Talk:2013 World Rally Championship
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 4 August 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
.jpg){kind=small} | World Rally Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Calendar
So, I think the current calendar table is not very good. First of all, there's no reason to have one event in two rows. The empty flagicon template is also a bit odd. Also the surface shouldn't be bolded. Here's my version: (all the info may not be correct yet!)
Yes, it includes the flags of Sardinia, Catalonia and Wales (all autonomous places) to get a better idea where the rally is actually located.
For me, its ok. But We should wait 'till the final supporting calendar its defined. MNSZ (talk) 02:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of the WRC2, 3 and J columns, largely because they'll have blank fields, which never looks good.
- The reason why the calendar is spread across two rows is so that the support events can be fit into a single cell when they are added. It was felt that having individual columns for each put too much focus on the support categories, and that putting them next to each other (instead of aligning them vertically) skewed the table too much. As for the blank flagicon template, it appears that it is being used as a crude indent. Prisonermonkeys (talk)
- I think you're right about the support categories, we can actually not include them at all in the main calendar. Instead we could reorder the whole page. First we have all info for the whole championship (calendar, changes, entries, standings etc.) and at the bottom of the page we have all the info for the support categories, first WRC2 (calendar, entries, standings) then WRC3 (with same stuff) and finally JWRC (with same stuff). Like in MotoGP page. Anti-lag (talk) 10:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- To divide the calendar into the diferent sections, will be repetitive. One Calendar it's ok. I like the columns for supporting category becouse shows what round is for the supporting category, but it isn't really important. Besides that, the table fells more organized that the actual one (even without the support columns). MNSZ (talk) 14:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- So why did someone remove this new version when I added it? It still has the all same info in much neater space. I think you can see the info from this new table much more easier than the current one. If someone disagrees, you can tell it here. Anti-lag (talk) 09:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Because you didn't have a consensus for a change. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 04:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, can you tell me how to do that? Couldn't find myself. Anti-lag (talk) 12:42, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
- I think now that it's confirmed that there will be no specific calendar for WRC-2 and WRC-3, we can drop the last columns and use this one. MNSZ (talk) 14:28, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Driver Changes
In the aftermath of Ford's withdrawal from the WRC, someone insists on removing Ott Tanak from the M-Sport entry on the driver table. I have explained to this person several times that they need sources to support this, and yet they have repeatedly ignored me.
The source supplied makes it clear that Tanak has a contract to drive for M-Sport in 2013. In the absence of any source contradicting this, this is what we have to include in the article. Please do not remove it until you can find an alternate source.
To the person who is removing this content from the article, if you continue to do so despite being told that you need sources, it will be considered vandalism and your edits will be reverted on sight. You may even be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 21:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- I am glad you have saved me the time of posting this here. I have supplied you with sources backing my edits up but you have deleted them. I have copied them from our chat and have pasted them below for everyone to see. My sources are conclusive and more recent than yours proving without doubt that my edits are correct. Since our chat I have another top level source for you, again proving I am 100% correct and have included this below. I have even picked out the key words once again as you seem to find this difficult to understand.
- RE Andreas Mikkelsen - "Capito has suggested that a third could be entered for Andreas Mikkelsen" also in the words of Andreas Mikkelsen himself!... "The deal is not signed but it's very, very close"
the words in bold prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that Mikkelsen is not confirmed for next season. Also this is a more reliable third-party source reporting on an interview with the VW Motorsport boss and is a more recent story than that currently on the page. http://www.wrc.com/news/archive/capito-dont-expect-too-much-too-soon/?fid=17803 and the new source... http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/104064/
- RE Ott Tanak "Of the potential candidates, current semi-works M-Sport drivers Evgeny Novikov and Ott Tanak..." the words in bold prove Tanak is not confirmed for next season. Also this is a more reliable third-party source reporting on an interview with the M-Sport boss and is a more recent story than the on currently on the page - please update.
http://www.wrc.com/news/archive/wilson-you-can-win-with-kids/?fid=17775
- I'm sure everyone who can speak English will agree these back me up 110% but if you still insist I have not provided sources I will gladly send you links to additional websites running the stories. I am sure I can find them in other languages too if that will make it sink in for you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grant1990 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, look. I see you've done half a job.
- First of all, your sources are better this time than they were last time. That's the good news.
- Now for the bad: if you want to edit that information out, then you still need to supply a source. We had a source that clearly stated that Ott Tanak had a contract to drive for M-Sport in 2013. You have removed that information, but you haven't given a reference to support it. Do I have to draw this in crayon for you? Anything and everything that you add to or subtract from the article must have a reliable source to support it. If you can't be bothered doing that, then I suggest you stop editing Wikipedia. A job isn't worth doing unless you do it properly. Between coming to me sprouting some nonsense about how it's your job to know what is happening in the WRC, waving around a bunch of unreliable sources, failing to reference the article properly once you do, posting aggressive messages on my talk page to try and keep your edits intact, and failing to redirect anyone to this talk page who might object to your edits, I'd say you've made a real mess of things. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 05:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
If you wanted me to reference the blanks you should've said, it sounded like you were saying I hadn't supplied any. By the way these are the exact same sources as before, just with one additional one. I've said before that I just want this to be accurate and have even agreed with a lot of stuff you have done on here in the past mate. As for unreliable sources what is wrong with Autosport and WRC? I find it hard to see how you can get more reliable than that. Where would you like me to add the source for Mikkelsen as there is not a TBA row? If you feel I have been aggressive towards you please feel free to report me to Wikipedia. For the record, I am a motoring and motorsport journalist specialising in rallying which is my passion, this is how I am so up to date on what is happening. Hopefully this is all sorted now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grant1990 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- I've made it pretty clear in the past that if you want to make any changes to the article, then you need to add references.
- And your sources are not the same as the first ones you supplied. Firstly, you referenced Paddock Talk, which is not reliable, and then you linked to The Saudi Gazette, whose articles had clearly been written off the Paddock Talk ones, thereby failing the reliability check by proxy.
- I don't care if you're a motorsport journalist. It doesn't count for anything, because we only have your word for that - and on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Your edits need to comply with Wikipedia policies. We can't just take your word for it that you're a journalist and make edits based on that and that alone, because we can't prove those are true.
- I suggest you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's editing policies before you continue making changes to any articles - and that you have a think about how you present yourself around here. Demanding that people acknowledge your contributions when you provide no sources and don't edit properly won't get you anywhere. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I have provided sources and have always provided sources to you personally, I was unaware you had to reference blanks which is the only reason they were not added to this page. If you have a look at our talk page you will see I agreed with you about the PaddockTalk and Saudi sources which were in reference to a totally unrelated edit to the one this talk page is in regards to so I do not see why you felt the need to mention that here. I agreed to wait until they are published by more mainstream authors. I have never made any references based on my profession and have always supplied at least one online article to you personally to back up my claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grant1990 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Thierry Neuville
- Just a quick point, I'm not convinced Thierry Neuville has been confirmed for Citroen yet. Have found this article on Autosport showing he is still in the running for the M-Sport seat. I believe Citroen are yet to confirm anything definite with Neuville as obviously they have more drivers this season with Loeb being part time and the arrival of Al-Qassimi. What do people think?
- "Other possible drivers include Evgeny Novikov, Thierry Neuville and Ott Tanak."
- http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/104656
Team and Drivers Entries
Wouldn't be better to divide the Teams and Drivers entries to show the different rules in witch they apply?
- Manufacture Teams - WRC Teams - Mayor Entries not registered to score point.
What do you think? MNSZ (talk) 01:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
| Manufacturer entries | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Constructor | Team | Drivers | Co-drivers |
| Citroën (Citroën DS3 WRC) |
 Citroën World Rally Team
|
 Khalid Al Qassimi
|
 TBA
|
 Mikko Hirvonen
|
Jarmo Lehtinen
| ||
 Dani Sordo
|
Carlos del Barrio
| ||
| Volkswagen (Volkswagen Polo R WRC) |
 Volkswagen Motorsport
|
Jari-Matti Latvala
|
Miikka Anttila
|
| Sébastien Ogier
|
Julien Ingrassia
| ||
| WRC Teams Entries | |||
| Citroën (Citroën DS3 WRC) |
Citroën Junior World Rally Team
|
 Thierry Neuville
|
TBA
|
| Ford (Ford Fiesta RS WRC) |
 Qatar M-Sport World Rally Team
|
 Nasser Al-Attiyah
|
 Giovanni Bernacchini
|
| TBA
|
TBA
| ||
| TBA
|
TBA
| ||
| Major entries not registered to score manufacturers points | |||
| Citroën (Citroën DS3 WRC) |
Citroën World Rally Team
|
Sébastien Loeb
|
 Daniel Elena
|
| Hyundai (Hyundai i20 WRC) |
TBA
|
TBA
|
TBA
|
| TBA
|
TBA
| ||
| Mini (Mini John Cooper Works WRC) |
Prodrive WRC Team
|
TBA
|
TBA
|
| TBA
|
TBA
| ||
When there are more teams, would be looking better. MNSZ (talk) 14:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- I would suggest waiting until more teams are confirmed to have joined the championship. That way, we will know where best to place some of the existing ones (I suspect Loeb will be run out of the Citroen WRT team, for instance, but I can't prove it) and if breaking the table up into three segments is needed.
- Hopefully next year we will be able to include a numbers column again. This year's table was going to be a mess with it. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- Good idea to put Manufacturer Teams ahead of WRC Teams, because they are definately more significant and should be first in the table. I have also solution for including the car numbers to the table
- ===Manufacturer entries===
Team Constructor Car Tyre No. Driver Co-driver Rounds Manufacturer Teams Citroën World Rally Team
Citroën Citroën DS3 WRC M 2 Mikko Hirvonen
Jarmo Lehtinen
0 3 Dani Sordo
Carlos del Barrio
0 Volkswagen Motorsport
Volkswagen Volkswagen Polo R WRC M 4 Sébastien Ogier
Julien Ingrassia
0 5 Jari-Matti Latvala
Miikka Anttila
0 WRC Teams Qatar M-Sport World Rally Team
Ford Ford Fiesta RS WRC M 6 
Mads Østberg
Jonas Andersson
0 7 TBA
TBA
0 Citroën Junior World Rally Team
Citroën Citroën DS3 WRC M 8 Thierry Neuville
Nicolas Gilsoul
0
- ===Other major entries===
Constructor Car Team Tyre Driver Co-driver Rounds Citroën Citroën DS3 WRC Citroën World Rally Team
M Sébastien Loeb
Daniel Elena
0 Khalid Al Qassimi
Marshall Clarke
0 Ford Ford Fiesta RS WRC Qatar M-Sport World Rally Team
M Nasser Al-Attiyah
Giovanni Bernacchini
0
- The numbers I have made up from my own mind but you get my idea. What do you think? Anti-lag (talk) 09:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think that solution will be necessary. Part of the reason why we cut the numbers from this year's table was because the VW Motorsport Skodas used six or seven numbers over the course of the year, and also because a lot of the privately-entered drivers used the same numbers as each other in different rounds. Hopefully, the new system with WRC-2, -3 and J will sort that out. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- The numbers I have made up from my own mind but you get my idea. What do you think? Anti-lag (talk) 09:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Very good idea in my opinion. It looks a lot clearer this way (first example) and is more informative. It would be good to have the number back but it does get awkward when they constantly change so maybe just have numbers displayed for the ones that are set for the season (manufacturer & WRC Team entries)?