Talk:Lewis Hamilton/Archive 2

message: A quote about LH from Michael Schumacher has been removed several times recently, but without any explanation.  Please could somebody explain what is wrong with this section of the article? Its seems perfectly reasonable to me.  Regards, Lynbarn 09:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see anything wrong with it, it's a relevant point from that time in his career. It might be considered invalid if it did not represent the normal view of Hamilton at that point, but as far as I am aware he has always been highly thought of. I can't think of any particular criticisms of him made before Villeneuve's rather odd comments earlier this year. I've asked the anon again to discuss it here. 4u1e 10:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxed Quote 

message: While it is of some interest that he's of Afro-Caribbean ancestry, his record in Formula 1 makes two mentions of it including the opening sentence. I have removed it from there and included non-duplicate information at the end of that section. --AJKGordon 14:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm having a lot of difficulty with the whole thing to be honest. First of all, we should not be describing him as black anyway. As his mother is white, it would be as accurate to describe him as white! Secondly, so what? Is it really that notable? Since when does the concentration of melanin in a person's skin have an effect on his skills as a racing driver? However it can be argued that it is notable in a cultural context. So I am changing those two sentences slightly to refer to geographical and cultural descent ("of African or Caribbean descent") rather than him being black, which is both inaccurate and irrelevant. --AJKGordon 08:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: (Although I'm sure someone will say that we're all ultimately of African descent!) --AJKGordon 08:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Did it months ago - see the archive!) 4u1e 09:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I take your point AJKGordon, but I think it's possibly not accurate to describe Hamilton as the first F1 driver/winner "of African or Caribbean descent". Consider that 1979 World Champion Jody Scheckter is South African. I haven't checked, but I think it's pretty likely that both his parents are South African. Wouldn't that make Scheckter "of African descent"? (Note: it's a serious question: I'm not trying to be "clever"). I'd probably agree that Hamilton is the first F1 driver/winner "of Afro-Caribbean descent". And of course the other problem is that many of the sources we are referencing just describe him as "black". So it's hard to know where to draw the line between technical accuracy, and faithfulness to the references. DH85868993 08:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm good point. This is where political correctness (which I must admit I'm trying to follow) is so limiting. The trouble is Afro-Caribbean doesn't mean African or Caribbean. It means people from the Caribbean of African descent. At least it does in a British context - the American definition might be different. What would be more accurate would be "of black African or Caribbean descent". But God knows what the PC would say to that! It's the mixing of "race" (a term which is controversial) and "culture" that causes the problem in my POV. I will try it and see if it causes any editing. --AJKGordon 09:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I have also consolidated the two relevant sentences into one to avoid duplicating the rather clumsy phrase. I think it reads OK now and doesn't dwell on colour or "race". I hope everyone agrees. --AJKGordon 09:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I doubt we will ever find an entirely satisfactory way of dealing with this - even not mentioning race/colour/culture at all will be wrong to some - so this is probably about the best we can achieve. Regards, Lynbarn 10:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: In any case, he's not the first black driver in the sport. Narain Karthikeyan is black is he not? Readro 21:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why I so dislike racial definitions. While many people wouldn't describe him as black because that normally means some sort of sub-Saharan African ancestry, his skin is probably darker than that of Hamilton. But so what!!! Irrelevant!! But it's notable culturally in the same way as the notability of Tiger Woods and the Williams sisters. Personally I don't get it but we need to put something in there that covers it. --AJKGordon 08:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe that telling where his father is from and the picture in the bio are plenty fine for aleviating any confusion. He cannoy be called black, and how can anyone prove no one else in formula one ever had any afro-caribean blood?68.187.117.71 09:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This particular discussion has moved further down the talk page. -- Scjessey 12:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colour 

message: Although this is recorded as a fact, is this of sufficient notability to be included? It appears to have been a one-off incident, and one in which Lewis wasn't involved in any case!  Regards, Lynbarn 15:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say delete it, he didn't actually do anything, so it's non-notable. 4u1e 16:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  School expulsion 

message: This talk page was getting a bit long so I have archived discussions from before July (ish). They can be found at Talk:Lewis Hamilton/Archive 1. Cheers. QmunkE 11:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Archived

message: As we've now apparently agreed this is reliable (above) does anyone object to me restoring this link to the external links section?
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-information/whos-who/whos-who-h/lewis-hamilton/
:There are at least three problems with the above website. Firstly, WP:EL guidelines recommend against linking to "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." Secondly, WP:EL recommends against linking to "personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority". Finally, the images on that site have unverifiable copyright status, and we may not link to sites that may be infringing on the creator's copyright. --Muchness 09:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  To take your points in order: (1) I don't see how F1Fanatic.co.uk any less a unique resource than the driversdb link already in there? (2) Many other F1 articles on Wikipedia link to F1Fanatic, and its veracity has been supported in the discussion above. Given that, I feel we should recognise it as an authority. I am also unsure of the term 'personal web page' (as discussed on the archive talk page) as F1Fanatic has multiple contributors. (3) The copyright status of the images is not unverifiable - you could try asking the author: http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/credits-and-contacts/contact-f1fanatic 193.243.130.14 07:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External link - F1F biography

message: "Hamilton suffered criticism from former driver and 1997 champion Jacques Villeneuve, who accused him of "nitty gritty" at the start of Grands Prix" Can you accuse someone of nitty gritty? I don't think this makes sense. 193.243.130.14 08:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't - it's been changed from "chopping", presumably by some moron who believes the urban myth that "nitty gritty" has something to do with the slave trade. I've changed it back. -- Ian Dalziel 11:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nitty gritty 

message: The last sentence:
"FIA outlawed receiving the aid of cranes and tow trucks shortly afterward."
is followed by a cite to a Times Online article.  Apart from the fact that the link points to the wrong section (which is a seperate issue), the article doesn't support this sentence at all.  The article writer only speculates that this might happen, it certainitely doesn't state conclusively that it has happened:
"On this subject I hear the FIA is going to - or may already have - outlawed the practice of drivers getting cranes to lift them back onto the track, as happened at the Nurburgring to Lewis, something which prompted a most enjoyable rules debate on this blog."
I reckon the sentence should be taken out, as it adds nothing to the article and is not supported by the link (unless someone could actually cite it)?  If you object, please put back in with a proper cite to a respected site that actually can back it up with an actual statement. Smoothy 21:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence re: receiving the aid of cranes 

message: Like in Fernando Alonso article I think this article is a bit unbalanced too. In my opinion it gives too much importance about the Junior Formulas which in my opinion are not as notable as F1. Finally I don't know if it has been discussed but I think that after the end of the season it is necessary to reduce the narration of the season and leave only a brief section here. if not when Hamilton is 30 or 35 years old the article will have may be 50 pages :) --GillesV 01:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Balanced/Unbalanced. May be too long?=

message: www.lewishamiltonf1site.com
Thanks
:No, it doesn't exist. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 15:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This link spamming of what I am assuming is this guys personal fan site here and on the Fernando Alonso page is very quickly running out of 'Good Faith'. Is there any way we can stop it? Narson 16:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Warn the user with anyone of these below --Childzy ¤ Talk 22:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Please add this new website in the external links

message: Earlier, user 88.110.173.236 made these edits - basically removing the transcript of Hamilton and Dennis' alleged heated conversation during Hungarian Grand Prix qualifying. Whilst I disagree with the edits themselves (we already clarify further down that the comments have been disputed by McLaren and Hamilton, and have an Autosport article that says the actual events may have been exaggerated by the media) I think its important to discuss whether we need a full transcript of the conversation, especially when its veracity has been called into question. Maybe these events could be summarised more succinctly without having to quote a conversation that may or may not have happened. Hammer Raccoon 23:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are sources both "confirming" and "denying" the precise content then I don't believe said content should be directly quoted. I do however think the alleged conversation is significant whether the f-word was exchanged or not, and therefore should be covered in the article. Additionally I believe that despite the denial, mention of the strong language is justified. 82.13.151.148 19:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know Ron Dennis said they spoke firmly to each other. There couldn't be a clearer way of saying strong language was used.
Dennis would not reveal what transpired between himself and Hamilton over the radio as the session ended, but said: "I was quite firm on the radio, and he was reasonably firm back. We were both firm with each other. But that's life."
 From . --Don Speekingleesh 19:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm with you on the hearsay point, but as for it being offensive...Wikipedia is not censored. (See also: WP:PROFANITY) Majin Izlude talk 16:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, here is the section of the article verbatim:
--Diniz (talk) 14:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Much appreciated Diniz. Hammer Raccoon 13:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, regardless of what we believe, I think we have reason to sanction the removal of the transcript, as there is enough here to cast doubt on whether the conversation panned out exactly as initially reported. The whole section will need to be worked on though - simply removing it won't do. I'll probably work on it tomorrow unless someone else fancies doing it. Hammer Raccoon 21:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

text: This still needs to be rectified, there is no point including a supposedly fake transcript which has been refuted by all those involved
129.12.228.63 08:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with the other editors on this who think the transcript should be removed. WP:PROFANITY clearly states that Wikipedia should not offend as long as the omission of the offensive content doesn't remove accuracy or relevance. As the veracity of the quote is disputed and can be perfectly well described using inoffensive language without direct quotes, then it should be removed and replaced with a suitable description of the alleged altercation. AJKGordon 17:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Quite apart from the profanity aspect, which doesn't bother me particularly, there is strong doubt as to whether the exchange took place or not. It has in fact been denied by all parties, in which case it shouldn't be there anyway. Bretonbanquet 18:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with AJKGordon - "a suitable description of the alleged altercation". I can't remember exactly but I think the clarification that McLaren issued said something like 'things were said that Lewis regrets' or the equivalent of. i.e. he didn't swear but he was very rude. Mark83 18:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "F word" comments 

message: The bit about "...thus making Hamilton the youngest ever driver to secure an F1 contract" seems inaccurate. Firstly, he signed alongside Wesley Graves, who is younger than Hamilton. Secondly, surely McLaren could have released him at some point along the way (as they did with Graves) so he hadn't actually secured an F1 contract as such, it was just an option. According to The Guardian Weekend supplement, 28 July 2007, Graves and Hamilton were splashed all over the newspapers when they signed to McLaren in 1998, so I'm surprised this isn't mentioned in the article. --Jameboy 21:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would question the accuracy of The Guardian Weekend supplement's claim, insofar as if they were "splashed all over" the papers this would be quite easy to verify. That said I agree the youngest driver to secure an F1 contract is contentious. My understanding is that he's the youngest driver to be signed onto such a deal who has gone on to F1 as a direct result of that deal. I agree that this doesn't necessarily constitute the same thing. BeL1EveR 08:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "youngest ever driver to secure an F1 contract" 

message: I'm also sure that his middle name is 'Carl' (lots of newspaper profiles refer to his having been named after American athlete Carl Lewis). Unfortunately I can't find any official and authoritative source as yet. Sam Blacketer 22:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep an eye out I guess. You'd presume it's out there. BeL1EveR 22:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle name 

message: I've requested that this page be semi protected until the end of the season due to the high level of vandalism. I'd like to request it indefinately but believe a 3 week request was far more likely to be accepted, and to be nearly as effective. BeL1EveR 22:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if this off topic for Talk, but something odd: some of the recent vandalism edits trying to add words like 'ugly' 'immoral' and 'bad mannered' are coming from Mercedes-Benz Spain. (IP 195.235.246.33) Epsilonpilot 07:28, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Not to be a bit nosy but what did happen with all the vandalism herE??? RIPped 04:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a heated season and, well, apparantly people so love Alonso or Kimi that, obviously, vandalising Lewis' page will clearly cause their man to win. Plus apparantly one of the anti-Hamilton brigade of editors was doing so on his work computer which was at a mercedes building (They seem to hint at a dealership) to perform some of the editing, resulting in Mercedes issuing a reminder of its net policy to its staff. I've requested (and got) the Alonso page semi-protected for the end of the season due to the vandalism there too. I guess some people take a sport too seriously (And we all know that due to some random fluke Button will win. Honest. Why are you laughing?) Narson 04:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi protection

message: Sorry to create a section a minute here, but what happened to his karting days? That's nearly ten years of his life, and is surely more relevant than the fact that his dad is an IT consultant, or that he went to school with Ashley Young. BeL1EveR 22:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Karting gone?

message: *"Mercedes hunts for Wikipedia vandal" Mark83 15:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Telegraph too --h2g2bob (talk) 02:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism of this article mentioned @ autosport.com 

message: I did not find the above mentioned vandalized version of the page in the pagehistory, so I'm pretty sure, it was deleted - What is one of the most disgusting method of Wikipedia. (If not, I'm sorry.) --Ezsaias 06:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh god...more of this Alonso fanboi junk. Why don't fans of both Alonso and hmailton suck it up. No driver /ever/ has a season taht goes perfect with no incidents, no retirements and constant podiums. Massivly complex machinery breaks sometimes. Or a human makes an error. As for the FIA, I seriously doubt Mosley has any love for Hamilton, considering his background. Narson 10:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Max Mosely could probably sue you for libel there, if you're implying that he is a racist, simply because his parents were.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinUK (talk • contribs) 09:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting from page history 

message: Lois Hamilton has been observed in Hamilton, Ontario dating a Hugo Boss employee. Hugo Boss is one of his main sponsors.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.62.97 (talk) 19:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just juvenile vandalism. Along the lines of 'tee hee, I said penis on the internet'. Narson 09:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lois Hamilton Romance 

message: Someone has vandalised already, first line.
R
Roz P 89 17:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  VANDALISM - PLEASE LOCK! 

message: Is that really necessary? Does it not belong more appropriately to the Wiki Page on the 2007 Brazilian Grand Prix
AjAxed 04:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be in with some kind of caveat making sure its clear that its disputed in nature. Narson 14:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Especially since Hamilton's family apparently deny he has ever talked to the paper (see here). How likely is it that he made this unique revelation only to a  French-language Canadian paper, rather than a British or Brazilian one? Sadly, newspapers are often quite happy to make things up, and even when they have got some basis for claims tend not to report accurately. If you think I'm being excessively cynical, try to remember the last occasion you saw a newspaper article on something you really know about yourself from first hand experience (therefore not F1 for most of us). Were you impressed with the accuracy of the reporting? I never have been. 4u1e 20:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Et voila!. And having read M. Domenjoz's biography of Michael Schumacher, I ain't all that impressed with his journalistic skills anyway. 4u1e 14:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the analysis/review of Brazilian GP in this article?