Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorsport/Formula E

Race abbreviations

There seem to be a few different race abbreviations on the various team pages. Originally we had it by country (China = CHN, Germany = GER), but I came across a different version on the Venturi page that was listed by cities (Beijing = BEI, Berlin = BER). What are people's thoughts on this style? I'm personally in favor of it for two reasons. 1) It's more accurate, as races are named after the city that they are held in, rather than by country (Like Formula 1) and 2) There are two races scheduled for the US right now, meaning that we have to be more specific anyways. In my opinion, the only downside is that it's harder to make a three letter abbreviation for some cities. Currently Punta del Este = PDE and Buenos Aires = BNA. Maybe I'm being too picky, but when I first saw them, I was confused as to what they stood for. Thoughts? JohnMcButts (talk) 20:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should approximate the names of the races, not geographic location. However priority should be on prose not tabulation, otherwise the wikiproject itself has no point. --Falcadore (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am in favour of what is currently on the Venturi GP page. Holdenman05 (talk) 23:07, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DAMS

Noticing persistant efforts to split Formula E racing teams into seperate articles from the parent racing team. There should be some form of justification doing this, especially as newly created forks have no sources. --Falcadore (talk) 09:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed as well that Virgin Racing (Formula E) is still separate from the F1 team when apart from a few personnel changes it's really the same team. What should we do about this? Holdenman05 (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DAMS, Andretti, Dragon, and ABT definitely should not have their own pages, as they are all currently active in another series. Virgin is a tricky one, because the F1 team was bought by Marussia, and both were run by Manor Motorsports. The question is then, is it the same entity? It does have the backing of Virgin, and Alex Tai was a team principle for both the F1 and FE programs. China Racing has a similar problem, in that the team principle, Yu Liu, was involved with the A1GP, Superleague Formula, and possibly a FIA GT1 World Championship team. From what I can tell, all of these operations were actually run by different teams.

A1GP (Team Astromega)
Superleague (Atech Grand Prix/Reid Motorsport)
GT1 (Selleslagh Racing Teamin 2011) and (Mühlner Motorsport in 2012)
Formula E (Campos Racing)

I don't have a good answer for how to deal with teams being operated by other teams. JohnMcButts (talk) 22:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What if we renamed the F1 team article 'Marussia Virgin Racing'? That was its last name before it was taken over by Marussia. Then this one could become the sole 'Virgin Racing'. Holdenman05 (talk) 06:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season in driver infoboxes

Is there any reason the Formula E driver infoboxes (see Nicolas Prost as an example) say "2015 Formula E" rather than 2014-15 Formula E"? DH85868993 (talk) 10:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that the racing driver infobox doesn't like multi-year series. Looks like anything listed in the "current series" field is listed as the current calender year, rather than by when the series starts and ends. JohnMcButts (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I should have realised that. IMO the automatic display of the current year is an undesirable feature of {{Infobox racing driver}} - consider that if a driver was competing in a particular series in 2013, if nobody has updated their infobox since (unlikely but possible), it would now suggest they are competing in the 2015 series, whether that's true or not. I might raise the topic for discusson at Template talk:Infobox racing driver. DH85868993 (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a good idea. I'm sure there are more than a few drivers who's pages haven't been updated in some time. It could be very confusing for a reader to see that a driver is still competing in some series when the rest of the article makes no mention of it. I wonder if a "years active" (similar to past F1 drivers) would be more appropriate. JohnMcButts (talk) 06:09, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a discussion at Template_talk:Infobox_racing_driver#Current_series_year. DH85868993 (talk) 11:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015-16 season page

I have raised a question on the talk page for the recently created 2015–16 Formula E season page regarding the list of teams and drivers. I would appreciate any thoughts you might have. JohnMcButts (talk) 04:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Berlin ePrix GA nomination

Hi everyone! A while ago, I nominated 2015 Berlin ePrix for GA. So far, no one has done the review, apparently this is not really a topic a lot of the usual reviewers are interested in. Maybe one of you is interested in doing it? Cheers, Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:28, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Zwerg Nase: Give it some more time. WP:GAN has a huge backlog, and it could take even longer to get a review; heck, when I nominated 2013 Mudsummer Classic for GA, I had to wait a whole five months to get a review. Just be patient. Zappa 24 Mati 15:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know it does, I am currently working on that by competing in the GA Cup ;) I just thought it might also be fun for one of you to do it :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Racing

I have moved the Formula E team article to DS Virgin Racing but I want to seek some sort of consensus on a long-term future for this article, mainly regarding whether it joins the Formula One article or remains separate. My ideal is for a re-written Virgin Racing article to incorporate both the F1 and FE ventures. Holdenman05 (talk) 08:15, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Race abbreviations: Part 2 (Season 4 onwards)

Beginning with the 2017–18 season, Formula E started using official abbreviations for the races. Therefore, it should not be our task to decide how we name these races, but we should just opt to use the official abbreviations.

As of right now (May 12, 2019; 16:15 CEST), I've edited the main pages of the 2017-18 and 2018-19 seasons and used the official abbreviations. They could be found here by opening documents related to championship standings. (example)

The usage of the official abbrevations should apply to all pages regarding both Formula E and Jaguar I-Pace eTrophy which include race results from season 2017–18 onwards.

I'm also suggesting to keep the "Wikipedia abbreviations" for the first three seasons. When it comes to complete results of the specific teams (those who competed prior to Season 4), the abbreviations would then differ between seasons (or should we retrospectively add the official abbreviations to races where they weren't a thing?; for example using 'MCO' for the 2015 and 2017 races instead of 'MON')

It's quite a lot of pages and I'm not sure wheter I'll be doing that myself, but I wanted to bring this thing up since I think these changes need to be made. What I especially want to suggest is that if someone does edit these pages with the official abbreviations, these edits should not be reverted. Since FE actually uses abbreviations, we should use the same ones.

14 May 2019 Update

DH85868993 (talk) has suggested to use the same abbreviations for all seasons, which I think makes sense. Therefore, the official abbreviations will be used even for those races where these weren't a thing yet (for example 'MCO' for all Monaco races). I already did update some of the pages, but only used the official abbreviations for seasons 2017–18 and 2018–19. Now I'll need to change the team pages again to add these abbreviations and use them for all seasons, plus update the main season pages for the seasons 2014–15 and 2016–17 which included the Monaco and/or Marrakesh races, which if I remember correctly, are the only two races that have official abbreviations since Season 4, but different "Wikipedia" abbreviations. I'll be excluding the driver profiles, which I think for now is pretty unimportant as people likely visit the season and team pages instead.

Looks like we've found consensus and a way to implement the official abbreviations in Wikipedia, which makes me happy.

I don't mind whether we use the "official" abbreviations, or the pre-existing "Wikipedia" abbreviations, but I think we should use the same abbreviations for all seasons. I think casual readers will find it confusing if the 2017 Monaco race is abbreviated as "MON" but the 2019 race is abbreviated as "MCO" in the same table (e.g. Jaguar_Racing#Complete_Formula_E_results). DH85868993 (talk) 23:55, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I'll go ahead and use the official abbreviations for all seasons. I think the only races concerned are Marrakesh and Monaco anyway. I'll further update this page once I'm done. For now, I'll only be editing the season and team pages, excluding driver profiles. CrashmasterSOAD (talk) 18:10, 14 May 2019 (CEST)

OK. I'll update the driver articles some time in the next few days. DH85868993 (talk) 21:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the driver articles and documented the abbreviations here for future reference. Please let me know of any I got wrong. Regarding changes to the driver articles, the only abbreviations I noticed that were wrong (and hence the only ones I changed) were MON-->MCO, MAR-->MKR and MOS-->MSC. Please let me know of any I missed and I'll fix them. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Official/formal race titles

We currently have some inconsistency regarding the use of "ePrix" or "E-Prix" for the "official/formal" names of the 2018/19 season races in the lead and infobox of the race report articles:

The 2018 Ad Diriyah ePrix (formally the 2018 Saudia Ad Diriyah E-Prix)...
The 2019 Marrakesh ePrix (formally the 2019 ABB FIA Formula E Marrakesh ePrix)...
The 2019 Santiago ePrix (formally the 2019 ABB FIA Formula E Antofagasta Minerals Santiago ePrix)...
The 2019 Mexico City ePrix (formally the 2019 CBMM Niobium Mexico City ePrix)...
The 2019 Hong Kong ePrix (formally the 2019 FIA Formula E HKT Hong Kong ePrix for sponsorship purposes)...
The 2019 Sanya ePrix (formally the 2019 FWD Sanya E-Prix for sponsorship purposes)...
The 2019 Rome ePrix (formally the 2019 GEOX Rome E-Prix)...
The 2019 Paris ePrix (formally the 2019 ABB FIA Formula E Paris ePrix)...

Obviously task force convention is to use "ePrix" for article titles, etc, but I notice that the Formula E website uses "E-Prix" for the race names, e.g. [1][2][3] So my question is: which format should we use for the "official" names in the 2018/19 race report articles: "ePrix" or "E-Prix"? I don't particularly mind which one we use, but I think we use the same format for all the races. Note that I'm not suggesting changing the article titles, I'm just talking about the "official/formal" name as quoted in the lead and infobox. DH85868993 (talk) 11:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Monaco ePrix polesitter

We currently have some inconsistency regarding the polesitter at the 2019 Monaco ePrix:

2019 Monaco ePrix, Jean-Éric Vergne, Oliver Rowland, Techeetah and DAMS identify Vergne as the polesitter
List of Formula E driver records and 2018–19 Formula E season identify Rowland as the polesitter

(for those who are unaware, Rowland set the fastest time in qualifying and was awarded the 3 points but was subject to a 3-place grid penalty, so Vergne actually started the race from pole position). Are we able to reach consensus on who the polesitter was, so I can make all the articles consistent? For reference, the FIA Formula E website identifies Vergne as the polesitter. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 11:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No takers? OK then, if there are no objections within the next 12 hours, I'll update List of Formula E driver records and 2018–19 Formula E season to reflect Vergne as the polesitter, per what it says at the FIA Formula E website. (I'm keen to get this resolved before the articles are updated again for this weekend's race). DH85868993 (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated List of Formula E driver records and 2018–19 Formula E season to reflect Vergne as the polesitter. I believe all the articles are now consistent. DH85868993 (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a bit late to chime in (especially seeing as the season article has already been reverted), but officially Rowland was credited with the pole position award ([4], [5]) so I can only presume it counts towards his record. It's different to the F1 ruling of you can't have any penalties to be properly credited with the pole (like Schumi Monaco 2012...). 🇮🇪 TheChrisD {💬|✏️} 20:55, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the links provided by TheChrisD, I'm now inclined to believe that Wikipedia should show Rowland as the polesitter in Monaco. I note that for the similar situation at the 2014 Putrajaya ePrix, where Prost set the fastest time in qualifying but was subject to a 10-place grid penalty, all our articles show Prost as the polesitter (however, on that occasion, the race result at the Formula E website also identified him as the polesitter, as opposed to this year's Monaco race, where the race result at the Formula E website identified Vergne, not Rowland, as the polesitter). If there are no objections within the next 24 hours, I'll update all the relevant articles to list Rowland as the polesitter. DH85868993 (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've updated all 7 articles listed above to identify Rowland as the polesitter in Monaco. DH85868993 (talk) 13:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nissan e.dams team name

We currently have some inconsistency regarding how we're writing the name of the Nissan e.dams team. In 2018–19 Formula E season, Oliver Rowland and Sébastien Buemi, it's written as "Nissan e.dams" (which is how the Formula E website writes it), but in all the 2018/19 race report articles, it's written as "e.dams−Nissan" or "e.Dams−Nissan". Does anyone object to me changing all the "e.dams−Nissan"s and "e.Dams-Nissan"s to "Nissan e.dams"? DH85868993 (talk) 13:52, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think whoever has been doing the race report tables has been styling the team name as it would appear on an F1 race report article - where it goes Constructor-Powertrain. I agree with changing to the official team name as listed in the Formula E race classification documents; but if doing so, change all affected teams to their proper name: so Techeetah-DS to DS Techeetah, Andretti-BMW to BMW i Andretti etc. 🇮🇪 TheChrisD {💬|✏️} 18:01, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New tables for race reports (suggesting them for future use in the upcoming season)

I think the result tables currently present in race reports are pretty basic and are lacking especially in the qualifying part. Still, whoever is doing them at least deserves the credit for putting them up there, so it's not like I want to critise anyone for making them in the present state as that takes time too.

I'm, however, trying to suggest a new and hopefully improved concept for these, which should bring following improvements:

Group draw table (not currently present in race reports)
New qualifying table (now sortable; separate columns for Group qualifying and Super pole stages)
New race table (pretty much without changes, but now sortable)

Season 6 is scheduled to award another extra point for drivers who were fastest in Group qualifying stage. We need tables that include both set of times instead of a combined table, which automatically rewrites the fastest time in Group qualifying, as that driver made it to Super pole.

My concept tables are based on the 2019 Swiss ePrix and can be seen on my Sandbox page.

I'm putting it there for discussion first, since I don't want to edit articles without any agreement made on it beforehand. Plus, there's generally nothing wrong with the current approach, I just think it could be made better and we can start with that in November when Season 6 is scheduled to begin, which gives us plenty of time to come up with a good design.

CrashmasterSOAD (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2019 (CEST)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to get Document URLs from the new FE Results Page for citation purposes

Hi everyone, previously when we used to cite our sources for FE results, we used to visit the results page, which had been hosted on the website of Al kamel Systems. Now, the results page is hosted on FE's own website, which doesn't allow "right click to new tab/window" to obtain the URL for the documents. After playing around with the site for a while, I found that to get the link to the selected document, you have to:

1. Select the document you want, to bring it onto the PDF Viewer
2. F12 to bring up developer tools (For Firefox/Chrome/Edge, I'm not sure about Safari, as I do not use a Mac)
3. CTRL+F to bring up Find
4. Enter the following into the find box: pdfjs-viewer
5. Located near pdfjs-viewer, and in the highlighted section of code is src=".." , which will contain your document link

Cheers, and I hope this helps out future editors with their citations when writing/editing Formula E articles! TJSRX (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Double dagger from points columns

Thie double dagger is clutter, does not add any value to the table. Items such as double dagger should give to a reason for being there the points column makes its inclusion superfluous. A reason of "needed for screen readers" has been given. This is though negated by the fact that the addition makes it much more difficult if not outright confusing and inaccessible for others. The use of accessibility aids should not reduce or remove ease of accessibility for the general user. The addition is very confusing, there should be a reason as to why it is included, for which there is no unique reason given. It is therefore confusing as it makes the columns difficult to distinguish the dagger from the number. This reduces the ability to access the article. The inclusion is also not standard across all Formula E results tables and is not included as far as I can see generally on results tables for motorsports articles. I have seen this symbol used for indicating half points have been awarded for a race. The double dagger should be completely removed except to indicate something unique happening, such as only half points being awarded for a race. Sparkle1 (talk) 11:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give an example of where the double dagger is used and why? -mattbuck (Talk) 12:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An example of the inclusion of double daggers: 2018 Rome ePrix#Race classification--Sparkle1 (talk) 14:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that does seem pointless. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to the double daggers in the race reports, I agree with you. They are completely redundant. People using screen readers are already conveyed who scored points since who scored which amount of points is already read out by the screen reader.T v x1 13:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed.--Sparkle1 (talk) 14:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AFD notice

The article 2020 Formula E rookie test has been nominated for deletion. Interested parties are welcome to contribute to the discussion here. MWright96 (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Event results misinformation

The event results tables in your articles contain misinformation. The 'team' column contains a chassis-power unit link when teams do not construct their own chassis, Spark Racing Technology does. Therefore, event tables need to be altered to look like this:

Pos.	No.	Driver	Team	Constructor	Laps	Time/Retired	Grid	Points
1	17	Nyck de Vries	Mercedes-EQ Formula E Team	Spark–Mercedes	32	46:44.765	1	25+3+1¹
2	48	Edoardo Mortara	ROKiT Venturi Racing	Spark–Mercedes	32	+4.119	4	18
3	4	Robin Frijns	Envision Virgin Racing	Spark–Audi	32	+4.822	24	15
4	33	René Rast	Audi Sport ABT Schaeffler Formula E Team	Spark–Audi	32	+4.852	3	12+1²

The 2014–15 season however does not require this change as all teams used the same chassis, a Spark–Renault. 2001:8003:3C2F:5F00:EC5A:F413:54B8:9243 (talk) 07:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "misinformation", you just consider the current layout misleading. I think the current format is acceptable, the jargon isn't correct, but it is easily understandable. Otherwise, we have a team column, and an engine column. If they all use the same chassis, then we don't need to list the chassis. But, I also don't see the point in listing the full team name - the common name is fine (i.e. just "Mercedes")
SSSB (talk) 08:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

São Paulo

I started the Draft:São Paulo ePrix due the recent contract signing. I'm thinking about submitting it to review when FIA confirms it next month. Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Monaco ePrix

Hi all, I made a draft for the Monaco ePrix this afternoon. I'm not entirely sure how to send it to mainspace as I'm a fairly new editor. Would it be possible to publish this article? TiA! MaxLikesStuff (talk) 17:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]