Template talk:Infobox racing driver: Difference between revisions

There are are a range of "...driver" infoboxes in :Category:Motor racing infoboxes. I suggest these be merged, into this one (note also discussion with WikiProject Motorsport). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, specifically for Template:WRC driver; rally drivers don't do "laps" or "poles". Other circuit racing infoboxes could possibly be merged, but unless the proposed overall template is cut down to remove such "performance" info (and I think you'll have a hard job getting that past Wikipedia:WikiProject Formula One, for example), then it's not quite compatible with rallying. --DeLarge 16:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Trying to shoe-horn all of the named box templates into one will result in a complete mess. How do you distinguish historical details from current? How do you differentiate records from different series/championships etc? And why do we need so much biographical detail? If you carry on down that route you may as well replace the whole page with one massive infobox. I can see where you thinking has come from, I just think it's misguided. Far better to have the flexibility of multiple boxes, and as they are all pretty much formatted to a standard they stack quite neatly (see John Surtees). Also, maintaining separate boxes allows each specialist Wikiproject to adjust their box details, without risking damage to something not linked to their field of knowlege. (As an F1/sportscar fan I haven't got a clue about NASCAR for example...) Pyrope 13:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What we can and should have is:

• A general template for current and retired racing drivers, such as this work in progress, which will eventually become Template:Infobox racing driver or its replacement
• An F1-specific template to cover its unique details, for current and retired drivers
• A WRC template for the informational requirements of rallying
• A complete NASCAR infobox (again, for its specific needs)

That's four templates, which is absolutely the bare minimum that is practical for all the subjects and WikiProjects involved. This merger proposal and the addition of unwanted biographical fields appears to have been born from a lack of understanding of motorsport. Adrian M. H. 12:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the standard biography fields (date & place of birth and death; spouse, parents, children). All are optional. Please feel free to change the running order, if preferred. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just as an aside, why include biographical details in the infobox at all? I don't see its relevance to the driver's career (which is what the infobox is summing up), and it may cause issues with those who enforce WP:BLP zealously. --DeLarge 16:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Curious, why would it "cause issues" with enforcers of WP:BLP? And BTW, I oppose inclusion of parents and children. I agree with inclusion of birth and death dates. I am undecided on inclusion of spouse. ZueJay (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying I agree with the way BLP is enforced, I'm simply saying that biographical details not directly pertinent to a person's notability are often removed. In fact, there's a specific policy against exact birth dates being included at all for those of "borderline notability". And not every article is someone of the stature of Sébastien Loeb or Michael Schumacher. Lots of motorsports participants are notable in their field, but don't get great mainstream coverage; see Gwyndaf Evans or Derek Ringer, two pages I've authored. Heard of either of them? They're both internationally successful at what they do, yet they both need day jobs to support themselves.

For the record, I'm not saying we should remove the info entirely, but where a person's birth/death dates are recorded in the lead sentence anyway (as they should be), having them in the infobox seems superfluous to me. --DeLarge 17:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In light of all that explanation, the "spouse" field should not be included either. ZueJay (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this be Template:Infobox Racing driver? --thedemonhog talk • edits 22:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does it really matter? This is navel gazing for Wiki Editors, and will have no effect on how Joe/Jane Public will use the encyclopedia. Pyrope 13:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not work well for deceased drivers as if you want to enter stats for the last series they drove in, it forces you to treat that series as a "current series" and then displays the current year, even though they are dead. See Paul Dana for how I tried to deal with it as best as possible. -Drdisque 05:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the need for such stats if they are retired, dead, or otherwise not competing. There are other templates for the series that warrant such levels of detail. Adrian M. H. 09:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, there is no other template for that series. That's why I'm using this one. If a field exists for this template, it should work whether the driver is deceased or not. If your template doesn't work with deceased drivers, then it shouldn't even be built to handle such information. -Drdisque 16:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But you should not need to have such detailed data in an infobox for a retired or dead driver. Only the F1 project insists on that level of minutiae. And if you think there are no templates for American single seater drivers, you should take a look at {{Former Champ Car driver}}. Adrian M. H. 16:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is NOT a Champ Car driver. Also, why should retired or dead drivers have less detail than active ones? I see no reason why they shouldn't other than your personal opinion. -Drdisque 17:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, for Christ's sake. I know that he was an IRL driver. I am not stupid, OK? As far as template usage is concerned, you will see that the former Champ Car driver template makes no specific reference to the series and could easily by called "former American single-seater series driver". It was obviously intended to be interchangeable between Champ Car and the IRL. How could it not be, given that they were one and the same until a decade ago?

Past participations are clearly less relevant to the affected championship, so our motorsport templates below F1 level have traditionally not included such levels of detail. But, just to keep you happy, I have done what you could easily have done yourself - the template now has fields for a last series, for which you need to follow the pro-forma guides in the documentation. Adrian M. H. 17:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Striking part of my comment, which was a bit too harsh. Adrian M. H. 21:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you. I really appreciate your work on this template and I care about this so much because I feel that a powerful yet generic infobox template can really improve the quality of WP:Motorsport articles and greatly increase infobox usage. -Drdisque 21:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the appreciation, Drdisque. My effort to improve it really grew out of the recent merge proposal and a desire to avoid a complete merger, but it needed doing anyway, to be honest. Adrian M. H. 21:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this template can be applied that well to all the pre-WDC racers. Grand Prix racing then consisted of the majority of races not being part of any championship, so how should that be conveyed using this template? Readro 16:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is it done currently, and with what template? Adrian M. H. 17:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no template. I've been using the Infobox Biography template. Readro 13:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could add some fields to this (quite easy, though I'm not sure where to place them) and make another pro-forma, but perhaps it might be better if you were to make a dedicated template, depending on exactly what data you want to include and how you want to display it. I'm not aiming for total rationalisation of all the driver infobox templates, because that would just be counter-productive. Adrian M. H. 14:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's an ambiguoug field on the template "Best finish". I know this template says it should be the championship finish; however, some users will think it is the best race finish (ie - checkered?). I don't know how to solve this, yet, but perhaps others know of a way to make this more clear? ZueJay (talk) 00:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing really ambiguous about that for anyone who is knowledgeable about motorsport, and all they need to do is look at the pro-forma. It is the same term that we have always used, partly because of the width constraints. I tend to check each new use of the template to look out for formatting issues anyway, so I am likely to spot any mistakes. Adrian M. H. 10:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How many users are knowledgeable about this kind of thing? Not enough. Truly, this encyclopedia is best used as a tool for understaning the basics (and finding references for more detail), users should not be expected to have prior knowledge of a subject before entering any single article. Thus, for those users without the proper background, this is an ambiguous field. I know there's a Championship, but the first time I saw this field, I thought for sure it was highest single race finish, not championship - and I'm certainly not any sort of lame-brain. Your response does not bring resolution to the problem, it just tells me why ya'll have never changed it. Can this perhaps be a wikilinked field to disambiguate the text? I'm not sure what it would be wikilinked to, but that might assist resolution. ZueJay (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who adds templates such as this to relevant articles will be doing so with some knowledge of motorsport, or they would have no need of such a template. Without some knowledge, they are not in a position to know whether anything that they add is suitable (not just in the template) and they would not have any particular interest in adding a template in such circumstances. You wouldn't find me doing anything other than basic typo/grammar fixing in a mathematics article, for example. There really is no issue here. I could change the field name in the code to make it clear for you, but if any field names don't match the displayed titles, I get other editors complaining and I'm not going over that old ground again. Adrian M. H. 18:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about me, it is not about editors - it is about users. Not all users understand that that is a Championship field; I'm looking for solutions/suggestions on how to disambiguate this field and alleviate confusion among users - I'm not looking for a brick wall. ZueJay (talk) 21:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By "users" do you mean readers? If so, say so. So you don't think that your average motorsport fan will understand that "Best finish: 3rd in 2005" means exactly the same here as it does in the info panels of just about every English-language motorsport periodical in print? If they are not motorsport fans, why would they want to know about Ricardo Risatti or Sebastian Buemi? Besides, we are limited by infobox width, unless you want to overturn the decision taken earlier this year (with which I agree) that all motorsport infoboxes should be 24em. We have no room for lengthy field titles (particularly unnecessary ones). Adrian M. H. 22:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a user is the same as a "reader"; I prefer the term user because being an Internet user is a bit more active than being a reader, which is passive; this whole matter of clicking on links, typing things in searches, implies usage not just reading.
Now, what's to say that your average user is a motorsports fan? Do you look up articles about politicians? Are you a politics fan? Do you look up articles about authors? Are you an author fan? Do you look up articles about sandwiches? Are you a sandwich fan? You look up articles to learn something.
I do not believe the width should be changed, I think you all are quite right in that; it is already a "wide" box, relatively speaking. I do think that wikilinking the field "Best finish" to a descriptive article (there must be one with regards to "racing championship" or some such) would be useful in clarifiying the field, and is probably the best way to disambiguate it at this point.
I really don't think the accesibility we provide users/readers in these articles is irrelevant. Information in Wikipedia is not just for us, only editors, or only fans, its for everybody. Why wouldn't we want to make it accessible and comprehensible to the average person no matter their fanatic inclinations? ZueJay (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you asked, I hardly ever use WP as a reference source (that may change if the world runs out of paper any time soon), but when I do, my readings are confined to things in which I am interested and at least adequately knowledgeable. There is nothing precisely relevant to which the field title may be linked. Adrian M. H. 23:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most editors seem not to use it as a particularly strong reference; I tend to only use it for non-technical (ie - pop culture) and a place to look for outside references.
I realize now that there seems no particularly ideal article for such a link - I made an article request for Championship racing or something similar that can discuss a bit all those series with championship races; it is a very popular, common term/element in motorsport that makes sense to have an article for (or at least a list); I know only enough about motorsport to watch it competently and discuss it with others but not actually write articles. ZueJay (talk) 23:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better to post that at WikiProject Motorsport/Tasks. It will get a quicker result. Adrian M. H. 23:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will do. ZueJay (talk) 23:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All we really need to do here is change the label of the field to "best season finish". There have been several cases lately where this has been changed to reflect the best race finish of a particular driver. I think that one word here will clarify. --rogerd (talk) 12:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even shorter would be "best series finish", maybe, in terms of width. ZueJay (talk) 03:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, List of motorsport championships was the result of a prior suggestion. ZueJay (talk) 03:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that this template's outer border is bright red in IE6. It looks fine in other browsers. There was a redundant hex colour value (#FF0000) in the style declaration, but removing it and clearing my cache has made no difference. The correct #dfdfdf colour value is still there and should be being picked up by IE. Can anyone look into this please? 83.67.34.115 (talk) 13:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK now. I figured out that IE does not like CSS shortcuts if the colour is placed first. 83.67.34.115 (talk) 17:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I was just looking at the template now that the red border in IE has been fixed, and what I see is that all these race car drivers are dead when utilizing the standard applied to Template:Infobox actor and Template:Infobox musical artist (gold=alive, silver/gray=dead). Not good. I would suggest a change, but to what color, I'm not sure. The gold of those infoboxes might be okay, or maybe a shade of blue. Options can be viewed at WP:Color. ZueJay (talk) 21:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, it is great the red border was fixed. Now, though, the solid gray background is more prominent and it immediately made me think of the infobox style used at Template:Infobox actor which distinguishes between "living" and "deceased" persons, in part, by shading the infobox differently for those states: gold and gray, respectively. Maybe some will not see this as an issue, but we could create greater consistency, unity, etc. across the wiki by addressing this issue. ZueJay (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Musical artist uses color coding to differentiate between different types of performers, not alive/dead status. Template:Infobox Football biography, probably the most widespread infobox uses blue for everyone. Other common sports templates Template:Infobox MLB player and Template:Infobox Gridiron football person use team colors for active players and gray for retired ones (living or dead). I think this is a non-issue and this sort of context only exists in Infobox Actor. -Drdisque (talk) 23:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. That's why I check before making changes, and why feedback to a question, not matter how inane the question might seems, is always useful. ZueJay (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Despite this notice, the hCard microformat in this template was removed in this edit. Could someone who understands the aims of that edit please restore the microformat mark-up? Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 19:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Achievements parameter in the second example appears to not be used. I am not sure if the code is wrong or the parameter was removed.--The Three Headed Knight (talk) 14:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few new parameters to this template to allow for "record/career infoboxes" to be embedded in this one. to give you an idea what I am talking about, compare this version with this version. notice how in the first version, there are actually three infoboxes at the top of the page. since they are not joined together, and the widths are mismatched, we get a big whitespace gap around the boxes. however, in the second version, I have embedded the second two boxes inside the top box, and the problem is solved.

what I have in mind is that we consider (1) adding the ability to embed to all the infoboxes in Category:Racecar driver infobox templates, (2) merge multiple boxes into one box as I have done in the Andy Priaulx example, using {{infobox racing driver}} as the base infobox. we can reduce redundant information by moving all of the common stuff (name, birth, nationality, death, ...) to the top by using {{infobox racing driver}}. If all goes well, I envision the specialized boxes as being simple "record/career section" boxes that just get embedded into the main racing driver box. what do you think? Frietjes (talk) 01:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in two minds about the idea, and will give it further consideration. A couple of points to note though:

• The only reason the infoboxes were different widths in the "old version" of the Andy Priaulx article is because "Autosport British Competition Driver of the Year" is {{nowrap}}ped - for most drivers, the infoboxes are (deliberately) the same width - see Alex Zanardi as an example.
• If the series infoboxes are embedded within {{Infobox racing driver}}, then the column widths for all the series will be the same (which may or may not be a good thing) - see John Surtees for an example where the column widths in his F1 and Le Mans infoboxes are quite different.
• Even if the consensus ends up towards embedding and we end up moving all the "common stuff" into {{Infobox racing driver}}, I'd be tempted to leave the Nationality parameter in the F1 infobox (at least) in case the nationality under which the driver raced in a particular series differs from their "general nationality" (whatever that means) displayed at the top of the infobox (in F1, a driver races under an identified nationality; the same may be true for other series).

DH85868993 (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the main reason why this came up is due to Infobox V8 Supercar driver closed as merge. I was trying to figure out how to merge it, and realized that the easiest thing to do would be to change it to something like Template:Infobox BTCC record. you make a good point about the label widths, and it's not entirely necessary that the label widths have to be the same. by embedding a borderless, distinct table, I can make the label widths different for each subsection. or, yet another option, would be to do what we did for the campaignboxes in {{infobox military conflict}}. in that case, the campaignboxes are visually distinct boxes, but they are attached to the bottom of the infobox (basically doing what is currently done with {{stack}} but the stacking is done by the template). in any event, perhaps the broader suggestion here is to reduce the redundancy between these boxes by putting the common information in this template and reducing the specific templates to "record/career" templates. how these are combined is a separate matter. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 15:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That merge is an interesting discussion - all of the people who understand how the motorsport driver infoboxes work were opposed and the merge comments weres from the people who knew nothing about motorsport. I wasn't aware of the discussion. I think it's a lousy idea to merge these driver infoboxes. They resulting merged infobox would be far too complicated to be useful. The problem is what accomplishments are important in some series are not important in others series. A top 3 (podium) finish is the mark of a high finish in some series (formula 1, motocross, off-road racing like TORC, and IndyCar). A top 10 finish is the mark of a good finish in NASCAR. Also, different feeder series are important in particular genres. That's why there's separate infoboxes were made. There is very little information that is common between the motorsport genres. Maybe driver name, hometown/country, image/size/caption, pole positions, and number of wins. Royalbroil 04:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, with the exception of a few common fields, what's being proposed is not a merger of the existing single-series templates into {{Infobox racing driver}}, but the ability to embed instances of the existing single-series templates within {{Infobox racing driver}}, such that instead of multiple infoboxes, the reader sees a single infobox with multiple sections. For example, in Sébastien Bourdais' article you would have:

{{Infobox racing driver
|name               = Sébastien Bourdais
|image              = Bourdais.jpg
|caption            = Bourdais during his ChampCar days
|nationality        = {{flagicon|FRA}} [[France|French]]
|birth_date         = {{birth date and age|1979|2|28|df=y}}
|birth_place        = [[Le Mans]], [[France]]

| record template1  = 
  {{Infobox Champ Car driver|embed=yes
  |achievements       = 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 [[Champ Car|Champ Car World Series]] Champion<br>2002 [[International Formula 3000]] Champion<br>1999 [[French Formula Three Championship|French Formula Three]] Champion
  |awards             = 2003 [[CART FedEx Championship Series]] Rookie of the Year
  |years              = 2003–2007
  |Total_Champ_Races  = 73
  etc
  }}

| record template2  = 
  {{Infobox F1 driver|embed=yes
  | Years         = {{F1|2008}}–{{F1|2009}}
  | Team(s)       = [[Scuderia Toro Rosso]]
  | Races         = 27
  etc
  }}

| record template3  = 
  {{Infobox Le Mans driver|embed=yes
  | Image       = 
  | Years       = [[1999 24 Hours of Le Mans|1999]]–[[2002 24 Hours of Le Mans|2002]], [[2004 24 Hours of Le Mans|2004]], [[2007 24 Hours of Le Mans|2007]], [[2009 24 Hours of Le Mans|2009]]–[[2012 24 Hours of Le Mans|2012]]
  | Team(s)     = [[Larbre Compétition]], [[Pescarolo Sport]], [[Peugeot Sport]]
  etc
  }}
}}

Frietjes, please advise if I have mischaracterised your proposal. DH85868993 (talk) 05:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yes, that is exactly what I am saying. the idea is to not make a single template for all motor sports, but to move all the common information to this template, and to allow for the templates to be glued together as DH85868993 has illustrated. if the article is split into distinct sections for each sport, then they need not be glued together, but there is no reason to list the same information multiple times in each box. whatever works well for the particular article, but the option to glue them together is there. by the way, this module idea is not new, if you check the code for {{infobox person}} it has module fields, and {{infobox military person}} can be embedded in that template to add additional military information. Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having given it some further thought, I think the best approach is to amend the individual series templates so that they can be embedded within {{Infobox racing driver}} (which has already been done), but not to remove the "common fields", so they can still be used as standalone infoboxes if desired (including locating different infoboxes in separate sections of an article). DH85868993 (talk) 00:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sounds reasonable, although I think it's best if we don't repeat name/birth_date/death_date information. nationality is, of course, a different matter if that nationality is related to the particular series. Frietjes (talk) 16:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If we remove the name/birth_date/death_date fields from the single-series templates, then that obliges us to add {{Infobox racing driver}} to all the articles which currently have one of the single-series templates but don't have {{Infobox racing driver}} (which includes at least 500 F1 drivers) - that seems like a lot of work to me for not much benefit. Where articles currently have both {{Infobox racing driver}} and one or more single-series templates, the name/birth_date/death_date fields are not populated in the single-series templates, so the information is only displayed once (at least that's what is supposed to happen - on the odd occasion when I come across the same information displayed in multiple infoboxes, I remove it from all but the top one). DH85868993 (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? It's done already. --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

that is definitely a viable option. The only drawback of that approach is (1) it does easily lend itself to splitting the individual records into article sections, and (2) it requires the editor to use the appropriate field labels for the particular sport. on the positive side, it doesn't require maintaining distinct templates. another example is what has been done for {{infobox motorcycle rider}}, which is less flexible in terms of series ordering, but effectively achieves the same thing. Frietjes (talk) 15:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing, we can't apply the template to all racing drivers. I was thinking of making a American motorsports driver template based off of that, excluding the fastest laps of course, but including former teams a driver has driven for.Gaeaman787 (talk) 18:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gaeaman787, check the sample of my template. All fields are optional, so it adapts to most forms of motorsport. --NaBUru38 (talk) 09:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

one thing that your example demonstrates is that we should really do something about the year/title alignment issues in the "Championship titles" section. the only reliable way to fix this is to split the section into years1/title1, years2/title2, ... or to use "nowwrap", but nowrap could cause really wide boxes. another advantage of using years1/title1, years2/title2, ... is that is fixes wp:accessibility problems, since the information is aligned in a way that can be properly parsed by a screen reader. to see the issue, try to cut and paste the contents of the section, and you will see that you get all the years followed by all the titles, rather than year/title, year/title, ... of course, this is not a problem with just your example, but one that exists in most of these templates. Frietjes (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the "Championship titles" section needs a new format. Your proposal can work. How about a simple box, there you write whatever you want? So you would write "2006 W Championship< br / > 2010 X Championship < br / > 2011 Y Championship". --NaBUru38 (talk) 01:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a discussion in progress at WP:MOTOR regarding possible changes to the "previous series" fields of this infobox. You are welcome to express any views you may have on the matter at the discussion. DH85868993 (talk) 03:36, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This message is to notify you that there is an RfC ongoing on whether to add pronunciation info to {{Infobox person}}, a discussion which may also affect this template. Your comments on the matter are appreciated. The discussion can be found here. Thanks! 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib)} 17:17, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is unhelpful for this template to automatically prepend the current year to the current series heading, for a couple of reasons:

1. it doesn't cater for seasons which span year boundaries, e.g. 2014-15 Formula E season (the infobox displays "2015 Formula E")
2. if an infobox is not updated for some time, it can present the incorrect information that a driver is competing in the current season, when in fact they are not.

Thoughts? DH85868993 (talk) 11:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion makes more sense than current protocol. Holdenman05 (talk) 04:26, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the current year from the heading and added the word "career", for consistency with the F1, Le Mans, NASCAR and IndyCar infoboxes. DH85868993 (talk) 11:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

How about to add the FIA Driver Category to categorised drivers, for example: Jeroen Bleekemolen, FIA Driver Category: Platinum (2017).

Full list here

Thoughts?