User talk:Mb2437

Channeling my inner geek: I've noticed your splits and I was wondering if you were a bot or using a robot AI program to update a lot of articles at once upon completion of a programming direction? Just curious. 2601:646:A200:E5B0:3D15:CE1A:E53C:A65B (talk) 18:51, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Hiya, I do not have any bots active presently. I use a search-and-replace tool when refining large tables and templates, and have a bunch of blank citations to reuse. If it's to do with my template programming: that's just down to a bit of search-and-replace trickery. MB2437 19:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Clarifying: So there is programming involved? It's not just single-sourced edits per article. You're using some advanced tool in Wiki to assist in mass updating. I can only do one at a time and am not always sure each update makes sense. I should check these templates out it sounds like. Thx. 2601:646:A200:E5B0:3D15:CE1A:E53C:A65B (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Which edits in particular? MB2437 19:37, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Changing 10 of these in less than one minute {Add national rankings to lead for top 10, MOS:LEAD covers rankings section.} Seemed odd and why I thought you were a bot, then I saw others on your contribs. The placement of the edits didn't seem to have a rhyme or reason but I could see there were links to lists stored elsewhere that backed them up as proof. It was the timing and the breadth at which you could cast the edits that was surprising. I adjusted one but realized it was fine where it was at. You say it's this template thing. I did not see the template thingy as the way to accomplish numerous edits at once. But I was wrong. Still new I am. 2601:646:A200:E5B0:3D15:CE1A:E53C:A65B (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah! So, those edits were entirely manual—only took me about five minutes of copy-and-pasting, replacing the university names and their placement. They were all open in separate tabs so I simply published the edits at the same time. I have a tendency to do that when making several related edits simultaneously and find that it helps my flow by focusing on one part of the task at a time. The template thing is unrelated, that was regarding my programming here. MB2437 19:57, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Ican't even imagine being able to do that much without a very keen AI assistant. Pretty cool if you ask me. I'm using a very low-end computer and I know if I had that many tabs open at once to even attempt such a thing as an update en masse it would kill off every single one of my other programs running at the same time. I swear to God something on that scale would be the end of my processing power. Something to aim for I guess. Just need an upgrade right?. ha ha ha 2601:646:A200:E5B0:3D15:CE1A:E53C:A65B (talk) 20:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Guess I have AMD to thank for that one! Haha MB2437 20:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

How do you feel about Kimi sacrificing his race for George today? Not much of a race… Namelessposter (talk) 16:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

A good old snoozefest! Merc did the best they could within the confines of Williams's gamesmanship.

They really need to reprofile the Nouvelle Chicane and use the left-turn before Portier to extend the straight. MB2437 16:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I don’t know how you’d manage to get rid of Loews - even if you built a bypass from Mirabeau Haute to Portier I don’t know if F1 cars could handle the resulting slope. I’d ideally like to keep going straight on Mirabeau Haute and then build a curve through the park on that block at an angle that allows cars to take the roundabout north of Portier at speed and build a little pace going into the tunnel, but I don’t know if that would meaningfully help. I might also extend the tunnel with a canopy before Nouvelle Chicane because the change from dark to light deters adding a second DRS zone, but nobody made much use of the DRS zone that currently exists, so it’s not clear this would be an improvement (plus it might be duplicative of the Nouvelle Chicane). No good answers really. Namelessposter (talk) 17:08, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

The hairpin has to stay, it's Monaco heritage! There's a building and a cliff-face between Mirabeau Haute and Mirabeau Bas. Rosberg already tried that one! There's already a left turn between Mirabeau Bas and Portier that leads to the roundabout, that would extend the tunnel straight by 70 metres. Not sure why they don't use it, they wouldn't need to do much—if any—work. The big concern with the Nouvelle Chicane is that you cannot fairly overtake there. The kerbs need to be wider and flatter, as does the track itself (moving the entry and exit wall). Ideally there would also be a gravel trap in the runoff to prevent people flying over it and saying "they pushed me off". The whole area needs reprofiling. MB2437 17:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, so that's what you mean by left turn, I thought you meant "the left turn on the track before Portier" (i.e. the hairpin). Sorry!

I don't mind the Nouvelle Chicane idea but I honestly do not know if it is possible to make Monaco good; everything we've discussed is trying to make it less bad. Every year the go-kart race idea seems more appealing. Namelessposter (talk) 17:53, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I don't think it would make it a great track by any stretch, but I support any idea to improve the racing while keeping its integrity. F1 wouldn't be the same without Monaco. MB2437 18:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Whoo! Namelessposter (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Spicy protest for George's gamesmanship... MB2437 21:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

The braking under safety car looked pretty safe on track and Max gave back the place immediately, so I’m not sure where the penalty comes from - the car lengths thing? Obviously Horner tried to challenge George’s podium earlier this season with the lifting under yellows ruling, that’s just part of the game. I’d do the same. All that being said, I don’t think George was trying to get Max a penalty. I do think he was trying to deter Max from tailgating him under safety car. Namelessposter (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Protest is probably centred around driving erratically. I haven't heard George's team radio—I think if he immediately called it out then that speaks to his intentions, given he did brake hard for little reason. MB2437 22:55, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

I’d be very surprised if they stripped George of a win for “erratic driving” during a safety car finish. You’d think it would have to be something more clear-cut. Namelessposter (talk) 22:59, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd be very surprised if it was actually penalised given it was (allegedly) a victimless crime. They cleared Kimi for the safety car infringement at least! MB2437 23:03, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Damn, not even a warning, they actually ruled RBR failed to prove Russell was doing anything wrong. Namelessposter (talk) 01:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

It feels like there were holes in Mercedes defence i.e. that braking suddenly is standard behaviour under a safety car (it isn't standard to do so when another driver is right behind them and their presence is acknowledged; I can't remember ever seeing someone brake so abruptly that the safety car vanished into the distance and the driver behind overtook them) and that the unsportsmanlike conduct allegation was inadmissible because the team didn't report it (even though the matter was about George—who did report the incident immediately—and not the team). I'm surprised Red Bull didn't present any evidence on his alleged motive. Either way, it seems more-and-more these days that the FIA are making decisions based on outcome. I think it would have been harsh to hand a penalty here, but clearer rules and related penalties need to be in writing; we see so many blatant infringements that the FIA dismiss because the impact of a penalty outweighs a minor incident. Written penalties would stop any "harsh" argument in its tracks, as the drivers would know the consequences of their actions, whether they finished first or last. MB2437 22:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree you have a point that Russell could have caused a collision if Verstappen had started weaving for tire temperature (for what it's worth, I'm guessing Russell looked in the mirror to make sure Verstappen was not directly behind him). I am a little surprised that Russell went with the "I'm not required to care about who's behind me" defense, given the prohibition on erratic driving. And I thought Russell had been notified the race would end under safety car when he braked - but he said he hadn't, I guess? But ultimately Russell vs Verstappen is a particularly bad vehicle to set the precedent that penalties are based on motive and not outcome, given that Verstappen got off extremely lightly two weeks ago. It would look like a Mosley-esque attempt to inject drama into the 2025 season by favoring McLaren's closest rival (Verstappen) at all costs, right or wrong. I also think that the stewards' decision was carefully worded to not endorse any particular argument Russell made. Namelessposter (talk) 23:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Seemed like a classic unsafe release to me. Surprised George wasn't penalized. How does he keep on pulling this off? Namelessposter (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Never doubt the political might of a well-structured PowerPoint... MB2437 21:31, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Slightly diabolical that one... MB2437 13:25, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I think this is an area where the Britishism is impenetrable to me. Diabolical as in “awful luck” or “Kimi engaged in track terrorism”? Namelessposter (talk) 13:31, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

The latter unfortunately! Just misjudged everyone checking up at the first hairpin; reluctant to say I am guilty of doing this irl. MB2437 13:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Surely you can see where I'm coming from now! MB2437 01:32, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Actual LOL. Namelessposter (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

They may distance themself from Cleese, but you could make a decent Python sketch out of this. Namelessposter (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The Meaning of IAR doesn't have the same ring to it. MB2437 17:26, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

They are back. I have been off WP for a while, but I would look out for similar activity from them and the Finnish newcomer: they have both gotten into incendiary run-ins with sssb lately. They have the right to a fresh start but if they are the same person, commenting to boost each other is classic sock behavior. Namelessposter (talk) 12:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought that at first but my alarm bells stopped ringing after a while. MB2437 15:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you are talking about now. Only one instance from what I can see so may be pure coincidence. The Estonian user seems markedly more apologetic when they step out of line. MB2437 16:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

This guy man ;-; MB2437 20:00, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Can you point me to something specific? I’m very behind on the discourse. Namelessposter (talk) 16:40, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

MB2437 17:12, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

This guy hates Kimi like r/formuladank hated George until they started hating Lando. Namelessposter (talk) 03:44, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

For a fun evening read. MB2437 22:46, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I saw that! I would have chimed in but sometimes if you give them enough rope they'll hang themselves. Namelessposter (talk) 00:41, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Still haven't gotten over the closing statement, I was creasing MB2437 10:58, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Love it when an actual racing guy closes racing topics! Namelessposter (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Guess you were right about active driver articles being GA-worthy even when they change all the time. Also congrats to Kimi for outqualifying George. Namelessposter (talk) 15:39, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Just means they are prone to re-review should the content change substantially (Lewis Hamilton is an example of an article that has extensively changed since its review). Only FAs require the content to be complete (ironically also one of the reasons Hamilton's FA review in 2019 was struck down); GAs simply require it to be broad with what has been published. Wanting to get all current drivers up to that level, at least in quality. I think Lando Norris will be next after I finish Oscar Piastri—that article is an absolute mess.

Needs to beat him tomorrow so I can put that stat to bed ;-; MB2437 15:54, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

He did it! Namelessposter (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Pub was absolute limbs when he passed Russell (only me) MB2437 22:07, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

He didn’t deserve the whitewash. I’m happy for him and befuddled by George’s race today. So many things went wrong but not quite wrong enough for George to go into cruise control. Namelessposter (talk) 22:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Titanium dioxide in the paint. Titanium dioxide in the food. Titanium dioxide in the pillows. Namelessposter (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

He's not beating the conspiracy. MB2437 19:24, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KZ (karting), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dunlop.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

You included the link to the page which doesn't support your prefered sentence. "Prevailed throughout" is not, in any way, broadly shared. It is factually incorrect, since Red Bull did not win in 2009. Sure, they had a faster car for much of the season, but how is that relevant to an article about Hamilton? Not sure it was necessary to put DUE in caps like that either. Are we collaborative and bold or what? Bertcocaine (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

They did prevail in terms of development, which is verified and discussed in the article body. Either way, they did prevail across that timespan; would it also be incorrect for 2010 through 2013, given they didn't win every race? It is relevant to why he was not winning titles in those seasons. DUE was capitalised in reference to WP:DUE—this is standard formatting in discussions on Wikipedia. MB2437 02:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Very nice work on List of international kart racing champions and surely a ton of time. My only comment is that the list immediately prompts the question why the senior karting titles produce so few F1 champions, so it may be worth adding a paragraph on why F1 drivers normally top out at KF2/KF3. Namelessposter (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! If I can find a source covering it I will. The top classes (particularly in shifters) are professional categories dominated by 18–30 year old factory drivers. It's extremely impressive when a junior driver is able to win at such a level; they usually advance to junior formulae before reaching that point, which is why the KF3 class was eventually given World Championship status in 2010.

In KZ (the top shifter category), lightning struck twice when Verstappen and Leclerc (both 15) finished 1–2 at the 2013 World Championship—nobody under 20 had won at that level before. Only Antonelli has come close to that level since (topped qualifying at the 2021 World Championship and was fourth in the heats before his tyres stuck off-the-line in the final), although the minimum age for F4 being lowered to 15 has prevented this in cases like Arvid Lindblad and Freddie Slater, who were both successful in KZ2. It usually only gives talented juniors one year in OK before progressing (Antonelli, Slater, and Lindblad had all reached that level at 13).

Hopefully I'll be able to find some verification online for this! MB2437 21:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Interesting piece in Vroomkart this week somewhat covering the content. MB2437 16:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

A neat and surprisingly detailed interview. I do wonder whether Piastri's success will start pushing people to deemphasize higher-level karting in favor of RC cars, but it's not like OP actually skipped karting. Namelessposter (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Only at a young age if money is a concern—it can teach basic fundamentals but crucially doesn't give you that natural feel behind the wheel. It's very impressive what Piastri has done after starting that late, but it has meant he doesn't have an edge over the likes of Verstappen, Leclerc, and Norris in raw speed. At least in my eyes. Piastri's strength is his intelligence, which allows him to all but eliminate that disadvantage. Even then, he still won three back-to-back national titles in karting. MB2437 09:50, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I am bit surprised that you reverted the edit on Akbar Ebrahim. It is not an international series, I understand that, but we are talking about a race, the line does not say it is a series. And for an Indian racing in England is an "international event" and he is the first one. If you follow Indian motorsports, you will know that. Anyway, considering you expertise in Motorsports, I will re word it. Also, he is no more the president of fmsci... need to change that. I am doing the edits in good faith and not with an intention to revert others'... Thanks and regards! Davidindia (talk) 16:53, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

An "international event" would still be one that's part of a multi-national series, at least in my eyes—British Formula Two is firmly a national championship. See "international" championships such as FIA Formula 3 Championship, as well as the List of FIA championships. Being "the first Indian driver to compete abroad/overseas/outside of India" would be clearer. MB2437 01:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

You had to do it, huh?😂 Just kidding, I’ve just always hated that specific portion of the MOS lol. I just don’t get it. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

You could start an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography if you wish to unwrite it. It makes perfect sense in cases such as "the Greatest" and the like, where the nickname is not strictly a trademark, but I can understand the concern with proper nouns such as wrestling ring names and musical acts. MB2437 19:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Let’s just say that I went off the rails in a rant at that talk page when I first got here (which didn’t help my case at all😂) and I don’t think it will ever get changed. It is what it is, but I was just hoping it would go unnoticed at Muhammad Ali. Good while it lasted I guess. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure the poetry helped 😭 MB2437 19:51, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Hahahahhahahhaha I’m legit crying of laughter I totally forgot about that. I hope you enjoyed the read at least🤣 GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Did give me a good chuckle! MB2437 22:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Hey there - just a friendly heads-up that per MOS:FILMPLOT, there's a presumptive limit of 700 words for plot summaries. I've gotten away with longer for super-long films (Lawrence of Arabia (film)) and films with particularly arcane narrative structures (Inland Empire (film)), but F1 wouldn't qualify. Namelessposter (talk) 03:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Just read that a minute ago! I am planning to trim it down now the key points are noted—it's a 156-minute film with a lot of technical content and pivotal moments so it will be a task, but should definitely get well below 800. MB2437 03:20, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Well, for films like these, you could either leave in the racing jargon or not. Without the jargon I could probably chop it down to 500-600 words, as the film follows the standard Hollywood formula. Granted, there's an argument for leaving in the jargon since the FIA/Formula One Group seemed to treat the film as a tutorial on the rules of F1. If you want to keep it, give it a go. I sometimes cheat the word count (as I did on Moneyball, another sports film) by moving material into footnotes and not counting the footnotes against the word count. Namelessposter (talk) 03:24, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I'll try to cut unnecessary jargon where possible although some will help with concision; we have explanatory wikilinks to help in those cases, as well as the glossary of motorsport terms. The efn idea is a good shout, I've already been using them for scenes inspired by real-life incidents. MB2437 03:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

(In any event I should note that it is much easier to trim a plot summary when the article is protected or the film isn't in theaters anymore. As you can probably tell already.) Namelessposter (talk) 03:35, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Already ahead of you, requested protection here. MB2437 03:37, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I also see that you have run afoul of one of the more aggro film IPs, who constantly changes their IP but normally sticks to the 109.76 to 109.79 range (that is, the Vodafone IP addresses for the Republic of Ireland, although I don't know if they're actually Irish). I've asked them to get a username in the past but they seem to like the pattern of being recognizable to frequent editors of film articles but unrecognizable to general audiences. They have a longstanding, mostly one-sided, dispute with Evope that has been going on since 2023, if not earlier. (See User talk:Evope.) I would be careful about how you respond to them, I don't know if Evope's ever fought back or tried to get them banned, but as Evope's talk page illustrates, they can go on extended vendettas. They are also not... the best... about responding to talk page messages. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, I think this particular editor changes their IP so often that even if you ping them via reply, your message may not reach them. Namelessposter (talk) 02:00, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

(I mention this in part because you replied to one of their more argumentative posts on the F1 film talk page and I would not expect to receive a reply. They might, but they also might not.) Namelessposter (talk) 02:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up! Just left a reply so the reasoning for the longer plot and related jargon is plain-to-see on the talk page. MB2437 02:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Against my will, I'm enjoying this. Namelessposter (talk) 02:36, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

One man's suffering is another's joy! This guy is gonna give me an aneurysm. I fear getting the champagne out now it's under 700 words would be a little hasty. MB2437 02:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Update: it was. MB2437 20:25, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

I think you put your finger on the problem: our anonymous Irish friend makes edits to articlespace but generally prefers to criticize other editors instead of fixing articles themselves. That said, they understand Wikipedia arguments and policies quite well. (I mentioned the Evope-IP dispute earlier; the IP is generally right and would have reined in Evope much earlier if they were polite about it.) At least, well enough that I suspect they have an established handle and simply hide behind an IP to be rude to people without getting escalated to ANI.

You are well within your rights to stick to your guns until the IP actually decides to make the edit; they often don't. 90% of Wikipedia is showing up. And on the note of showing up... apologies I haven't been able to chip into Wikipedia lately; I'm getting crushed at work. Namelessposter (talk) 00:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

And on that note, check out User talk:MikeAllen#How to report an IP address and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User: Evope for some good fun. Namelessposter (talk) 21:58, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

All of that over rounding to three sig figs—I'd use 3 for π in engineering! If they want a consensus they should start an RfC at WP:FILM instead of whining to ANI. Although, consensus for their preferred version has seemingly gone against them in both discussions above and each of the ones they cited. Would help their case if they didn't write 40-mark essays of pointed waffle instead of being clear and concise; you have to read 500 words to get "they frequently update infoboxes and leads but not the body, leading to inconsistencies in our work". MB2437 22:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Ah, yes - it's one thing when the IP tells Evope to put consistent box office figures in the infobox, lead, and body (which I believe is how the IP-Evope beef got started), it's another thing when they are trying to establish a consensus about sig figs. All very silly stuff. Namelessposter (talk) 22:35, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Are you goning to reply? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 22:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I don’t know you, and I’m not following your conversation much, but stealth editing Mb’s page to say he’s a twat (and passing it off as his edit) was pretty rude. Namelessposter (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

That was just a little joke, I knew you would notice and edit it, anyway 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 13:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

I did reply. MB2437 23:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I'd have thought an apology for an incorrect reference would have been better than the pointed "contribute to fixing it then". And perhaps you could go back and format the reference properly? Thanks. Mark83 (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Apologies for being pointed! Will do, wasn't going to waste time formatting it if it were to be reverted. MB2437 10:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. And on reflection, apologies for being point myself here myself. Mark83 (talk) 11:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

btw if you have discord or anything, I'd love to talk to you there as we have a dedicated part of the feeder series server on Wikipedia editors and you'll fit right perfectly there :) (my discord is Memedanker52 if you want to add me) BurningBlaze05 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to F1 (film), you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You’ve reverted about twelve editors in the last 48 hours, so you’re well beyond 3RR as it stands. I understand you’ve done a lot of work on the article, but your seemingly knee-jerk reversions might be construed as WP:OWN. Seasider53 (talk) 20:03, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

All edits were justified in the summaries. At what point did I violate WP:3RR? Most reversions have been to contentious changes, MOS violations, and edits overriding talk page consensus that the plot needed trimming—hardly knee-jerk. Will tone down the editing over the next few days anyway, the number of edits has decreased rapidly; the semi-protection request was previously denied. MB2437 20:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Upon reflection, I can see how it could be perceived as going beyond 3RR, given it was not limited to vandalism, the reversions to contentious changes were not regarding a BLP—which I am used to working on—and there is no exemption for violations of talk page consensus / MOS. Apologies. MB2437 23:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

So then, favourite driver and team? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Michael Schumacher and McLaren—I grew up in Woking. MB2437 22:10, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

For me, Oliver Bearman and Alpine 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

What do you think? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I also like C Sainz Jr 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Who is your least favourite team and driver? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 22:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Not a big fan of Alpine and Stroll. MB2437 22:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I love Stroll, as an Australian 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:7D69:9785:4EEF:493A (talk) 06:40, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

He's a talented driver, as proven several times over, but half-arses nearly every other weekend and never looks like he wants to be there. A lot of entitlement and not enough grit. The way he treats his team is abhorrent. I suppose it's to be expected when you don't have to fight for your place in the sport—it seems Lawrence gave him an ultimatum towards the end of 2023 and start of 2024, when he was performing at his best—but there are so many young drivers who would kill for the opportunities he has yet never seems to want. MB2437 06:51, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Well at least he is good 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:1176:AA36:D97E:F4C8 (talk) 18:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Do you like Oli Bearman? And Andrea Antonelli? What do you think about Fernando Alonoz? And Carlos Alcaraz? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:1176:AA36:D97E:F4C8 (talk) 18:54, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

I like Bearman, followed Antonelli closely since karts, was an Alonso fan as a kid during his second McLaren stint, and who doesn't like Carlitos? MB2437 21:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

And who is more likeable, Carlos Sainz Jr or Carlos Alcaraz? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:79FD:EA77:8693:C9A6 (talk) 19:33, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

What do you think about Sinner doping? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:79FD:EA77:8693:C9A6 (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Definitely Alcaraz, pure humility through-and-through and a great personality for tennis. From what I know, Sinner's doping offence was fairly borderline, but it will forever go against his record as a great of the sport. MB2437 19:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Why not Sainz? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:79FD:EA77:8693:C9A6 (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Gets a little big-for-his-boots, but I still rate him relatively highly as a driver. It's not so much a mark of me not liking Sainz as it is me being a fan of Alcaraz. MB2437 21:16, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh

Hat do you think about him accidentally exposing his penis online? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Haven't seen it, nor do I fancy Googling it. MB2437 12:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Why not? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Not my cup of tea nor did he want anyone to see it. I also don't want the Daily Mail or the like in my browser history, can't have my MI5 agent think I'm a twat. MB2437 21:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

His penis looks really nice though, I caught a glimpse of it on Spanish media 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 21:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Good for him, if he loses his backhand then he can make a career switch to backstrokes on OnlyFans. MB2437 22:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

It was after the Wimbledon final, in a video on Instagram congratulating Sinner, coming out of the shower, where he accidentally flashed. 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:F5CF:C74C:FB59:E61F (talk) 13:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Please reply 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:64E2:48AE:D3AB:67E6 (talk) 18:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

? 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:64E2:48AE:D3AB:67E6 (talk) 21:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Please reply 2A02:C7C:746D:3000:DD79:DC7A:962D:A699 (talk) 20:11, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey there, I saw you editing some of my wiki pages and I wanted to personally thank you for improving them. I hope you're having a great day and happy editing!! Road Atlanta Turn 5 (Talk) 10:13, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words, brought a smile to my face—to you too! MB2437 11:58, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I know this has already been drawn out to hell and back but your version works perfectly and I highly suggest you add it back. Electricmemory (talk) 13:43, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

There isn't consensus to do so, unfortunately. MB2437 13:46, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

The way you wrote it follows BLP rules; and there's certainly enough people who think it should be included. (The only real opposer seems to be the Dan Gurney guy). The lack of a clear consensus doesn't really apply here. Electricmemory (talk) 13:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

The main issue with people adding it to the page at first was the fact it didn't follow BLP. Yours, however, does, so it's a non issue. Electricmemory (talk) 13:49, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, You have been paired at good article review circles to review Zhao Xintong. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #46.

History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Champions of the Future is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of History6042 -- History6042 (talk) 12:22, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I wanted to publicly thank you for bringing up the incident with the weird IP(s) that left those creepy comments on my talk page (and as I see, multiple instances of yours, wow). I'm fairly new to the whole procedures for this kind of thing, so again you have my thanks for that. BrandNewSaint (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

No worries, apologies for not elevating this matter before it reached you. MB2437 18:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

did you change the wording of my edit due to conciseness TheSpecialOne799 (talk) 21:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Not really, more that his two fastest laps on their own aren't really noteworthy—they aren't wins or podiums. I didn't even bother adding his fastest lap in Belgium to the body. MB2437 21:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

i see. your right to mention his fastest lap in Japan as he became the youngest driver to set one which is a record. TheSpecialOne799 (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Champions of the Future has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of History6042 -- History6042 (talk) 13:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oscar Piastri 2016 City of Melbourne Titles.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Champions of the Future has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of History6042 -- History6042 (talk) 22:47, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oscar Piastri Yas Marina Test 2021.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:28, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Charles Leclerc Max Verstappen.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:33, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Please only upload non free images if they meet all the WP:NFCC- particularly "significantly enhance an article". Karting images of F1 drivers who have loads of free images in the article does not meet this criterion. On a quick look of your user contributions for file uploads, I suspect a large number of these images should be deleted. Even if you disagree with me, please at least wait for WP:FFD consensus on the ones I have nominated before uploading more similar karting images. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

The free images in question are completely irrelevant to the sourced content being illustrated. You equally do not need to spam FFD with every file in hopes one will get the consensus you desire. MB2437 23:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Happy to let FFD have a consensus on this- but I strongly suspect consensus will be with what I'm saying. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:44, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I understand that differing views may come from the first two, but the Leclerc–Verstappen one is crucial and the event pictured is still widely discussed 13 years on. MB2437 23:53, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mb2437, I am inviting previous participants of a good article review circle to nominate another article for a circle. As you know, GARC is an excellent way to get a good article nomination reviewed more quickly and help reduce the backlog at WP:GAN. I hope you will consider participating again, and happy editing! Z1720 (talk) 19:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I will let you know tomorrow! Had a great experience with GARC, thank you very much. MB2437 19:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey, I saw you had also removed the "racing" from the godfather term on the article, and I do agree it's a silly modifier to add to an unofficial title. It was additionally changed on Jules Bianchi as well, if you wanted to sort that as well. If not, I can do so later. If it pops up again, we can start a discussion on one of the talk pages. Thanks. Haj (talk) 18:02, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

This is being discussed at Talk:Charles Leclerc. MB2437 14:18, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:George Russell 2020 Sakhir Grand Prix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jack Aitken 2020 Sakhir Grand Prix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrea Kimi Antonelli Karting European Championship 2021.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:07, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Brundle Senna 1983.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Max Verstappen Karting World Championship 2013.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Max Verstappen 2024 iRacing Daytona 24.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:26, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mb2437! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Kimi Antonelli several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Kimi Antonelli, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. SSSB (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I have been trying to avoid WP:3RR and resolve it at the talk page, hence why I ultimately brought it to the WP! Thank you for stepping in though. MB2437 15:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi, are you planning to add winners of World Cups in senior direct-drive classes anytime soon? Because I could do that, but I don’t know if you have something already prepared for that. 12316A (talk) 10:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I am; have the tables organised at User:Mb2437/sandbox3#Karting World Cup—feel free to add to them! MB2437 13:26, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Kimi Antonelli is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Kimi Antonelli has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:46, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrea Kimi Antonelli FIA Motorsport Games.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:04, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:2022 FIA Motorsport Games F4 Cup Podium.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:05, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mb2437. Thank you for your work on OKN-Junior. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for taking the time to create the article! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 12:13, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

On 12 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article OK-N, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that kart racing has crowned its first female champion in a global series since 1966 within its newly established OK-N category? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/OK-N. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, OK-N), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

On 12 September 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Champions of the Future, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that kart racing has crowned its first female champion in a global series since 1966 within its newly established OK-N category? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/OK-N. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Champions of the Future), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Kimi Antonelli has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:37, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

On 22 October 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dries Van Langendonck, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dries Van Langendonck has been called "the great Belgian [Formula One] hope"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dries Van Langendonck. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dries Van Langendonck), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Oscar Piastri is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SnowyRiver28 -- SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Oscar Piastri has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SnowyRiver28 -- SnowyRiver28 (talk) 00:07, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Oscar Piastri at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! TarnishedPath^talk 09:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

I’ve got a guy who may have broken 3RR on Mulholland Drive (film) to delete a claim that has fairly straightforward sourcing, claiming that the reputational claims are merely an opinion (sourced or not). What is the procedure - do we take to talk first or do we go straight to ANI? Namelessposter (talk) 23:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Did not see any 3RR on the history and gave my two cents; it would go to WP:ANEW. MB2437 00:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! This actually is the third time they've deleted the claim:

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mulholland_Drive_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=1281816746

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mulholland_Drive_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=1318600680

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mulholland_Drive_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=1320135280

But the first one was eight months ago. Alas... Namelessposter (talk) 00:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Rule is exceeding three. Would not be a 3RR violation as that strictly applies to a 24-hour window but would count as edit warring. MB2437 00:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Got it. That's very helpful to know - I normally take matters to talk long before it gets to that point. I will have to read the rule more closely. Namelessposter (talk) 00:36, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Got the approval. Thanks! Namelessposter (talk) 03:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, you have been paired at good article review circles to review Samar. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #56.

Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I hope you will also consider nominating another article for a circle. Please ping me if you have any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Charles Leclerc is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of MasterfulNerd -- MasterfulNerd (talk) 22:41, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you declare that you are canceling inconvenient information about Nikita Mazepin out of personal financial interest.The question of your interested editing will be raised with the administrators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-32507-53 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Please do not accuse other editors of misbehavior without evidence. As a courtesy notice, I am informing Mb2437 that this has been brought up to AN/I, although I expect it to be speedily closed. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:07, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I can delete whatever bullshit crops up on my own talk page. MB2437 11:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:09, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello I'm a student from LUISS university in Rome and I'm working on a presentation based on wikipedia's crowdsourcing process and one part of the work is to put myself in the shoes of a wikipedia contributor and find out some feeling he receives when editing or writing pages. The questions I would like to receive answers on are the following:

1. What does the editor think and feel:
2. What does the editor say and do:
3. What does the editor hear and see (about its surroundings):
4. What are his pains (what type of frustration does the user feel when contributing):
5. What are his gains (what does make him feel good when contributing):

Active support is really needed so thanks in advance and have a great day Tartaluca (talk) 14:41, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tartaluca, happy to help—although I will say you may face backlash from other experienced editors for this process:

1. Enjoyment—a hobby like any other. I see issues with our encyclopaedia and fix them, whether its grammar, tone, formatting, or outright absence of information.
2. I primarily work on motor racing articles (Formula One, the lower levels of formula racing, and kart racing). My main focus is on racing driver biographies; main projects are on my user page. I have also worked on wider sport, politics, geography, cinema, etc.
3. Not so much. A lot of stubbornness and a lack of compromise.
4. My main issue is our "neutral point of view" process and varying perceptions of it; (I feel) common consensus it to follow the bias of reliable sources, rather than discuss matters plainly in an impartial tone, forcing media opinion on readers as if they cannot form their own views. This caused a lot of controversy recently when the co-founder publicly opposed it.
5. Getting to learn and write about the things I love. It is a rewarding experience that challenges and humbles me.

Best of luck with your project! MB2437 03:33, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

thanks so much have a wonderful day Tartaluca (talk) 09:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:SKUSA SuperNationals XXVII Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Club racing, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 03:06, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

Has Lindblad's stock fallen this year? Considering the weak grid but also the fact that the drivers ahead of him are two years older and Kimi's good performances in F1 after finishing 6th in F2. I'd go with lower but I could convince myself that he's ready for Racing Bulls. I like Dunne but it's a small sample size. Namelessposter (talk) 15:10, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Not really, given his age and the fact he will (likely) be announced as an F1 driver in four days. His CV speaks for itself. He is still one of the very few serious F1 prodigies in junior formulae alongside Slater (rumoured to join Audi), Van Langendonck (McLaren until 2031), and possibly Câmara (Ferrari). 10 years ago, Fornaroli would be an F1 shoe-in but I'm still not convinced he will make it and will almost certainly find himself condemned to Formula E. I would give Lindblad another year in F2, but Honda's departure has forced their hand early. Not all that bad with the reg changes.

F2 has progressively become more setup-dependent and indicative of team performance as opposed to driver performance; the "spec series" label in the pre-F1 hierarchy has become gradually more comical and the switch to ground effect only exacerbated it. The teams' primary influence should always be on raceday. Antonelli and Bearman were textbook examples of this last season, when Bortoleto was the only driver who really had their level of ability yet they couldn't get close; Bearman only finished one point clear of Maini in twelfth. F1 teams seem to solely be scouting from karting, F4, and FR now. You can only really compare teammates and even then there is a chassis/engine lottery at play.

Dunne has speed, but his racecraft is diabolical. Damn good iRacer though, albeit not as good as Van Langendonck. MB2437 15:43, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

All very fair, F2 has been competitively illogical for a while now. My conspiracy theory is that F1 teams encourage F2/F3 to be so cash-intensive despite their lack of predictive value because the main purpose of the European racing pyramid is to force even regular rich people like George Russell to sign team friendly 10 year contracts as fifteen year olds. Namelessposter (talk) 16:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Academies can only cover half of the cost—it forced O'Sullivan out of F2 last year despite full backing from Williams. The main allures of academies are that they get them in the door and offer testing opportunities. Slater does not need the financial support in the slightest but is set to join Audi, presumably for the inevitable, extensive testing programme he will receive. Most F1-level talents will be able to bring in their own sponsorship or the F2/F3 teams themselves will cover the fee; it only truly becomes a necessity for the likes of Van Langendonck, Ocon, Hamilton, etc. who needed that support back in go-karts. No clue how much the BRDC would have been paying Russell, I think ART covered the rest. He certainly could have found the investment elsewhere given his resumé. The decade-long contracts for teenagers, however, are certainly a moral grey area and has recently ruined the likes of Pourchaire and Drugovich. Bortoleto is very fortunate the stars aligned for him last year. MB2437 19:34, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

There’s academies (I need money) and there’s “academies” (here for the inside track to the seat—Norris, Piastri, Bearman, Stroll, etc.). Both have value for the driver but the leverage is different—maybe the same length, but the driver can insist on out clauses or certain assurances of getting an F1 seat. I doubt Piastri would have gotten a breakable Alpine contract if he hadn’t been paying his own way. Same for when Stroll switched from Ferrari to Williams.

Russell got pretty minimal BRDC backing after his first year of Euro F3, if I recall correctly. Volkswagen paid for his first year of Euro F3, and Mercedes paid for the rest. I’m sure George could have found *a* sponsor somewhere—but I don’t think he wanted to endure the Red Bull shark tank if he could avoid it. Namelessposter (talk) 00:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Make that two days… MB2437 15:35, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Lawson over Dunne is probably the right decision but it would have been funny to see another year of Lindblad/Dunne. Nice to see the wonderkids arrive. Namelessposter (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Not wholly convinced it was—Lawson will be gone in two years, may as well bring in another young talent instead of wasting time the way they did with Tsunoda. I would have gone all-in with Dunne or Fornaroli, even though I have doubts they would last. Few come through the ranks quite like Lindblad so it will be fantastic to see him, Antonelli, Bearman, Bortoleto, and Hadjar on the grid next year, with three of them in factory teams and the other two set for promotion to one. Got a few years before Slater, Van Langendonck, and, maybe, Câmara emerge so enjoy the wave while it lasts! MB2437 18:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Based on Colapinto and Bortoleto (and maybe Albon?), F1 teams can make decent cash from transfer fees for academy talents with long junior contracts and no promotion prospects (although both of these guys had better sponsors than either Lawson or Dunne). Lawson is at least not embarrassing himself in the Racing Bulls car, so maybe he has potential to become a Gasly/Ocon/Perez-level journeyman. If so, Cadillac or Audi might pay a decent fee for him. That might put him over Dunne in Red Bull’s eyes—nobody is paying a big fee for Dunne right now. Namelessposter (talk) 18:45, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

If the rumour mill is to be believed, Audi will line up with Bortoleto and Slater by 2028. Cadillac (once Pérez and Bottas depart), Haas (Bearman replacing Hamilton, or a move elsewhere should Piastri pull the pin on McLaren), and Alpine (Colapinto) appear to be opportunities; I am very surprised that Cadillac are yet to pursue Crawford given they want an American driver so bad, maybe Ugochukwu in future.

I see Hamilton (2027), Hülkenberg (2028, maybe later if he finds a seat elsewhere), Bottas (~2028), Pérez (~2028), Colapinto (about half a race into next season), Alonso (2028), and perhaps Verstappen gone in a few years time. Lawson's future, now it has been spared, really lies in what Bottas, Hülkenberg, Verstappen, and Pérez do. The more I think about it, Câmara will surely be there. Tsolov and Beganovic could also throw a spanner in the works next year. With the shape of the junior scene, most teams will prefer a young talent to a Magnussen-esque midfielder. MB2437 19:09, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

As a Los Angeles Dodgers fan, nothing about Mark Walter suggests that having an American driver is a priority for him. He cares about winning first and marketing potential second, and fan interest a distant third—this is the guy who sacrificed Corey Seager and Cody Bellinger to pay Shohei Ohtani several years down the road. If American drivers are not F1 ready he will not force the issue. I don’t place too much hope in any particular junior driver because I bought Shwartzman stock back in the day and look how that turned out. But I agree that given the overall shape of the junior pipeline, Lawson has a daunting task ahead of him. Namelessposter (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Also: outstanding Colapinto joke Namelessposter (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

On 6 December 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oscar Piastri, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2025 Oscar Piastri became the first Australian since 2010 to lead the Formula One World Drivers' Championship? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oscar Piastri. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oscar Piastri), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Kart racing results legend has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Costs of motorsport, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 22:07, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Unto others as you wish for yourself. Unity will forever be rooted in our humanity. Happy Holidays to you too my friend. MB2437 18:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:British Kart Championships, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 10:08, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Tony Brooks 1957 Monaco Grand Prix.webp requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file from a commercial source (e.g. Associated Press, Getty Images), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary. If you can explain why the file can be used under the non-free content guidelines, please add the appropriate non-free use tag and rationale.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  ${\displaystyle 999}$REAL 💬 ⬆   00:14, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Howdy. I just completed my first GA review at Talk:Shikona/GA1, although I left the final verdict to my GA mentor IAWW. I'd like to pick up one more next week before I get wrecked at work for three months. I see that Charles Leclerc has been sitting in the queue for a while despite looking in good shape. Do you have time to work on it next week? I'll need to wrap up most of the review up by the 4th. Also feel free to take a look at my Shikona review; if you prefer that someone more experienced handle the Leclerc review totally fine with me. NicheSports (talk) 02:58, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Hiya, it would be brilliant if you could! It is quite a long article but should be a fairly routine review; have some trimming to do in areas but I have made sure every criterion is meticulously followed over the past 14 months of writing and tweaking its content. MB2437 22:45, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Done. Will pick it up tonight and complete the first pass tomorrow. NicheSports (talk) 22:50, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Charles Leclerc is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NicheSports -- NicheSports (talk) 05:06, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, Mb2437, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to see you intend to help us improve Wikipedia's coverage of women. When you feel like creating your first biography of a woman, you'll find some useful tips in our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing and all the best for 2026!--Ipigott (talk) 09:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Charles Leclerc has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NicheSports -- NicheSports (talk) 04:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

The redirect Road to the World Cup has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 8 § Road to the World Cup until a consensus is reached. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 15:11, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi MB2437, thanks for participating in the WikiCup. You recently submitted two articles for points in the WikiCup, but unfortunately neither are eligible:

• You submitted Oscar Piastri for DYK points. It is not eligible because (1) it was nominated to DYK as a newly promoted GA, and (2) even if it were just a new or expanded article, Main Page appearances must have occurred within two weeks of the submission and during the WikiCup (neither of which is the case here, as the appearance was last year). Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring#Did you know? states that only newly created or expanded DYKs (including those moved to mainspace or converted from redirects) are eligible for DYK points.
• You submitted Joanna Trollope for ITN points, but you do not seem to have been a major contributor to the article. According to XTools, you seem to have made only minor changes, with less than 10% authorship. Epicgenius (talk) 22:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I understand now. Thank you! MB2437 23:47, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Formula Super A, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 00:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Mb2437. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Formula Europe, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 00:08, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. — Newslinger talk 08:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Please be aware that WP:CT/AP (post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people) and WP:CT/BLP (living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles) are also contentious topics. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 08:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Peter Gethin, a link pointing to the disambiguation page British Formula Three Championship was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, you have been paired at good article review circles to review 2010 Yazoo City tornado. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #66.

RedShellMomentum 03:13, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Andrea Margutti Trophy is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DDMS123 -- DDMS123 (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Andrea Margutti Trophy has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of DDMS123 -- DDMS123 (talk) 01:45, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Women in Red | February 2026, Vol 12, Issue 2, Nos 358, 359, 361, 362, 363 Online events: New: Alphabet run: countries starting with B | Black Women | Works by women: theatre, opera, music Continuing: #1day1woman ( year-long initiative) | Sports (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Join Wikipedia:26 for '26 and create or substantially improve twenty-six Wikipedia articles during the year 2026, at least one for each letter of the English alphabet. Tip of the month: Our redlists are a great resource, but not every redlinked subject is notable. Be sure to research before starting a new article. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Lajmmoore (talk 22:49, 31 January 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

You’re pretty plugged in - the George WDC odds seem pretty ridiculous right now. It seems too soon to tell whose car will be better but everyone seems to think Merc takes it at a canter. Is there any real heat to the rumor or just the usual offseason scuttlebutt? Namelessposter (talk) 05:48, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Real heat. McLaren and Williams could be within distance although their chassis haven't been designed around the power unit. Red Bull are still a question mark, but they've cast doubt over their own performance. They scalped most of the Merc engine leads back in '21 when the cost cap hit. George has been my '26 champion prediction for the past six years and nothing has changed that. I do think people are foolish to completely rule Kimi out with the new regulations, however. MB2437 12:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

George may not be an actual Brummie (just a Wolves fan), but there is nothing Brummier than repeating Mansell’s feat of getting drummed out (or drumming yourself out) of a WCC car right after winning the WDC. Namelessposter (talk) 20:36, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Could've been V*lla. Damon managed it too. Something about Brits and Williams... MB2437 21:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

George is not a good liar (first minute). Namelessposter (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Sort of a content question. Recent edits have attributed Ferrari's loss to a strategy error. Not sure that's true?

I thought Ferrari made the right call to stay out and gamble for a safety car. On the one hand, Merc was blatantly managing at the end: Russell closed the initial gap to Hamilton brutally quick. It might be sandbagging, it might be George's philosophy to win as slowly as possible, not sure. On the other hand, Ferrari maybe should have predicted the hard tyres would be as good after the 10-lap mark as they were last year.

Good result for George, but rather dull unless you enjoy yo-yo overtakes. As long as boosts exist, it is still too difficult to naturally overtake a driver with a boost in hand without using your own boost, and boosts are so power-limited on this track. Everyone is treating the boosts as an optimization tool for a given track (PvE), instead of an overtaking tool (PvP). We'll see if other tracks are like this. Namelessposter (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

It was a gamble that didn't work, which in my eyes—and quite a few sources' views—is a strategy error. Left them completely out of sync with Merc, when they knew they didn't have the race pace to keep up when outside of boost range, even with a tyre delta. I feel Russell's victory was inevitable, but you never know.

I thought the first race was successful for the new era. While the closing speeds were artificial, drivers still made the moves in the corners. We saw some utterly fantastic moments between Leclerc and Russell, as well as from Verstappen. Looked a four-way dogfight for the win before the VSC! It was far more enjoyable than wait 2 seconds behind, close the gap gradually as their tyres fall off, bide your time, fly past with DRS. It still rewarded intelligent racecraft.

So satisfying, as well, to see Verstappen able to stay within half-a-second of Norris and not have to drop back when he didn't have the pace to pass. Still tweaks to be made, which the FIA have complete control over, but I remain optimistic. I am deeply concerned about qualifying, however. Not sure if you saw the Russell vs Antonelli onboard, but it was comical. Entirely decided by their having different deployment strategies over one lap. Russell gained about a second on the straights and Antonelli clawed back the rest in the corners, with no gauge on who actually put together a better lap. Should be flat out. MB2437 01:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I was so delighted with the close following! That’s honestly the most important thing (other than getting rid of the hard tyre domination). But we said that in 2022, didn’t we? I do think the battery/boost issue can be fixed with enough innovation and I like that Formula One set the engine manufacturers a hard target. But you can see why they’ve cut down on Spa, and Monza could be tough to watch. Namelessposter (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Also: quite enjoyed watching Arvid. He’ll be a very fun rival to Kimi for sure. Namelessposter (talk) 02:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Congrats on the win! Many more to come. Namelessposter (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, you have been paired at good article review circles to review 2008 United States Senate election in Delaware. At the same time, another user will be reviewing the article you nominated. Please wait 24 hours or until all users have accepted their nomination before starting your review in case a user in your circle decides to decline their invite.

To accept or decline this invitation to review the article, visit WT:GARC#Circle #68.

Z1720 (talk) 04:49, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article OK-N is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article OK-N has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheNuggeteer -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 04:33, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kimi Antonelli, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Torchbearer was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Charles Leclerc has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NicheSports -- NicheSports (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey - I changed "el Mencho" to "El Mencho" because I initially thought the lowercase was just a typo. I only saw your edit citing MOS:THENICKNAME after I'd already published mine, sorry about that. I completely understand the policy-based reasoning, and it does make sense to follow it. At the same time, I've noticed that virtually all reliable sources seem to use "El Mencho" even mid-sentence. "el Mencho" looks a bit unusual stylistically, though I understand that consistency with the MOS is important. I suppose there's also a WP:COMMONNAME consideration here. I'm curious to hear your thoughts when you have a chance. Hope all is well. Morogris (✉ • ✎) 05:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Hiya! The thing about that point in the MOS is it very frequently goes against COMMONNAME in media, inherently. Take examples like the Weeknd, "the Greatest", the Who, etc.—all commonly capitalised in major publications. One of the many differences between our MOS and AP style. "Le", "la", "l'", "les" (fr), "el", "la", "los", "las" (es), and "il", "lo", "l'", "i", "gli", "la", "le" (it) are all definite articles equivalent to "the", which follow the same philosophy in their own languages. See articles like l'Humanité, el Economista, and la Repubblica for examples of this even featuring in branding. It is frequently overlooked by editors. MB2437 06:26, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Women in Red | March 2026, Vol 12, Issue 3, Nos 358, 359, 364, 365, 366 Online events: March 1-31: Artists & Activists | Artworks by women | Alphabet run: countries starting with C Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports Announcements from other communities: Celebrate Women Unreferenced articles backlog drive Wiki Loves Ramadan Tip of the month: Those experiencing difficulties with new articles can follow the guidance in our essays, perhaps starting with our Ten Simple Rules. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 09:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The first round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As some of you may have noticed, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. This point increase has been retroactively applied to all good article reviews for which competitors have claimed points in this round. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.

Round 1 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 300 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1,467 round points, largely gained from 1 featured article, 5 featured lists, 15 good articles, and 42 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Olliefant (submissions) with 1,246 round points, largely from 4 featured lists, 9 good articles, 2 featured topic articles, 4 did you know articles, and 75 FAC and GAN reviews;
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, largely from 3 featured articles, 6 good articles, and 5 did you know articles;
• MCE89 (submissions) with 848 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 32 FAC and GAN reviews; and
• Rollinginhisgrave (submissions) with 838 round points, largely from 1 featured article, 8 good articles, 1 did you know article, and 14 FAC, GAN, and peer reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 7 featured articles, 16 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 168 good articles, 13 good-topic articles and more than 50 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 14 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 700 reviews. The tournament points table will be updated within the next few days.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

On 28 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Andrea Margutti Trophy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Andrea Margutti Trophy was founded to commemorate a 14-year-old Italian kart racer who died while racing in 1989? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Andrea Margutti Trophy. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Andrea Margutti Trophy), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:02, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey there MB! Could you please check on my latest interaction on Talk:Deerfield Academy and see whether the author may have used AI to generate their latest comments to me? They’ve been declined at AfC several times for AI reasons, and it feels AI-ish, but I ran the wording of the Deerfield discussion through several AI checkers and it turned up nothing. Namelessposter (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

One look and it certainly appears that way. MB2437 19:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Noah Monteiro is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Canary757 -- Canary757 (talk) 09:33, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Noah Monteiro has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Canary757 -- Canary757 (talk) 12:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)