User talk:DH85868993

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Why were my edits removed from Lance stroll? I added true information from multiple sources including espnf1 and wtf1 on Instagram. 2001:8003:1624:5B00:D481:7AD5:9C3F:BCB9 (talk) 10:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:8003:1624:5B00:D481:7AD5:9C3F:BCB9: You didn't provide a reliable source for the statements that he is a "pay driver". DH85868993 (talk) 10:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But I did? I literally just stated two reliable sources. ESPN and wtf1, they are both run by journalists 2001:8003:1624:5B00:D481:7AD5:9C3F:BCB9 (talk) 12:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @2001:8003:1624:5B00:D481:7AD5:9C3F:BCB9: With this edit information was added without a source, including the statement that he is a pay driver. With this one the words 'pay driver' were inserted in front of an existing source which does not support that information. Eagleash (talk) 13:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:8003:1624:5B00:D481:7AD5:9C3F:BCB9: To expand, it's not sufficient to just mention the name of a website in the edit summary, you need to provide a link to a specific webpage which explicitly supports the added statements, preferably as an inline citation in the article text (see WP:IC for details). DH85868993 (talk) 22:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

DH85868993,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Moops. And the same to you! DH85868993 (talk) 07:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DH85868993 I saw you removed my addition of tyre suppliers to the race results for the 2005 Australian Grand Prix but please can you restore my edit as it is inline with other Wikipedia F1 race results. Tyre supplier data is included on official TV coverage results from the period and we have reached consensus that tyre data can be added for Grands Prix which have more than one tyre supplier (IE Bridgestone and Michelin) but not for races that only have one, where it is viewed as redundant (IE just Goodyear or just Bridgestone or Pirelli). This is reflected in official TV coverage or timing data. I am intending to add more for the 2005 season and others. Finally, though, I'd like to add I appreciate your efforts to keep the F1 race data clean as this is important! :) Theoutside29 (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theoutside29. I've restored your edit (and fixed the column headings). I hadn't noticed that some of the race reports include tyre data. I've added a "with tyre data" variant to the page detailing the standard race results table format. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your rapid response DH85868993 :) Best regards. Theoutside29 Theoutside29 (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Theoutside29: No worries. Thanks for adding the tyre data to those other 2005 race reports. Just a reminder that because you've added an extra column into the table, the footer row one needs to be one column wider, and if you change the number of sources from one to more than one, the word "Source" should be changed to "Sources". (I've made these corrections to the articles you updated in the past 24 hours). Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 08:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it seems that you forgot to remove the points from Renault, when you did this. I've made the change at {{F1estat}}, but thought I'd let you know in case I'm wrong and they were already not included, or something. SSSB (talk) 07:10, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SSSB: No, you were correct: I forgot to deduct the points from Renault's total, and I completely forgot about {{F1estat}}. Thanks for cleaning up my mess! Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 11:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ewing (constructor) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced since at least 2007

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've obviously spotted that the Glover Trophy and the Richmond Trophy aren't always synonymous, see here for details: https://web.archive.org/web/20141105125505/http://www.barc.net/Hackedsite/images/stories/Glover_Trophy.pdf I was planning on having a go at sorting out the confusion but a bit more research is required. Halmyre (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Halmyre: Thanks for the clarification regarding the Glover and Richmond Trophies and for creating Richmond Trophy Race. As you may have seen, I created Category:Richmond Trophy Race. Do you think 1955 Glover Trophy, 1956 Glover Trophy and 1957 Glover Trophy (which are linked from Richmond Trophy Race#Winners) should be included in Category:Richmond Trophy Race? DH85868993 (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes, those races are identified as the Richmond Trophy race in contemporary Motor Sport articles. I'll go ahead and update them accordingly. Halmyre (talk) 08:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Moldova location map templates has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Ferien (talk) 12:45, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DH85868993. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Zoran Stefanović (businessman), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you reverted an edit I made alterring an edit location directing the a car called a Lola, but not built by Lola or Lola staff to Haas Lola. The THL1 and THL2 cars whilst called Lolas were actually designed and built by FORCE, a part of the then Haas Lola organisation. They were called Lola because Carl Haas had a financial interest in Lola, effectively making Lola a sponsor. Whilst convention it is nonetheless inaccurate. Several Brabham race cars were called Repco Brabhams but generally they are called Brabhams as Repco was a sponsor and in most cases did not even provide engines as most were powered by Coventry Climax, Ford, Honda or even Alfa Romeo engines. -- Falcadore (talk) 02:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Falcadore. The THL1 and THL2 are described at both Haas Lola and Lola Cars, so the word "Lola" could arguably be linked to either article (although I think it makes sense to consistently link to one or the other). Given that the cars are included in {{Lola}} and Category:Lola Formula One cars, I lean towards linking it to Lola Cars, per the current convention, but you're more than welcome to start a discussion at WT:F1. DH85868993 (talk) 03:43, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So your preference is against accuracy and to prefer the status quo? I just want you to realise that is what you are saying before I start a discussion. The history of the the two designs is very well known and documented so it's not like it can be disputed. I mean are you really saying you prefer the convention because that's where it is now and you don't care as to accuracy? --Falcadore (talk) 06:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Falcadore: I've done some more reading/research, and I now find myself supporting the view that the Haas "Lolas" should be considered as distinct from the Lola Cars "Lolas". So I think (for the Haas Lolas) we should link "Lola" to Haas Lola and remove the THL1 and THL2 from {{Lola}}, Category:Lola Formula One cars and the results table in Lola Cars. FWIW, my previous position was influenced by a mistaken belief that Lola Cars had more of a connection with the Haas Lola cars than they did, including statements like the one in Lola Cars that "Broadley had some involvement with the car", which I now believe to be false. DH85868993 (talk) 08:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:SDAVOID which says "avoid duplicating information that is already in the title". Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Turkish Grand Prix (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DH85868993!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent restoration at Cisitalia, I mean. It may be standard in roughly similar sections, but with one result, no pole positions and no fastest laps, it's also nonsensical to use the word "results" or speak of specially formatted text that doesn't exist in this section. Anyway, if you're sure, you're sure and that's cool; just making sure. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@InedibleHulk: Thanks for your enquiry. Yes, I'm sure I want to use the standard formatting for Cisitalia's F1 results section. You may note that I didn't restore the pole position and fastest lap text, because it's not applicable in this case. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Sorry for overlooking that "key" part. If I didn't already know what DNQ meant, I'd want to; good job! So we're clear, though, Cistalia did not qualify once and only once. I'll just leave "Only F1 World Championship result" on your desk as I go and you can consider it a viable and sensible alternative or not. No pressure, and enjoy your weekend. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit summary about the item at the Trans Australian airlines - I would strongly suggest against Abe books, when there is the Trove reference for good referencing to clarify edits...

Gunn, John (1999), Contested skies : Trans-Australian Airlines Australian Airlines 1946-1992, University of Queensland Press, ISBN 978-0-7022-3073-8

JarrahTree 13:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @DH85868993! I've seen your name come up a lot with editing the F1 records page. You seem to know what you're doing, so I respect you. I'd like to make some bigger changes to the page, but I'd like to talk about it with someone else first. Could you let me know what you think? The reason why I want to make these changes, is because the page has become quite big and the loading time is quite long as well, especially on phone devices. Hence why I think some unneeded tables and references should be deleted. To only have the useful tables listed also makes the page clearer.

The tables I think don't say too much and should go, are: - Most consecutive wins at the same Grand Prix; - Most consecutive pole positions at the same Grand Prix; - Most consecutive podium finishes from first race of season; - Youngest double World Drivers' Championship winners; - Youngest triple World Drivers' Championship winners. Of course the record with the recordholder can be added to the 'Other records'. (I know I'm talking about lowering the data but I do like to add the table 'Total started races not finished', or shorter: 'Total career DNFs', because I think it's a fun record and because there are only 2 tables for the topic 'Races finished', and they can use a 3rd. And perhaps a new topic with tables about Sprints.)

Furthermore I think the notes at 'Multiple achievements at the same race', can be shortened by only mentioning the number one recordholder (and for example 'The other seven drivers to have achieved a hat-trick in two consecutive races' can be removed).

At the 'Other records', there are quite some records with multiple achievers. For example 'Most championship leader changes in a season' and 'Most podium finishers in a season'. These drivers are listed under each other. To make the page shorter, the drivers can be listed beside each other.

Then about the references. I've already written a topic at the talk page. Could you look at it? For example the references with numbers 26 and 57 I often come across, which I think are often unneeded to add. But they're definitely not the only ones.

Let me know what you think! Perhaps you have some suggestions of your own? PS, sorry for the long read ;) Regards. Wiki4David (talk) 15:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki4David: Thank you for the kind words. It's always difficult to decide which information to include in that article (and in which format) - what some people think is interesting/important information, other people don't. I'm generally an inclusioninst, so as long as the information is accurate, I'm usually happy for it to stay. You might face some resistance to deleting the "Most consecutive wins/poles at the same Grand Prix" tables - they've been in the article a long time and survived several culls. I guess there are two ways you can go regarding your proposed changes: you can either start a discussion on the article talk page, or you can boldly make the changes, see if they get reverted and then start a discussion (if required). I'll have a look at that references topic. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 22:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I have made some changes to the page. I hope they're all okay! I like to say I'm an inclusionist as well, as some records could be very interesting (as long as it's accurate and complete of course). So I actually added more than I deleted ;) I just was a bit concerned about the bigness and loading time. But if it becomes a real problem, we can always make then some changes as well. I still think there are too many references, but that can also be changed later. Lovely talking to you! Wiki4David (talk) 22:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Just wanted to notify you of this, seems you were active on similar discussions and AfDs but the Lewis Hamilton win list and other such lists are proposed for deletion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Lewis Hamilton 159.242.125.170 (talk) 12:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. DH85868993 (talk) 13:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The plural can't be Grands Prix, despite the mistake made on another Wikipedia page. Grand is an adjective not a noun. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Murgatroyd49: The term "Grand Prix" derives from French, where adjectives typically also take 's' to indicate a plural, like nouns do in English. See:

• https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/grands-prix
• https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Grands_Prix

Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 11:51, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adjectives don't take plurals in English, regardless of what they may get up to in French. All the quotes appear to be from Wikipedia so cannnot be used a s a reliable source. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English borrowed the term "Grand Prix" from French, and as part of the process, it borrowed the plural as well. Other dictionaries confirming "Grands Prix" as the plural of "Grand Prix" in English include:

• https://www.ldoceonline.com/Other%2Bsports-topic/grand-prix
• https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/grand-prix

I also invite you seek opinion at the Formula One WikiProject.

Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 12:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But what if the Russian Grand Prix is never revived? I mean, while there's the Ukrainian War, and it ends. I doubt FIA will return to Russia Ev24000 (talk) 03:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ev24000: You might doubt that the FIA will return to Russia, but neither you nor I know for sure. In 1945, France and Britain were at war with Germany; as soon as 1951 there was a World Championship German Grand Prix. We just don't know what will happen in the future. DH85868993 (talk) 09:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the question I had when I edited it days ago, i thought because the Russian race was discontinued, there would no longer be a race if war ends due to sanctions Ev24000 (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know either what could happen in the future Ev24000 (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding your recent reverts at the Red Bull car articles, is there actually a convention to only list the chassis constructor in the Constructor field of the infobox? There are articles such as Williams FW42 and McLaren MP4/2 that also list the engine maker. Carfan568 (talk) 10:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Carfan568: The vast majority of F1 car articles just list the chassis constructor, but you are correct that some also list the engine/power unit manufacturer (I wasn't aware of that), and it's not listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Formula_One/Conventions#Cars so I've reverted my changes. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 12:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was Goldsmith the oldest living WDC veteran at the time of his death several days ago? I am searching for a citation. RegalZ8790 (talk) 21:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RegalZ8790: I believe he was. I'll also look for a citation. DH85868993 (talk) 22:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This Reddit post says he was the oldest in April 2023. But it's Reddit, so it probably doesn't count an a reliable source. I'll keep looking. DH85868993 (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This blog post from February 2024 also confirms the information. But again, it's a blog post, so not an RS. DH85868993 (talk) 22:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DH85868993 Thanks for taking to time to research/contribute. RegalZ8790 (talk) 05:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 September 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Paul Goldsmith, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 04:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Belgian Grand Prix (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if you can add more of your voice to the discussion on WP:F1 about standardizing leads and infoboxes. The changes, mostly driven by a certain editor, seem to have good faith intentions. However, they way they are being discussed is not conducive to collaboration with other WPs, and has led to deletion of content relating to other WPs.

When I first started editing, I attempted to remove some of the F1 infoboxes of drivers who had only competed in the Indianapolis 500. You were there to "correct" me - I learned that the WP:F1 community wants those infoboxes there and that the participation of the drivers in even a single WDC race was important. I also learned that if there is confusion, the answer is not to be reductive and delete, but to be productive and provide more context/info.

I think the same case applies here. Giuseppe Farina was an incredibly accomplished racer with a long career. Infoboxes of his 24h and AOWR participation, however brief, are not disinformation, as another editor argues. Rather they help illustrate at a glance Farina's talent; while he didn't finish well, the fact he competed was important and due to his skill and success competing in Grands Prix. I work mostly through WP:AOWR, and the convention is the same as WP:F1, a driver's participation merits an infobox. It's a work in progress, obviously, with fewer editors.

Anyways, I think your voice would be impactful in steering things in a collaborative direction. Editors are equal, but through your many years contributing you have played a huge role in shaping WP:F1 into the standard other discipline-specific WPs should aspire to, and your words carry weight. It was the thoughtful way you communicated with me that caused a rethink of how I approached editing. WP is a huge collaboration, and it feels better to work with rather than against.

Best regards, RegalZ8790 (talk) 00:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RegalZ8790: Thank you for the kind words. Apologies for taking so long to reply; for some reason I missed the notification. I'll take a look at the discussion and the changes being made and see what I can add. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DH85868993, I was hoping you could help me get ahold of another premium article. In this case it's this one for use on the McLaren MCL38 article. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 11:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@5225C: Sadly, I can't see the full text of that article; I can see the "Previous article" and "Next article", but not that one. That particular article must require a higher level of access than I have. But I'll keep trying. DH85868993 (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, thank you! 5225_C (talk • contributions) 23:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DH85868993, back again. Do you have access to this article? Looks like it could be quite useful for the MCL38 article. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 03:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@5225C:. Yes, I can see the article - I've emailed you the text. Unfortunately, the article is all about the "nadir" and doesn't contain any info about the MCL38. However, I also find that I can now access the first article you asked about as well, for which I've also emailed you the text. (I gather I can access so many articles per month, and I must have used up my quota for November). DH85868993 (talk) 06:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you very much! 5225_C (talk • contributions) 07:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Japanese Grand Prix (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

only reason i removed massa's image is because i don't know how to change the display image please explain to me how to do that TheSpecialOne799 (talk) 20:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSpecialOne799: I don't know how to change the display image either. But I'll try to find out. DH85868993 (talk) 20:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSpecialOne799: It was selecting the image of Massa because the image of Hamilton was too narrow. I've made the image box wider, so it now displays the image of Hamilton. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Selection_of_image_displayed_at_the_top_of_the_article_/_in_the_search_results_on_mobile_devices. DH85868993 (talk) 21:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks because i believe the champion should be in the display picture. the same issue is on 2005 formula one so you need to fix that one as well TheSpecialOne799 (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed DH85868993 (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks man your a legend TheSpecialOne799 (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]