Talk:Canadian Grand Prix

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Formula One High‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.

View the task list
Discuss the project
Help out with Portal:Formula OneFormula OneWikipedia:WikiProject Formula OneTemplate:WikiProject Formula OneFormula One articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sports Car Racing

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports Car Racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sports Car Racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sports Car RacingWikipedia:WikiProject Sports Car RacingTemplate:WikiProject Sports Car RacingSports Car Racing articles

Canada: Ontario / Quebec / Sport Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian sport.

Montreal High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montreal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montreal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontrealWikipedia:WikiProject MontrealTemplate:WikiProject MontrealMontreal articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

2005 Alonso

"In 2005, World Drivers's Championship leader Fernando Alonso also came too close to this same wall, damaging his car and therefore having to retire."

Alonso didn't hit the Wall of Champions, it was some other wall around the circuit. 80.222.251.160 18:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the right hand side of the main page, along with the map, there is a field that says last race, which still says that the last race was held in 2006 and that the winner is Fernando Alonso. I looked around, but could not find the edit tab that allowed me to update these fields. Can anyone assist? Complexvanilla 20:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no specific edit link for the infobox. You'll need to use the "edit this page" tab at the top of the page. Note that I would expect someone to update the infobox sometime within the next 24 hours, as part of the usual "post-Grand Prix updates". -- DH85868993 01:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "history" section starts in 1982, .. so we need more content there, back to the actual beginnings. Camcurwood 18:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pushing the car across the finish...

I remember watching one of the races that I think was in the early 90's when the leader's car ran out of gas only a few tens of meters from the finish line. The driver got out to push the car, but collapsed. Does anyone know which race this was? It was pretty exciting. I seem to recall Ferrari was running one of their early paddle-shifting transmissions, and lost one during the race. Maury (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Circuit name

Circuit Ile Notre Dame is the same track as now they just changed the name

Indeed. But (imho) it's less consufing if both names are listed. DH85868993 (talk) 12:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Links in year by year section

Does anyone else feel that every driver/constructor/circuit in the year by year section should be linked, not just the first mention of each? Having some linked and some not, leading to some text in black and some text in blue, two colours randomly strewn all over the place, looks extremely messy. I feel that if everything was linked, making all the text the same colour the table would look much better and more aesthetically pleasing. Having some not linked doesn't provide any real benefit to the quality of the article, in fact I would say it hinders it as having to scroll to find the nearest link to to something, for example, looking at the 1982 row and wanting to read about the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, is just plain irritating. If no objections are raised in the next 24 hours I will make the change. The- (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see every row of the table linked, noting that (a) that would make this article consistent with most (all?) of the other "xxx Grand Prix" articles (e.g. French Grand Prix, British Grand Prix, Australian Grand Prix, etc) and (b) linking of every row in a table is specifically permitted/encouraged at WP:OVERLINK#Repeated links which says "In general, link only the first occurrence of an item. This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including ... tables, in which each row should be able to stand on its own." DH85868993 (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, more than 24 hours has passed, I've received support, and no objections have been raised, so I've made the change. If anyone disagrees, please discuss here. The- (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Not Held row

This has now been added and then removed by the same user 6 times by my count in the current history listing. Clearly the edit summary "table does not begin with Not held row" is not a satisfactory explanation as to why the 2009 row should not be added, especially given that the 2010 race has now been confirmed on this year's calendar. Rather than insert the row and have it once again removed, can someone please explain why the 2009 row should not be added to the table now?Vulcan's Forge (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not held is used to indicate gaps between races. 2010 race has yet to take place, that it will is not particularly relevant. No race has been held since 2008. When the 2010 race takes place, feel free to add said row. Have a look at the French Grand Prix for comparable example. --Falcadore (talk) 03:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion held and action decided upon, on this subject, but it was a while ago and finding it in the archives of WP:F1 is proving difficult. --Falcadore (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is. DH85868993 (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The French Grand Prix is not a comparable example, because it is known at this time that there will not be a French Grand Prix this year; that is exactly why the known scheduling of the Canadian Grand Prix is relevant. Barring serious incidents preventing the race, there will be one this year, so the length of the gap is already known; 2009.

That said - since this was discussed and a consensus was reached, I won't go against it (even though I don't agree with it). Thanks to DH85868993 for finding and posting the link to the discussion.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 03:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for abiding by the consensus even though you don't agree with it. DH85868993 (talk) 08:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd like to re-open this discussion. I think that it is illogical to not show the 2009 not held on the page. I don't see how it's linked to the 2010 race. Why can't it be displayed (Wiki id2 (talk) 00:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]

The reason for not having a "Not held" row for 2009 in this article is that for consistency, we would also have to add "Not held" rows to all the other races that weren't held in 2009 (Argentine Grand Prix, Austrian Grand Prix, Dutch Grand Prix, etc, etc). And they'd all need to be updated every year. That just seems like a waste of time to me. Regarding how it is linked to the 2010 race: if the 2010 race isn't held for some reason, then we would need to update "2009 Not held" to "2009-2010 Not held"; if the "Not held" row isn't there, there's no extra work to do. DH85868993 (talk) 00:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not helds are used to indicate gaps in a races history. At present no Canadian Grand Prix has been held since the 2008 race, there is no gap to indicate. When the 2010 race is run there will be a gap, but the race has yet to be run. Sometimes we just have to wait. Waiting can be painful, but we all have to wait for various things in our lives. One of the important things about adding information to Wikipedia is the information is added, once it occurs. It is against Wikipedia's aim to predect outcomes that have not yet occurred, this is covered for example in policy WP:CBALL.

If I may ask Wiki id2, what has changed since the previous two times this topic has been discussed? What is different that warrants changing the agreed consensus? --Falcadore (talk) 01:19, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because only three people participated in teh debate. A little bit more will be good. I believe the reason we haven't added Not Held to the Dutch, French or US GP is because no contract is in place. But there is one for Canada 2010. And i believe that it should be there becaused the only time it was not held was for 2009. The others don't have a contract with FOM so we don't add it. (Wiki id2 (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]

That isn't actually a change, and it's also wrong. The original discussion featured User:DH85868993, User:Apterygial, User:Readro and User:Chubbennaitor. The second added User:Vulcan's Forge and me. With the third discussion you become the seventh edittor.

Is it really so hard to wait until this year's race is run? --Falcadore (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I'll add my name to this list. We already have a huge number of items that need ongoing updating, I'm really not keen on adding any more. Precedent is important and if we add the row now there are many weeks before the race is run in which overzealous editors can head off and start creating havoc elsewhere. Just wait for the race to be run this year. Pyrop e 23:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) I've publicised the reopened discussion at WT:F1. DH85868993 (talk) 23:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where you're coming from Wiki id2, but given the implications across the whole project as pointed out by DH above I don't think we should add the 'not held' row until another race has occured. What would be the benefit of doing it? 4u1e (talk) 05:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The race wasn't held in 1745, but I'm not going to add a row for that. It should be used for gaps in history. When this year's race occurs, a gap will be created. Until then, there is no gap. Readro (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. When looking at the list, you can clearly see when the first and the last races were held, but it is not as easy to spot gaps between years in the middle of the list without the not held line. That's what it's for. John Anderson (talk) 06:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Missing fair use rationale for File:Kubica crash.jpg

File:Kubica crash.jpg, a non-free image, is used in this article but it does not have a Non-free use rationale for this article. I am also not certain whether it is acceptable to use the image both here and on 2007 Canadian Grand Prix (for which it does have a rationale). I have started a discussion about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:Kubica Crash.jpg. Please comment there rather than here. Thryduulf (talk) 13:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Canadian Grand Prix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]