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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply

]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply

]

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)[reply]

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)[reply

]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

Hey there - just a friendly heads-up that per

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

(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)[reply]

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