Talk:2010 Formula One World Championship
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Mars3 in topic Table of championship leaders - Add or delete
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2010 Formula One World Championship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 60 days  |
 | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A news item involving 2010 Formula One World Championship was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 November 2010. |  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Index
|
||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
Table of championship leaders - Add or delete edit
This is getting a bit childish by now but I don't quite get why the table of championship leaders by race keeps getting deleted. It was there when I consulted the page some months ago and I'm sure it was there a long time, I think the best thing is to keep it there and *then* argue for their deletion, not deleting it and then argue for its inclusion. I don't think it falls under WP:NOTSTAT since it's not just a random statistic, it's intrinsecal to the season, it's useful aditional information and it deserves its place. If not, then why have all the words there, just put the final table with the championship standings, the calendar and be done with it. DGT15 (talk) 23:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
- The information is important, it being presented in a table is not. The information should really be presented in the season report's prose. I will note that the report also already has a graph showing the championship leader. Adding a table for it is not necessary.Tvx1 12:46, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
- I think it should stay as it shows the progression of the season in a concise way. Also you know the etiquette User:Tvx1 the table needs to stay until this discussion is resolved. If their is a consensus for its removal then it can be removed. I’d rather not ask this page to be locked but I will if needed. user:DSQ —Preceding undated comment added 20:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- How is it any more concise than the already existing chart or prose? The length of time that the chart existed on the article has no influence on this discussion of its usefulness, we have changed the season articles in many ways over the years.
- I think it should stay as it shows the progression of the season in a concise way. Also you know the etiquette User:Tvx1 the table needs to stay until this discussion is resolved. If their is a consensus for its removal then it can be removed. I’d rather not ask this page to be locked but I will if needed. user:DSQ —Preceding undated comment added 20:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- There is zero need for anything to stay on or off the article until this dispute is settled. Locking the article also does not address the discussion. The359 (Talk) 22:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- The representation of this data in a table is far more succinct. If it causes problems in the existing format we can think about condensing it but this type of data is not conducive to a written explanation. User:Mars3 —Preceding undated comment added 09:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
- There is zero need for anything to stay on or off the article until this dispute is settled. Locking the article also does not address the discussion. The359 (Talk) 22:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)