Knowledge (XXG)

:Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive2 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

305:"Starting from pole position is important, as a driver has a greater chance of winning from pole than a driver who has qualified in a lower position on the starting grid." I think this is generally true although it sounds like original research. I know I've seen races where starting in second place was considered advantageous because of the layout of the circuit or because of dirty track on one side etc. 408:, it's for nominators to show that the site is a reliable source, rather than for others to show that it isn't. I too checked the site and found nothing that could help. Can you find reliable sources that use StatsF1 as a source themselves, or discuss it in a way that shows it's reliable? If not, I don't think it cuts the mustard at FLC. 452:"Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." The official site would be best, although I guess that means some work... (to put it mildly!) 430:, which does at least acknowledge its sources, most of which scan be deemed reliable. Another option would be to use the official f1 site, as although it doesn't list the poles in the way that statsf1 does all the information is on the site its just not collated. Would either of those be a better option? 518:
Well, I've replaced the general ref with one from Forix, so that's sorted, its just the inline citations from statsf1 which are now the problem, as I can't find this info reliably sourced elsewhere elsewhere. So unless I can source it reliably within 24 hours then it would be best to archive the nom.
259:
asking whether the project deemed the source reliable, unfortunately no one got back to me. There is not much on the site in the way of clarifying reliability, all I can say is that is regularly updated and the information is correct, that in itself does make the site reliable, but its the best I've
337:
Yes, it's statistically better to be anywhere in position 2-24 than on pole; however, it's statistically better to be on pole than any other individual slot. That's like saying a politician who won an election with 40% of the vote didn't win just because 20 people split the remaining 60%. :P
128: 123: 118: 482:
I left a message there and they confirmed your doubts about the reliability of the site. The only option now is to source the list individually, from the f1 website and some books that I have. There is
330:
Funnily enough "the driver that has qualified on pole position has gone on to win the race 347 times" means that less than half the races were actually one by the polesitter so statistically it's best
505:
As long as it's a reliable source (which I haven't checked), it doesn't matter if it's subscription-only. Would it be better to archive this now and to come back when you've revamped the sourcing?
88: 83: 92: 491:, and a user in the f1 project has confirmed the information is correct. The only issue is that it is subscription only, not sure if that would pose a problem or not? 75: 145: 40: 528: 513: 500: 477: 460: 439: 416: 391: 376: 347: 321: 290: 269: 246: 224: 194: 177: 444:
The Silhouet site suffers from the same problem, really - saying that you use reliable sources doesn't mean that your output is reliable. The
185:
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that the list meets the criteria. I look forward to addressing any comments, cheers.
30: 17: 79: 150: 71: 64: 260:
got. Unfortunately, I'm yet to come across an alternative reliable source which offers all the information this site does.
302:
Should "The F1 world championship " be World Championship (since you have "Formula One World Champion" in the key...)
372: 286: 509: 473: 456: 412: 368: 282: 448:
info is here. It's effectively a self-published source, and doesn't seem to pass the relevant test of
240: 358:
Perhaps worth mentioning that the qualifying sessions are currently referred to as Q1, Q2 and Q3?
524: 506: 496: 470: 453: 435: 409: 387: 343: 317: 265: 220: 190: 173: 466: 484: 234: 53: 449: 423: 405: 256: 109: 445: 520: 492: 431: 422:
I agree, it can't be proved to be a reliable source, unfortunately the folks at
383: 339: 313: 261: 216: 186: 169: 488: 426:
didn't get back to me when I brought it up at FLC. I have stumbled across
404:(with regret) on sourcing, nothing else checked. Unfortunately, under 312:
In light of the stats I've removed this sentence as I can't verify it.
427: 39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
207:
I see "pole position" and "pole-position" in the lead. Which is it?
129:
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive3
124:
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive2
119:
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive1
155: 255:
I anticipated this would come up so i left a message at
105: 101: 97: 57: 382:
Cheers for the comments TRM, I've addressed them all.
542:The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 354:"in as little as half the amount of races" -: --> 43:. No further edits should be made to this page. 548:No further edits should be made to this page. 41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates 29:The following is an archived discussion of a 8: 355:"in as few as half the number of races..." 276: 134: 279: 18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates 361:For Raikkonen, shouldn't that be 2012–? 137: 116: 233:What makes StatsF1 a reliable source? 7: 215:all should now read pole position. 465:Alternatively, have you tried the 24: 72:List of Formula One polesitters 65:List of Formula One polesitters 1: 467:reliable sources noticeboard 364:Similarly for Hulkenberg... 565: 270:22:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC) 247:21:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC) 225:22:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC) 195:20:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC) 178:20:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC) 545:Please do not modify it. 529:21:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 514:12:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 501:18:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC) 478:14:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 461:14:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 440:22:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 417:20:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 36:Please do not modify it. 31:featured list nomination 392:19:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 377:10:03, 1 May 2012 (UTC) 348:14:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC) 322:19:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 291:15:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC) 281:Resolved comments from 56:21:22, 11 June 2012 334:to be on pole...! 469:for their views? 399: 398: 181: 163: 162: 556: 547: 487:which is run by 369:The Rambling Man 283:The Rambling Man 280: 277: 243: 237: 166: 135: 113: 95: 38: 564: 563: 559: 558: 557: 555: 554: 553: 552: 543: 241: 235: 133: 86: 70: 68: 34: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 562: 560: 551: 550: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 463: 397: 396: 395: 394: 366: 365: 362: 359: 356: 352: 351: 350: 327: 326: 325: 324: 307: 306: 303: 294: 293: 275: 274: 273: 272: 250: 249: 230: 229: 228: 227: 210: 209: 183: 182: 168:Nominator(s): 161: 160: 159: 158: 156:External links 153: 148: 140: 139: 132: 131: 126: 121: 115: 67: 62: 61: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 561: 549: 546: 540: 530: 526: 522: 517: 516: 515: 512: 511: 508: 504: 503: 502: 498: 494: 490: 486: 481: 480: 479: 476: 475: 472: 468: 464: 462: 459: 458: 455: 451: 447: 443: 442: 441: 437: 433: 429: 425: 421: 420: 419: 418: 415: 414: 411: 407: 403: 393: 389: 385: 381: 380: 379: 378: 374: 370: 363: 360: 357: 353: 349: 345: 341: 336: 335: 333: 329: 328: 323: 319: 315: 311: 310: 309: 308: 304: 301: 300: 299: 296: 295: 292: 288: 284: 278: 271: 267: 263: 258: 254: 253: 252: 251: 248: 244: 238: 232: 231: 226: 222: 218: 214: 213: 212: 211: 208: 205: 204: 203: 201: 197: 196: 192: 188: 180: 179: 175: 171: 165: 164: 157: 154: 152: 149: 147: 144: 143: 142: 141: 136: 130: 127: 125: 122: 120: 117: 114: 111: 107: 103: 99: 94: 90: 85: 81: 77: 73: 66: 63: 60: 58: 55: 51: 48:The list was 44: 42: 37: 32: 27: 26: 19: 544: 541: 510: 474: 457: 413: 401: 400: 367: 331: 297: 206: 199: 198: 184: 167: 151:Citation bot 69: 50:not promoted 49: 47: 35: 28: 507:Bencherlite 471:Bencherlite 454:Bencherlite 410:Bencherlite 236:Giants2008 54:Giants2008 489:Autosport 485:this site 428:this site 298:Comments 200:Comments 146:Analysis 138:Toolbox 89:protect 84:history 521:NapHit 493:NapHit 446:writer 432:NapHit 402:Oppose 384:NapHit 340:Golbez 314:NapHit 262:NapHit 217:NapHit 187:NapHit 170:NapHit 93:delete 450:WP:RS 424:WP:F1 406:WP:RS 257:WP:F1 110:views 102:watch 98:links 16:< 525:talk 497:talk 436:talk 388:talk 373:talk 344:talk 318:talk 287:talk 266:talk 242:Talk 221:talk 191:talk 174:talk 106:logs 80:talk 76:edit 332:not 52:by 527:) 499:) 438:) 390:) 375:) 346:) 338:-- 320:) 289:) 268:) 245:) 223:) 202:– 193:) 176:) 108:| 104:| 100:| 96:| 91:| 87:| 82:| 78:| 59:. 33:. 523:( 495:( 434:( 386:( 371:( 342:( 316:( 285:( 264:( 239:( 219:( 189:( 172:( 112:) 74:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates
featured list nomination
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates
Giants2008

List of Formula One polesitters
List of Formula One polesitters
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive1
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive2
Featured list candidates/List of Formula One polesitters/archive3
Analysis
Citation bot
External links
NapHit
talk
20:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
NapHit
talk
20:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
NapHit
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.