Jump to content

Talk:Andrea Kimi Antonelli

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 3 September 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 13:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Kimi Antonelli → Kimi Antonelli – WP:COMMONNAME. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support on the basis of a more concise title.
𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 21:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do not support, Andrea is his name and, whilst he is popularly referred to as Kimi, all series he races in have him named clearly as "Andrea Kimi Antonelli" on official media and TV graphics. Stating "commonly known as" in the introduction covers this base, in my opinion. Could become confusing for viewers looking for more information if they cannot find an "Andrea Kimi". Mb2437 (talk) 17:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's unlikely that viewers will be confused as Andrea Kimi Antonelli will redirect to Kimi Antonelli and the first sentence of the article doesn't need to change. SSSB (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Things might change in F1 but it's ultimately too soon. He's always been referred to as "Andrea Kimi Antonelli" in feeder series, and "Kimi" for short. I've rarely seen the combination "Kimi Antonelli" used until he got announced for F1 ([1], [2]). Most media, both specialised and general-interest, still goes for the full name as his WP:COMMONNAME: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. He goes by his full name on social media and is also listed as that on his Mercedes, Prema and F2 profiles. Interestingly, even the F1 website (which now seemingly favours the shorter option) went for his full name as recently as May, which hints at a will to change the trend. Like I said: too soon. MSport1005 (talk) 09:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. And I'd like to bring up some counterexamples of this: Zhou Guanyu and Jak Crawford. Before his F1 signing, he was known as Guanyu Zhou until he clarified he wanted to be known as his two names swapped around, and the F1 media referred to him as such. Antonelli goes by Kimi, but he has "Andrea Kimi Antonelli" on his socials and that's the name on the timing documents. As for Crawford, a fellow F2 driver, his full name is Carlton Jakston Crawford, but only one source states this and his socials are all Jak Crawford. So I believe that if we were to move the page to simply "Kimi Antonelli," first we would have to see if Antonelli himself changes this.DualSkream (talk), 12:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with this; with both Crawford and Zhou, their names are clearly given as such on timing documents and TV graphics. Same with Lance Stroll, as opposed to Lance Strulovitch. All article names seemingly follow this convention. This could very well change with Antonelli come next season but, until it does, I believe that should be the defining factor and this matter be tabled at a later date. Mb2437 (talk) 01:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree, and it is also the argument for switching back to Alexander Albon. Marbe166 (talk) 10:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Motorsport and WikiProject Formula One have been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lead changes

[edit]

The lead had no issues in its previous state. This edit is simply attempting to disparage the subject; replacing his F2 wins with "failed to keep the expectations, with no podiums for 14 races in a row", noting that he "failed to win the Karting World Championship", and that his contract with Mercedes is "only" one year (WP:EDITORIAL). None of these points are notable enough for his biographical summary, which is meant to concisely and impartially discuss his career. These changes were initially made by a WP:SPA. Mb2437 (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mb here; the karting statement is unsourced and not notable, and lack of performance is a) not notable and b) it would be better to mention his wins, like other articles do. The one year contract statement is fine, but shouldn't be phrased with "only". The first two statements are not neutral, and should be removed since this is a BLP. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Sandcat555 for the reversion; please read the source (in reference to the karting statement). Replying here since it is relevant to the topic.
"Worth noting is the performance of Andrea Kimi Antonelli (KR Motorsport - KR - IAME): the young Italian once again misses the start and really loses many positions, but still shows an excellent speed so as to score the second best lap of the race (50,265)"
It does not mention that he failed to win the championship; that statement is original research. I am not sure why you have reverted the edit as a whole, as you can see my reasoning in my edit summary. I would like to hear your thought process regarding the reversion. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 20:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it was sourced, it is not notable enough to be plastered in the lead in WP:EDITORIAL language as a means of diminishing his achievements, which the WP:SPA who made the initial edit was clearly created to do. Replacing his F2 wins with an opinion of him not keeping up to expectations is utterly ridiculous, and "failing" to win the World Championship is laughable—it doesn't belong in Lewis Hamilton's lead that he twice "failed" to win it, or Ayrton Senna "failing" five times; it is non-notable trivia that should be discussed neutrally in the karting section. Mb2437 (talk) 20:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You make a fine point. My mistake. Sorry Sandcat555 (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! Mb2437 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The lead isn't objective, it says "after a successful karting career" and "culminating with the Euro wins" as if it was the most prestigious championship. That's not true, the karting most prestigious championship is the world championship and he didn't win it. That's why I had to put "but failing to win the world championship", to compensate the not objective lead of "successful and culminating with Euro win". Senna's page does mention that he didn't win the world championship. Bearman page says "miserable F2 season", so I don't see why the objective disappointing F2 season as sourced shouldnt be mentioned. There's even an interview to Toto Wolff where he says he was wrong at overestimating Antonelli. Yugann (talk) 09:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The European Karting Championship is the second-most prestigious championship, and his winning the senior class back to back at 14 and 15 was widely acclaimed. His karting career was successful, not winning the World Championship does not detract from that. Lewis Hamilton's was successful, he did not win it. Ayrton Senna's was successful, he did not win it. Senna's lead mentions he came runner-up, which was his most notable achievement in karting. Antonelli did not finish that highly, nor are his World Championship performances discussed as widely as Senna's in the body, so it is not mentioned. His karting career highlight is laid out concisely in parentheses, as it is for all other drivers with such an achievement; any added detail would not be WP:PROPORTIONAL with the rest of the article, it does not need extended prose on which competitions he did not win. Any such quote on his F2 career should be in quotation marks with a name and source stated clearly to the reader: John Smith of Magazine opined that Antonelli's season was "so-and-so". Anything else would fall under WP:NEWSOPED. One source saying they thought it was disappointing doesn't mean you can state "It was disappointing" as an encyclopaedic fact. It certainly should not be in the lead, his winning multiple races—without an opinion given on the matter—is far more notable for his career. Mb2437 (talk) 13:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's your opinion and it's not objective. Stating that it's successful despite never winning or top finishing at the most prestigious championship is clearly subjective. So if a subjective "successful" is allowed then a "disappointing" should be allowed. The double standard is clear. His positioning at the World Championship must be quoted, no matter if he didn't win or wasnt runner up because it's the pinnacle of karting. In F2 the lack of podiums and performance was widely debated by the media, it would be dishonest to hide it Yugann (talk) 13:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Successful merely states it had success, which it did at a very-high level. Per the dictionary: "accomplishing a desired aim or result". Successful is not subjective in this instance, he was successful in FIA competition by winning multiple titles. This is common nomenclature throughout all F1 driver articles where the driver won an FIA Karting title: Alex Albon, Logan Sargeant, Lando Norris, Max Verstappen. I agree his World Championship performances should be discussed in the body, but definitely not in the lead. In F2 the lack of podiums and performance was widely debated by the media, it would be dishonest to hide it, his lack of performance needs to be widely agreed upon by reliable sources, else it is WP:NEWSOPED. As with the karting career in the lead, we generally condense junior careers to their most notable facts, we do not need a 400-word prose on every detail about his junior career e.g. when he did and didn't achieve podiums; simply state what he achieved and leave it up to the reader to decide if it's good or bad. NOTE: At the end of the season, I will be adding his F2 championship position. Mb2437 (talk) 13:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Successful is a subjective word, if it's allowed then the opposite "disappointing" must be allowed too. Oliver Bearman page states "miserable F2 season", why on this page it's not allowed disappointing? I put sources, one of them also quoted Toto Wolff saying he overrated Antonelli and no podiums for 14 races is a notable data Yugann (talk) 14:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bearman's page stating that is not justification, I will be going through and making sure that is addressed neutrally, per WP:NEWSOPED. No podiums for 14 races is an example of original research, you would need a direct quote attributing his "disappointment" to that run of form. I have expanded his karting career section, with all results at World Championships addressed. Mb2437 (talk) 15:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GalacticVelocity08 My mistake. Sandcat555 (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All good, no worries. I just wanted to get this done ASAP since it is a BLP. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 16:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable. I didn't catch that the source didn't actually support what was being said in this article. Sandcat555 (talk) 21:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a NPOV page

[edit]

The page is clearly not a neutral point of view, especially Mb2437 edits (his name Mb Mercedes Benz is a fan). The karting section is too long, it's trivial and not encyclopedic and is only aimed at celebrating Antonelli. For example the Garda karting has no encyclopedic interest. The narrative is clearly not neutral, such as "dominating" which is ridiculous as Antonelli never won the world championships. In no sport you can call "dominating" someone who can't win the world championship. He even adds some trivial papers quote that say "Antonelli will be a future champion", this alone proves Mb2437 is biased. If Wikipedia had to quote all the papers about karting "future champions" then thousands would have the same quote. As Mb2437 edits are clearly biased and aimed at celebrating Antonelli, his edits should be cancelled. He also deletes the sourced and objective edits that in someway disprove his celebration narrative, such as F2. Yugann (talk) 15:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MB doesn't stand for Mercedes-Benz, what are you waffling about? Vroomkart is not a trivial magazine in kart racing. His karting career is discussed objectively, and is entirely sourced. It is merely a list of his achievements year-by-year, including all European and World Championship results; it does not dwell on irrelevant information, and is certainly not "too long", "trivial" or "not encyclopedic". Might I add it was your initial idea to expand the karting career section. His South Garda Winter Cup victories clearly have "encyclopedic interest", as they are discussed in secondary, independent sources. He did dominate the European Championship—which takes place over a whole season, rather than a single race as in the KWC—in the senior class, as well as several other competitions, and that wording is reliably sourced. [15] I'm sorry you disagree with Antonelli having a successful karting career, but please learn what WP:NPOV means. What it certainly doesn't mean is plastering the article with editorial conjecture that the subject's career is "failing". He also deletes the sourced and objective edits that in someway disprove his celebration narrative, such as F2. This edit simply re-worded the "objective" claim to what the source actually says, its previous wording fell firmly under fictitious referencing. Please learn about contributing to Wikipedia before making claims about my integrity. MB2437 15:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I said the quote is trivial, not the magazine. Your attempt of changing words prices your dishonesty. It's not encyclopedic quoting a sentence like "he will be future champion" of a karting magazine. There are no sports where someone who never wins the world championship is called dominating. You're clearly wrong. No point discussing with you, there should be an independent admin to ban your editing on this page. Yugann (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • proves
Yugann (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The quote is not trivial whatsoever, and its usage adheres to WP:INTEXT and WP:NEWSOPED. It is a direct quote from one of the world's largest karting publications.[16] There are no sports where someone who never wins the world championship is called dominating: Stirling Moss dominated motor racing for two decades, and never won the World Drivers' Championship; Cristiano Ronaldo dominated football for two decades, and never won the World Cup. No point discussing with you just underlines your lack of collaboration and clear intention to undermine the subject's achievements, not contribute neutrally. This is very apparent from your editing history. You have zero policy-based arguments against the karting prose in its current format; it is sourced correctly with due weight applied, all key achievements in establishing his notability are mentioned, and it is discussed neutrally, free of editorial language or bias. The use of 'dominating' and 'successful' are both reliably sourced with inline citations. Feel free to notify WikiProject Motorsport or Formula One of this discussion if you believe other users will take your side. MB2437 19:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F3 or FR?

[edit]

Should the "Formula 3" section be renamed to Formula Regional? While FR is a subclass of F3, I feel like it would be more clear to name it as "Formula Regional" instead. People unfamiliar with the topic might misinterpret it as FIA Formula 3. While there isn't consensus, most articles about drivers that have competed in Formula Regional have it named as such, and not as Formula Three. It isn't a major change, but I don't want to interfere with the ongoing expansion. (pinging @Mb2437) GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The thinking with that edit is that people are generally unfamiliar with the term "Formula Regional"; Formula Three is a more appropriate title for readers, who we can't assume have widespread subject knowledge, to signify the progression from F4. I'm not really fussed, either one is correct, if users disagree with it then I'm happy for it to change. MB2437 01:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I understand. While I agree either could work, personally I'd still lean towards Formula Regional, but it isn't that pressing of an issue. Thanks for the response. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Andrea_Kimi_Antonelli&oldid=1266269522"