be included.AviLalo (talk)14:46, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• TheVirtuosi Racing article should discuss the history of Virtuosi Racing.
• TheInvicta Racing article should discuss the history of Invicta Racing.

Invicta doesn't retroactively inherit all of Virtuosi's history. It's about as simple as it gets.MSport1005 (talk)15:00, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but on Formula 2's website it states, debut year 2018. Also why does it say 'Invicta Racing traces its origins back to a title sponsorship deal' when they were never a title sponsor but it was always a purchase.AviLalo (talk)12:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They also were Invicta in 2023, why is that year deleted and not included, they were cleary Invicta Virtuosi.AviLalo (talk)12:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Invicta team profile on the F2 website overwrote Virtuosi's old one ([15]), that's why it states "debut year 2018". That's when Russian Time pulled out and Virtuosi took over independently. But Invicta was NOT involved back then.

• [16] (2023) – "The multi-year agreement between the two organizations will see Invicta becometitle partner of the team."
• [17] (2024) – "Invicta Watch Group has purchased anownership stake in Formula 2 team Virtuosi Racing, with the team's name changing to Invicta Racing from 2024."
• [18] (2025) – "The reigning FIA Formula 2 Champions, Invicta Racing, have announced that Invicta Watch Group has acquired100% ownership of the team."

It wasn't always a purchase. The first ownership stake was bought in the lead-up to 2024. Invicta Racing began in 2024. Sources back this up, and you've disregarded anddeleted them all, in total breach of Wikipedia's guidelines.MSport1005 (talk)16:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MSport1005,

I saw that there was an article split discussion in theIron Lynx article regarding the separation of Iron Lynx and Iron Dames into two separate articles. It seems that there is a pretty clear consensus to do so. Due to this, I was thinking of creating a sandbox to make it easier to separate the information from the Iron Lynx article. I'm not sure if there's a better way of doing this other than creating a draft page for Iron Dames (although that doesn't really make sense since Iron Dames already exists as a redirect). What do you think?SteeledDock541 (talk)19:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support that. Going through a draft process would also bring up trouble when moving to mainspace, so a sandbox does seem more advisable. An independent Iron Dames article has been a long time coming.MSport1005 (talk)21:03, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'm not really familiar with sandboxes, so would I have to create a user sandbox, or is there some other type of sandbox that's more appropriate?SteeledDock541 (talk)21:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, the generalWP:SB only works for quick tests and is cleared every hour, so a user sandbox will do. If your one is already in use don't worry – you don't have to overwrite it – you can create another as "sandbox2" (I have multiple myself too).MSport1005 (talk)21:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. I've created two sandboxes to separate the information. I've set the Iron Dames one to be inUser:SteeledDock541/sandbox2 and the Iron Lynx one to be inUser:SteeledDock541/sandbox3. I appreciate the help!SteeledDock541 (talk)23:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that new topic onWikiProject Motorsport from2001:8003:268E:A800:4815:64B4:791A:D066 and I really don't understand their desire to change the team format. For the sake of brevity (and because typing their IP address every time would be annoying), I will refer to them asIP guy. I already had to deal with IP guy once with this same issue when I was creating the separate Iron Dames page in mysandbox. They even went as far as filing a dispute resolution for my sandbox because they thought that we were edit warring.

I feel like incorporating what IP guy is proposing is extremely convoluted and would open a whole can of worms of confusion. One example they gave intheir response is aboutPonos Racing and the fact that multiple teams from 2021-2024 ran under thePonos Racing name. They saidTo use an example from Japanese motorsport, various teams used the title "Ponos Racing" between 2021 and 2024 as a means of advertising PONOS Corporation, however Ponos Racing was set up by the company as a separate team in 2025 – for the 2024 Super GT Series, using the entrant name "Ponos Racing" instead of the operating team "GAINER" misleads the reader into thinking that the Ponos team ran the car when it did not yet exist. It is similar to the 2024 F2 season whenVirtuosi Racing raced under theInvicta Racing banner, but thenInvicta Watch Group bought out the team this year. The thing is, all you have to do in those situations is make the text ofPonos Racing link toGainer, which is literally how it has been done for multiple years in articles. So, I really don't understand how that could be misleading or inaccurate and breakWP:ACCURACY, especially when articles will have notes citing that the team is entered asX, but the team is operated byY.

I'm just kind of frustrated by IP guy at this point and having to explain what the standard format is and has been. IP guy cited you in their topic, but you don't have to get involved in this discussion if you don't want to, and I don't really want to either. I just wanted to let you know about this discussion if you haven't already seen it.

Thanks,SteeledDock541 (talk)19:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll take a back seat too.

IP has raised a plethora of points that go way beyond the content of theIron Dames edits, way beyond what I participated in. Rally Wonk and MB2437 do a good job refuting them. I don't think the discussion requires our input for now.

Also, heading to another user's sandbox to edit war is wild. Take care!MSport1005 (talk)23:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MSport1005, I saw your modification and redirection of Andrea Dupe Page. Thank you for your help and contribution. Following your edit,I managed to contact Andrea Dupe's family through the driver's Instagram account. They confirmed that the last name was dupe (whitout accent) and not dupé, and they sent me a copy of the passport just so I can verify it. I'm not really familiar with backspace fonction , So can you cancel the redirection and remove the accent on the last name?Legend7583 (talk)23:00, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'mQwerfjkl (bot). I haveautomatically detected thatthis edit performed by you, on the page2025 Euroformula Open Championship, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• Amissing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix |Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is afalse positive, you canreport it to my operator.Thanks,Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk)14:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with thecategorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atWikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 October 21 § Category:2020 in Chilean sport by month on thecategories for discussion page. Thank you.Kaffet i halsen (talk)13:04, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSport1005 Why are you deleting subsections for Formula numbers history? Formula 1 has much longer history, then since 2014 and the had various different type of numbering! @Brankom (talk)19:59, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bring that up onthe article's talk page, not mine.MSport1005 (talk)23:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)00:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on the articleExtreme H! Your effort on this is deeply appreciated.aaronneallucas (talk)22:01, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With regards tothis edit, itis useful to have the tables sortable by driver name and car number. The tables are automatically sorted in an arbitrary fashion (by each team's lowest number), to the detriment of the reader. With long tables like this, it is difficult to quickly find the entry you are looking for; car numbers are also routinely used in official communications in lieu of a name.

It would be aWP:MOTORSPORT matter if these tables were consistent, which they are not (F1, sortable;WEC, not sortable;F2, not sortable;IndyCar, sortable;BTCC, sortable). Our high-quality articles have sortable entry lists, our low quality ones do not. It is a matter of people not taking the time to implement them in lower-ranking series. In fact, the reason why I started with the 2026 FWS article was to set a solid baseline for all season articles, as there is very little consistency between them.

AnyWP:GA reviewer worth their salt would question why there is an arbitrarily ordered, 39-row list without any navigability.MB243701:57, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about it is arbitrary. Teams and drivers within them are sorted by number. These areshort tables, max 50 rows, nothing like what you see in, say, GTWCE, or standard Wikipedia lists (whichare worth sorting, because they often present stats). This arrangement has been the practice for ages in most motorsport series and isn't"to the detriment of the reader".

Two of the series you pointed go under separate WikiProjects:Formula One andAmerican Open Wheel Racing. They do things differently; heck,IndyCar even lists "All" in the rounds column by default! Yet for them, there is a degree of sorting utility as teams share power units. Notice how F1 doesNOT sort driver number and driver names.

That's because it's pointless (to the reader) and tedious (to the editor). It's exactly what you're implementingunilaterally in 2026 FWS, from your own admission,"to set a solid baseline". This shows that you're aware it's a full-scale change concerningWP:MOTORSPORT.

Yet, upon being questioned, instead of backtracking andasking the community, you have continued to push your own POV.MSport1005 (talk)10:25, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation