Jump to content

Talk:George Russell (racing driver)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on George Russell (racing driver). 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) 06:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on George Russell (racing driver). 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) 02:17, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong information?

[edit]

The article says 'Russel will be the first driver in history to finish two consecutive seasons in the last position.'
How can we know who will finish in the last position while there are still 4 races, at the time I'm writing? Eric Pignet (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric Pignet: That statement was added today and I have reverted those changes. --DB1729 (talk) 18:56, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2021

[edit]

Change the picture of George Russel with this one : https://cdn.motorlat.com/administrator/uploads/13997_ektpwf9w4aal657.jpg . He , personally, requested it in a video that you can watch right here : https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2021/4/My_First_My_Last_-_Part_1__F1_drivers%27_first_cars___searching_for_themselves_online.html . Thank you! 2A02:2F07:3802:A300:20D3:59E6:1F33:E6BE (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Change the picture of George Russell, he has stated he didn't like how it looked, Reference → https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhM_yNDPWjU @2:04 Jacob7russo (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please show that the image in question is under an appropriate licence and does not have copyright restrictions which would exclude it from being usable on Wikipedia. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 20:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please be aware, everyone who is currently switching the photo around, that you can't just upload someone else's photo and pretend it's yours. You can't just grab a photo online and whack it up here. If Sir George is sensitive about his photo then I suggest he uploads his own, preferred image. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: If you can find an image that does not have any copyright restrictions, then please reopen this request with a link to the image. Sincerely, Deauthorized. (talk) 21:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2021

[edit]

George Russell recently said in a interview on the F1 YouTube account that he doesn't like the picture of him on his wikipedia page saying that "first impressions always count". All I want to do it change the picture to something more recent and flattering. I will attached the image below. Sally Sherman123 (talk) 05:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have not attached an image. If you do find a picture of him, please make sure it does not have any copyright restrictions. Sincerely, Deauthorized. (talk) 05:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Partly done: I removed the picture that Mr. Russell doesn't like. As Bretonbanquet said earlier, he can upload his own preferred image. –Fredddie™ 05:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted that. A bad picture is better than no picture.
SSSB (talk) 06:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, what do you think about this one? George_Russell_Profile.jpg--MrFran55 (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's almost certainly a copyrighted picture. I'll try to check that. --Urbanoc (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a copyvio stolen from Russell's social media: https://www.instagram.com/p/CM-N506BrZJ/. He didn't donate it to Wikipedia, and it's not even clear he's the actual copyright holder... --Urbanoc (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And as a general note, please stop being so worried by a passing-by comment by Mr. Russell. The image isn't the best, but it's neither degrading nor inaccurate. If Mr. Russell really has such a big problem with it, he can fix it by donating a better picture to the WMF (you can comment that to him if you want...). I'm starting to be troubled by this, especially because of WP:COI as some comments here have too much of a concern for what he says... --Urbanoc (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok. Yes I thought it wasn't acctually the author the one that uploaded the picture but well, I was not sure. And yes, let's wait until someone of his team upload other uncopyrighted pic or remain with this cover photo, that's acctually not bad at all as you said.--MrFran55 (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw you acted in good faith. My comment was more in a general sense, as I think it's time to let the topic die for now instead of opening a requested edit after another. We do what we can with what we have. :) --Urbanoc (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2021 (2)

[edit]

Hello, recently I watched a video on F1 YouTube. George says he does not like this Picture of him on Wikipedia. I suggest that you can change it to something else. 116.88.41.149 (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like what? We don't have a better picture. And a bad picture is better than no picture. If you have a suitable picture (see WP:IMAGES for what is suitable), please upload to commons.
SSSB (talk) 13:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2021 (3)

[edit]

Please change Profile Picture to a current better one - Thank you!

Maybe this one: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0291/2016/8035/products/WilliamsRussellTShirt@2x.jpg?v=1600942509 2603:8000:841:5FA3:B5E2:8ACC:E571:3C2F (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: WP:IMAGES. If you can find a suitable image without any copyright restrictions, then please upload it. Sincerely, Deauthorized. (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2021

[edit]
86.59.166.178 (talk) 07:11, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.
SSSB (talk) 07:29, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2021

[edit]

The picture on the page must be change with the latest picture.

George Russell himself stated that he does not like that picture as it does not accurately depicts him. Joe Annnee (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: It has to be a free image, not a nonfree image. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 20:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: - The current image is the most recent one available under a suitable licence of a usable quality. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone tried contacting George Russell to ask him to donate a photo? https://www.georgerussell63.com/contact Fences&Windows 01:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 August 2021

[edit]
No consensus just yet. There's a general theme in the discussion regarding Russell's promotion to the Mercedes works team, and it's still an open question on what his actual staying power is; he's one of the more well known "future world champions", but so are Norris and Leclerc, and there are too many unknowns right now (team performance, his own performance in a front-running car, etc) to definitively say if he really is the primary topic. It may be prudent to wait until around the mid-season break so the dust can settle and sports analysts examine whether he's still the next Schumacher, or if he's more like the next Barrichello. (non-admin closure) Sceptre (talk) 20:34, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


– Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, most of the other articles at George Russell are either stubs or differentiated by a more WP:COMMONNAME. This article's pageviews also far outweigh any other entry at George Russell, indicating this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and would likely be the desired article of any reader that searches for "George Russell". George Russell should be moved to George Russell (disambiguation) in this case. IronManCap (talk) 21:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. JamesVilla44 (talk) 23:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral comment - I have notified the jazz and horticulture Wikiprojects, as their George Russell's seem to be the most notable out of all the others on the disambiguation page, and they may not otherwise be aware of this discussion. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The current structure was introduced in 2009 prior to which the article on the jazz composer (now qualified as George Russell (composer)) was the primary topic. Prior to that point I recall being a bit uneasy that this primary position rather displaced the Irish writer Æ so accepted that the 2009 revision placed articles on a flatter playing field. While the article on this upcoming racing driver may be getting higher page views at this point (the first aspect atWP:PRIMARYTOPIC), I am unconvinced that the proposed change would meet the more long-term second aspect. I favour persisting with the status quo. AllyD (talk) 06:39, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In terms of the second qualifier (substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term), this article is currently the most developed and well-referenced of any article at George Russell with 98 refs, compared to the other most notable namesakes: George Russell (composer)'s 15 and George Russell (horticulturist)'s 10. George William Russell is already established by a more WP:COMMONNAME, and a hatnote on that article takes care of any further ambiguities. IronManCap (talk) 09:29, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You've jumbled up the long-term significance of a topic with the quality of an article. Article quality, including the number of sources, doesn't necessarily indicate anything about the significance of the topic (various people, in this instance). EddieHugh (talk) 13:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What other metric for determining the significance of a topic is there other than sources, apart from original research? An article is naturally more likely to have more sources if the topic is more significant, surely? IronManCap (talk) 14:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per AllyD. There are 21 men listed upon the George Russell disambiguation page, all of whom [for disambiguation page purposes] are considered to be named "George Russell", regardless of middle names, initials, honorifics or other characteristics. Taking those facts into consideration, it does not seem likely that the historical notability of the 23-year-old racing driver has reached such a level that it overwhelms the combined renown of the other 20 men. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 13:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The vast majority of those 20 articles are either stubs or short start class articles, with the only two exceptions being George Russell (composer) and George William Russell, both of which are shorter, less well-referenced and receive far fewer page views than this article. Just because there are a great number of George Russells does not mean one cannot be a primary topic. Another example of a clear primary topic among many is Imran Khan (disambiguation). IronManCap (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, being the Prime Minister of Pakistan makes you a myriad orders of magnitude more notable and likely to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for an article title than being a young racing driver who hasn't even won a grand prix or scored a pole position in Formula One. If Russell becomes a world champion or a prolific race-winner then there will be an argument that he is the overwhelmingly the person who people searching for George Russell are likely to be searching for outside of a brief period where he happens to be the most notable George Russell currently alive. If Russell retired tomorrow then his career would be a footnote in Formula One history and it's highly doubtful that in ten years time there would be substantially more people interested in his article than in those of other George Russells. While I believe it is likely that he will establish long-term significance over others who share his name in the coming years, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 04:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The stats (pageviews analysis) indicate that this GR caught up with GR (composer) in page views in 2017, and moved past him in 2018. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC – "A topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term." – I don't consider 3 years to be "enduring" enough to banish all other GRs to a disambig page. EddieHugh (talk) 13:44, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Having looked at other's arguments and the sourcing that has showed up, I ultimately believe that it is WP:TOOSOON to make this request. If Russell's career in F1 continues successfully I believe it's quite plausible he will become the primary topic, but right now his long term significance relative to others who share the same name has not been established, even if WP:RECENTISM makes it easy to believe that he is far more important and significant than any of them. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 17:20, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:10YEARTEST - I believe that the racing driver, even if he never drives in another Grand Prix, will be considered the primary topic still with that name in 10 years time. On a personal level, I have never even heard of the other two articles, neither of whose articles are titled "George Russell" anyway, and a headnote across the top of the racing driver's page ("for x, see y") will be sufficient here. Spa-Franks (talk) 15:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I suspect that the only reason you have heard of this George Russell is because you follow Formula One. Outside of F1 he is relativly unknown, outside of racing - even more so.

    As for the WP:10YEARTEST - do you have any evidence for this claim. In the absence of any I would take the contrary view. If today were his last race he would fade into abscurity. Only to be recalled by pundits when bringing up the write-off that was the 2021 Belgian Grand Prix.

    Let us consider Pedro de la Rosa and Vitaly Petrov - they both had one fastest lap, one podium, no poles or wins (the same as Russell). They also both did more races than Russell (116 and 58 respectivly to Russell's 51). Petrov has also had some success in a post-F1 race career. De la Rosa post-F1 career is limited to testing. De La Rosa and Petrov had viewership of 4.4k and 3.2k respectively in the last month - this is not high enough to exceed the more likely than all the other topics combined criteria, with George Russell (composer) and George Waterfield Russell haveing a combined total of ~4.2k. Add the other Russells we are looking at closer to 5k. So, for me the WP:10YEARTEST fails at this time. He only passes it if we speculate about his future success.

    I suggest we re-visit this when he has a few wins under his belt. SSSB (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Building upon SSSB's analysis, tallying the page views over the course of July 2021 (discounting August as this discussion may have skewed things somewhat) for all the articles on the George Russell disambiguation page (other than the racing driver) gives a total of 8141. This easily exceeds those of drivers like De La Rosa and Petrov, and is comparable to those of one-time Grand Prix winners like Heikki Kovalainen (9786 pageviews over July 2021), Jarno Trulli (8063 pageviews), Jean Alesi (8714 pageviews), or Olivier Panis (3621 pageviews). Even three-time Grand Prix winner Giancarlo Fisichella only had 10,225 pageviews over the course of July. I do not believe that there will be a significant argument on these grounds that this George Russell is firmly established as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC until he has won at least five Grands Prix or a World Drivers' Championship. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Echoing HumanBodyPiloter5's point in WP:RECENTISM now doesn't seem to be the time to change that, maybe possible if a long term mercedes contract is announced Uglyjumpers (talk) 15:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    A Mercedes contract does not contribute to long-term notability. Realistcally, only success will do that, or stuff he does outside of F1. SSSB (talk) 21:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Demoxica (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:RECENTISM. There is no evidence at this stage that he is the primary topic, he is a minor Formula One driver. The only reason he is getting the most pageviews is because he is the only active George Russell, not because he is the primary topic (which has a condition of ...long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value...) again, no evidence that this is the case for (at this stage) a minor racing driver.SSSB (talk) 07:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - as per Spa-Franks. Dan pixelflow (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose George is a very common aka popular name. So is Russell. No doubt wiki contributors will each have their favourite George Russell. So - which is more important - will wiki readers. The balance will shift over time. Just now there's a race at Zandvoort about to start and I hope the boy from Kings Lynn will have a great race. On recent form he most likely will, notwithstanding yesterday's little slide into the welcoming barrier. But it's not particularly encyclopaedic to send everyone looking for any one of several dozen George Russells on english language wikipedia to our man's page whether they like it or not. Most English speakers - even mother tongue English speakers - have never been to England. There's not a lot of Formula I in the USA or in India. Nor, for that matter, in Ireland. When it comes to people fluent in English as a second language, whether in China or South America, interest in FI is (1) uneven and (2) in many places more than a little "niche". Our "customers" are not ourselves. Our customers are our readers. We should try and make them feel wanted. Or....? Be well Charles01 (talk) 11:59, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm struggling to find much substance in your argument. This has nothing to do with nationality, this is to do whether this is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. IronManCap (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The argument is basically that he may be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for English readers, but won't be for readers in other parts of the world and therefore the article shouldn't be moved. SSSB (talk) 08:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Alexoperplexo (talk) 00:11, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is WP:NOTAVOTE. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Allyd and Charles01. While undoubtedly the racing driver's star is in the ascendant (he's to move to Mercedes next season), it's WP:CRYSTAL-ball gazing to assume he will be and/or will remain the primary topic. The argument that "His article has 98 references" is specious - it's really easy to add a reference from an online news report to back every addition of a new but relatively trivial sentence about a performance in a race or a comment in an interview; by contrast, some of the other Russell's - such as AE, for example - are important enough in their fields to have had multiple biographies written about them. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. We've seen this happen to Leclerc, and I have no doubt that it will happen to Russell sooner or later. Admanny (talk) 05:33, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sooner or later? So you're speculating? The situation is also completely different. In the Leclerc case there was only one other page to consider (at the time) and that article was receiving less than 20% of the page views that the other Russell articles are now. WP:OTHERSTUFF. SSSB (talk) 08:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are a number of George Russells on the list with as much if not more long-term significance as the 23-year-old who happens to be in the news at the moment. It's a common name. WP:RECENTISM personified. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:52, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article picture

[edit]

In this revision the article photo was changed from File:George Russell, Silverstone 2021 (51350033659) (cropped).jpg to 2019 Formula One tests Barcelona, Russell (33376134568) for seemingly no reason, just a summary of "Picture". The first image looks much better, is under a clear free license imported from Flickr and is more recent. I would be BOLD and change it but as this article has had so many picture changes in it's history, I would rather establish a clear consensus on what image to use so we can clearly revert any other changes. FozzieHey (talk) 17:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the first one too. SSSB (talk) 10:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move 8 July 2022

[edit]

George Russell (racing driver) → George Russell

George Russell → George Russell (disambiguation)

Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, the racing driver article with respect to usage is highly more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term. I give the example of the pageviews analysis from 1 August 2021 (the month this move was last discussed), to 4 July 2022, which continues the trend from before.[1] I think the topic could now be well considered the primary George Russell with respect to long-term significance with substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than the other George Russell articles. JamesVilla44 (talk) 09:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sceptre, @FozzieHey, @HumanBodyPiloter5, @AllyD, @EddieHugh, @SSSB, @Necrothesp, @Admanny, @Alexoperplexo, @Charles01, @Uglyjumpers, @Spa-Franks, @Bastun

JamesVilla44's tag didn't work, so I'll redo it. @Sceptre, FozzieHey, HumanBodyPiloter5, AllyD, EddieHugh, SSSB, Necrothesp, Admanny, Alexoperplexo, Charles01, Uglyjumpers, Spa-Franks, and Bastun: SSSB (talk) 10:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Pageviews Analysis". 8 July 2022. Retrieved 8 July 2022.

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2022

[edit]

Change pole positions from 0 to 1 as of the Hungarian Grand Prix qualifying. 78.71.106.52 (talk) 15:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done SSSB (talk) 15:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Family

[edit]

You should make a family tree 81.78.220.65 (talk) 22:56, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Results

[edit]

Pole position for the 2024 British Grand Prix is not highlighted. 82.76.86.85 (talk) 17:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed SSSB (talk) 17:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 season wins error

[edit]

It says that he won 3 races out of 14 in the 2024 season. It should be 2 wins out of 14 races in the 2024 season. (Fran Bosh (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC))[reply]

It is in the racing career summary section. (Fran Bosh (talk) 16:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC))[reply]
 Fixed Although it's only 1 win out of 14 now, following his disqualification from the Belgian Grand Prix. DH85868993 (talk) 06:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Season subtitles

[edit]

@Mb2437, @Lobo151, I hope we can reach a consensus on the subtitles of Russell's various seasons. Prior to Lobo151's most recent edit, the subtitles were:

2019: Rookie season // 2020: First F1 career points // 2021: Maiden F1 podium // 2022: Maiden pole position and win // 2023: N/A // 2024: Multiple victories and return to form

My own personal view is:

1) We should have descriptions for either all the seasons or none of the seasons. It is weird for 2023 to be the only season without a description. I would personally call it "2023: A difficult year" or something similar.

2) I think "Multiple victories and return to form" is fine. He had a pretty good 2022, and his 2024 has been pretty good as well (at least relative to Lewis). What's wrong/NPOV with that? Would you prefer "First multiple-victory season"? Namelessposter (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd drop "F1" from the earlier titles as they're in the already-named F1 section. I'd merge 2019 and 2020 as "2019–2020: Rookie season and maiden points finishes"; doesn't need to be split really. 2021 would be fine as "Maiden podium and departure", or simply "Maiden podium". 2022 is perfect as is. 2023 is a tricky one: "difficult" is subjective. I think the best course would be to merge 2022–2023 simply as "Maiden pole position and win", 2023 doesn't really need separating in my opinion. Obviously I agree with the "Multiple victories and return to form" framing of 2024 as I wrote it. As for this edit, its a return to his form of outscoring Hamilton, which was absent in 2023. Mb2437 (talk) 18:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with dropping "F1" for the reason you provided.
With respect to the proposed 2019-20 merge, I cautiously support it, although in that case I would be inclined to rewrite slightly to shift the narrative from Russell's gradual improvement (which works better in a season-by-season process) to Williams' struggle to score points.
I worry that the 2022 and 2023 season summaries are far too long as it is, and merging them will make the result somewhat less readable. While I'm not sure Russell needs the brevity of Lewis Hamilton's article (2022-24 being just a footnote in Hamilton's career, after all), if you have a specific idea of how you'd cut those down to size, I'd support that. Namelessposter (talk) 18:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to add that merging seasons would require trimming. Some inconsistent detail, such as the extended 2023 Australian GP analysis, can go. If we're not going to merge the 2022 and 2023 seasons, I would simply leave the 2023 title as "2023", we don't need a title for each season if nothing particularly notable happened; maybe "Winless season amid Red Bull dominance" would be more neutral, but isn't really relevant to Russell's season specifically.
This is a separate conversation really, but we don't need a whole section for his "records", which can be noted simply in the season analyses. Mb2437 (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think everything in that section is worth noting (maybe not the exact names of the other DQed race winners), but I'm agnostic about whether a section is necessary. The key is to reduce bloat in the season summaries. Namelessposter (talk) 19:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, since this discussion is not part of the original dispute re: subtitles I think I can start trimming the Williams section. Namelessposter (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
return to form I have problems with that as npov. Because was he not in form in 2023? Based on what? Only on outscoring Hamilton? Personally I think those subtitles should not contain a possible opinion. On the other point trimming is really needed and do we really need subtiles for every season? Check for example Alonso's page.Lobo151 (talk) 19:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think subtitles are necessary to address his multiple victories in 2024, and his maiden win/pole in 2022. As for "return to form", he himself branded his 2023 campaign "a complete disaster" and his 2024 campaign "one of the best". I agree that we don't need subtitles for every season, only where it's noteworthy. Mb2437 (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've put in a shift doing some cuts, but I think there's still some to do and would appreciate your thoughts. Namelessposter (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have a few problems with the chronology—season analyses should really come after the summary, although I noticed this issue earlier—besides that good job with the trimming. Mb2437 (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Define season analyses? I don't see any reason why "Russell finished 20th in the Drivers' Championship" shouldn't be at the top of every season summary, at least for seasons in the rearview mirror. Namelessposter (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's not MOS:CHRONOLOGICAL. The vast majority of driver articles follow this. Mb2437 (talk) 21:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see a number of World Champion articles starting WDC season summaries with "In 19XX, Driver won the World Championship" before going on into the summary (Schumacher, Prost, Senna, some of Lewis), but other than that, I take your point. Go ahead, edit as you like. Namelessposter (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed Schumacher's is a mess before, I'll have a look through that article and this when I can. Mb2437 (talk) 22:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the summaries are chronological now, but I'd appreciate if you could take a quick look. Namelessposter (talk) 02:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Post-race comments

[edit]

NB: Moved discussion from User:Mb2437's talk page

Hi there - I had a question about the George Russell article. Do you think that including another driver’s angry post-race comments in the Russell article counts as WP:DUE? Can the due/undue weight issue be remedied by adding additional context (my initial instinct)? Since Russell hasn’t weighed in yet, I think it’s more prudent to wait until Thursday’s media availability before commenting on what you yourself correctly described as “drama.” Namelessposter (talk) 16:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important context to the pole position, which is a notable point in his season. Verstappen's comments have been widely covered by secondary, independent sources, making headlines at the Associated Press, The Athletic, The Independent, The Guardian and Autosport, as well as BBC Sport and the official Formula One website, who are relatively selective with their output. I trimmed a lot of it, but perhaps his alleged warning to Russell can be removed as well. This could be expanded should Russell make headlines with his response on Thursday. As years go on, this could possibly be moved to a "Rivalries" section with his (now) several clashes with Verstappen, should they end up consistently fighting for wins and titles. MB2437 16:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to hold off for now. I'll admit that this all strikes me as a case of "it's been a long season," especially for Max, who's been pushed to the limit for months and just wants to go home. It is kind of funny that George is still trying, although in his case, if he finishes above Lewis next week he will be the first teammate since Button to outscore Hamilton over multiple years, which would be interesting historical trivia if nothing else. I'm not a WP:RS but I think this will all blow over. Namelessposter (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To me it's a culmination of three years of tension between Verstappen and Russell, first struck in the aftermath of AD21; they also had their run-in at Baku last season. I have noticed they're exactly tied on points as teammates, it would be a good addition if analysed by secondary sources as it would be a great point in establishing Russell's notability (if it happens, that is). MB2437 16:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now we have Motor Sport saying that the two drivers "both were agitated and a bit aggressive with each other" in the stewards' room... Namelessposter (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just going to note that we don't need exact quotes for every small detail regarding their feud, just the headline-grabbing ones such as "lost all respect". I'd say it's got enough detail in its current form, and covers all bases accurately according and concisely to both parties without giving undue weight to either side. MB2437 17:22, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the current version goes too far in sacrificing precision for concision. By including Verstappen's summary of what happened in the stewards' room but not including Russell's response (that he advocated for a penalty but didn't want to make it personal), the current version inadvertently creates an undue weight problem. Unlike yesterday, both drivers have now had a chance to weigh in, so we should include each side of the story and move on. I don't feel strongly about including Verstappen's "nitpicking" quote given that we already have material from Verstappen, but I do feel strongly that Russell's comments about the stewards' room should be included.
In addition, Russell's comment that Verstappen threatened to put him in the wall is an extraordinarily serious accusation (if "headline-grabbing" is your standard for inclusion, it's certainly done that), and warrants inclusion in some form, as does Verstappen's response that he did not use those exact words. (If I had to guess, I'd say that Verstappen said that he would do anything to overtake Russell, even if it means binning him into the wall, but obviously neither of us are in a position to verify this.) Namelessposter (talk) 17:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know what you think about the following language:
Russell again qualified on pole in Qatar after Max Verstappen was handed a grid penalty for driving unnecessarily slowly ahead of Russell, who was on an out-lap. Verstappen condemned Russell's pleas to the stewards for his penalty, stating he "lost all respect" for him; Russell responded that while he "f[ou]ght hard" in the stewards' room, he was not trying to make it personal. In addition, Verstappen warned Russell before the race that he would overtake him into turn one at any cost; Russell said he threatened to "quote, 'Put me on my f***ing head in the wall'". (Verstappen replied, "I didn't say it like that".) Ultimately, Verstappen overtook him into turn one, with Russell finishing fourth after two safety car periods. Namelessposter (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Verstappen's part of the prose doesn't dwell on the nature of Russell's pleas, simply that he made them. I think going into detail on that becomes a he-said-she-said kinda deal and doesn't add much to simply stating that Russell pleaded to the stewards; what was said in the stewards room isn't really important, it's the overreaction from both sides that's being discussed widely. The nature of his pleas are not implied or suggested in its current wording, I think it's a fair account. Either way I'd say the weighting on that matter is covered in the "cannot deal with adversity" quote, which itself implies that Russell feels Verstappen is overreacting. Verstappen's threat is already covered clearly and concisely in "warned Russell that he would overtake him into turn one at any cost"—with multiple citations—as well as Russell's wider claims of bullying; Russell's paraphrasing is, again, a he-said-she-said comment that doesn't add to what's already been verified by reliable sources. The current form is an unbiased, verifiable account of what happened without diving too deeply into their bickering over the small details. As far as an encyclopaedic account goes, I think it's solid. Perhaps "at any cost" could be rephrased, but I think its very clear to the reader what that entails without spreading a potentially false claim that Verstappen denies. I'd also note that this paragraph is currently pushing the limit of being too long, the suggested version is 121 words (his entire 2022 season was 117). MB2437 18:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little confused, since you've repeatedly referred to headlines as a basis for notability/inclusion, and Russell's "into the wall" comment made the headlines at The New York Times, The Guardian, The Race, The Telegraph, and Motor Sport. More broadly, however, I'm doubtful that anything in this unusually silly drama has been properly verified except the drivers' literal quotes and the fact that Russell admitted to asking the stewards to penalize Verstappen. The sources mainly parrot what the drivers said, which as you note is he-said-she-said. I directionally agree that there's merit to limiting the amount of drama on the Wikipedia page. Fundamentally, why is it notable that Max doesn't respect George or that George thinks Max bullies Lando et al? My view is that we have two options to summarize this matter fairly. 1) Include Max's quotes, then include George's quotes to avoid a WP:UNDUE issue. 2) Minimalism. If you prefer the minimalist route, I suggest something like this:
Russell again qualified on pole in Qatar after Max Verstappen was handed a grid penalty. Russell encouraged the stewards to penalise Verstappen for driving unnecessarily slowly ahead of him during his out-lap, for which Verstappen sharply criticised him after the race. In response, Russell accused Verstappen of threatening to shunt him into the wall at turn one if he did not give way, although Verstappen disputed the precise wording of the threat. Ultimately, Verstappen overtook Russell into turn one, with Russell finishing fourth after two safety car periods. Namelessposter (talk) 18:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The key difference is that Russell is paraphrasing, it is not an exact quote unlike Verstappen's "lost all respect" remark. I'd drop the "threat" wording as that would be editorialising. I don't think re-structuring the entire prose around Russell's quotes today would be duly weighted. Here's my suggestion with the "put him in the wall" claim:
Russell again qualified on pole in Qatar after Max Verstappen was handed a grid penalty for driving unnecessarily slowly ahead of Russell, who was on an out-lap. Verstappen condemned Russell's pleas to the stewards for his penalty, stating he "lost all respect" for him, and warned Russell that he would overtake him at any cost—Russell claimed he said he would 'put him in the wall', which Verstappen denied. Verstappen overtook him into turn one, with Russell finishing fourth after two safety car periods.
The "Prior to the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Russell remarked that Verstappen "cannot deal with adversity", accusing him of bullying." can probably go for now, and be re-introduced should this require a whole rivalry section. MB2437 19:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Acceptable to me as long as we replace "pleas" (which is also editorialising) with "advocacy". Namelessposter (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree we should remove "pleas", I'd suggest "appeals" as a more appropriate term. MB2437 19:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, will implement shortly. Would you mind if I moved this discussion to the GR talk page for housekeeping? Namelessposter (talk) 19:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course! MB2437 20:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Namelessposter (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_Russell_(racing_driver)&oldid=1261434310"