Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Max Mosley/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 00:05, 31 March 2008.

Max Mosley edit

Self-nominator as one of several major contributors to this article I'm nominating it for featured article status. The article is currently listed as a good article and has under gone a peer review. I feel that meets all the criteria of a Featured article, it is a comprehensive insight into Max Mosley and his intresting background. It is (as far as i can judge) well written, neutral and stable. I think this article is of intrest to a wide range of people. Looking forward to your comments. Tommy turrell (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Object - The article is very recentist - that's the first thing that I can see. I am also a bit surprised that there isn't much in there about Moseley being criticised for being pro-Ferrari and pro-MS. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, it's not madly recentist: the lengths of sections are broadly in line with length of time covered and the importance of what happened. About two-thirds of the article covers the period before 1990, for example. However, I agree that far too much space is given to the 2005 USGP and particularly to the 2007 season. I'll take my word-smithing machete to them. Is there anything other than those two sections that you felt was disproportionately long?
  • OK, they're shorter now. Does that do the trick, Blnguyen? 4u1e (talk) 15:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re Ferrari and Schumacher, I agree in principle. In practice, we need sourced opinions to that effect (which I will try to find), and we need to be careful not to conflate Mosley the man with the FIA; it's not always him that makes these decisions. Since we're really talking about the period 1999 - 2006 (The FIA were perceived to be decidedly anti-Schumacher in 1994, for example), we also need to add this without adding to the perceived problem of recentism ;-). If I can find reliable sources, I'll add the comments you suggest. 4u1e (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And yet some people (http://www.grandprixgames.org/read.php?3,41044) suggesting that Max Mosley "'fixed' the outcome of an FIA World Council disciplinary hearing" to ensure that Benetton and MS weren't excluded when Benetton were found with an illegal fuel rig in 1994. Only bring it up too illistrate 4u1e's point about how tricky this would be to add comment from reliable sources.
However I too agree in principle about the perception that Mosley was/is pro-Ferrari and pro-MS. There is always paul Stoddart's Ferrari international assistance (FIA) quote (http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=32733) but I worry about to much criticism becasue it might start getting disproportionate to the rest of the text.Tommy turrell (talk) 18:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this is perhaps a bit random, but I've added a sentence on the supposed Ferrari bias, and ref'd it using three different news stories from three different news organisations over an 8 year period. Does that do the trick? I'm a bit worried we're leading the witness with this one. 4u1e (talk) 15:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note to FAC director, Blnguyen struck his comment above, so is presumably content. I've had no more specific contact from him. 4u1e (talk) 11:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments All sources look good now.
Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 23:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • what makes this http://www.thepeerage.com/p5643.htm a reliable source? I'm not seeing any sources listed on the page relating to Mosley.
    • the "Creating a market for safety" ref (current ref #51) should probably say it's a downloaded Word document, not a website.
    • http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=41019 doesn't take me to any sort of article, just what appears to be an ad.
      • Looks like ITV have re-organised their website ahead of the new season. Will try to locate the original article.
        • ITV appear to have binned their old content. Replaced with same story from Autosport.4u1e (talk) 02:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Format on the newspapers should probably spell out the months.
      • You mean expand Oct and Sep? Will do. Done. 4u1e (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All links but the above listed one work. (In the interests of full disclosure, I passed this article to GA) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just waiting on the first one now. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Neutral: I have no time to further review this article
  • "Molsey was accused of being motivated by an anti-McLaren agenda, with his historically difficult relationship with Ron Dennis, his warning that continued success for Lewis Hamilton may eventually be negative for Formula One[63] and by saying that he was relieved that Ferrari's Kimi Räikkönen won the 2007 driver’s championship[64] being mentioned as evidence of this."
  • "At the Euro NCAP 10th Anniversary Conference in November 2005, Mosley suggested that "the moment has come where the emphasis really has to move from the improvement of the performance of the car in a crash, to the avoidance of the crash entirely." by much wider use of 'eSafety' technologies such as Electronic Stability Control (ESC)."
  • "Mosley has announced a 10-year freeze on the development of engines, which would allow manufacturers to spend more of their budgets on environmentally friendly technology such as Kinetic Energy Recovery Systems (KERS),[46] which were first introduced into Formula One by the McLaren team but are currently banned by the FIA.[47]"
  • These are single sentences! Please rewrite as simplified/shorter sentences, and get a copy-edit of the entire article done. indopug (talk) 07:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK - I'll ce myself and try and round up a couple of non-contributors to do a final check. The lead time at LoCE is unfortunately far too long to be helpful here. Did you notice any other generic problems with prose other than over-long sentences? 4u1e (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I and a few others have gone through it. I've requested copyedits from WP:LoCE (but the backlog goes back to last year) and from WP:PRV to get a truly fresh pair of eyes. Comment from original reviewer on current state of article would be appreciated. 4u1e (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Image:March240.jpg‎ contains contradictory copyright information. Summary implies copyright is held by www.greatracingcars.co.uk, yet license says User:Lebkuchenteile has released to PD. Copyright would seem to be owned by 1) the website or 2) the manufacturer/designer of the 3D piece. Please resolve if image is to be utilized. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 21:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch, thank you. Replaced with a pic of the full-sized car, which does not seem to have the same licensing issues. 4u1e (talk) 02:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good deal. Better image, too. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 00:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in a way, I'd prefer a pic of the toy, because that's really the point we're making, but the car itself is an adequate representation. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 06:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I peer reviewed the article after it attained GA and all of my concerns were addressed. Despite my obvious interest in motorsport, I am not a Formula One fan and I had never heard of him before I reviewed the article. Royalbroil 13:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As a reader who is not an avid fan of motor sports, I found this article informative, well-written, and well referenced. I did encounter an awkward sentence here and there. An example: "However, the association of his surname with Fascism has stopped him from developing his interest in politics further." Why not write, "However, his father's widely publicized links to Fascism prevented Mosley from pursuing a political career"? Although the article devotes a good deal of space to Mosley's family background (a detail that can hardly be ignored), it doesn't allow this issue to overshadow the subject's involvement in international motor sports. I found this to be an engaging introduction to a figure I had known nothing about. -- twelsht (talk) 03:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I personally don't approve of the man but that's not what's we're discussing ;-). I was very impressed with the article and I think the authors did a very good job. I'll be putting in my support for this article to become FA.--Phill talk Edits Review this GA review! 10:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • V. minor: "Mosley is the son of Sir Oswald Mosley." Starting the main body with an 8 word sentence isn't perfect. It should be integrated with the succeeding sentence (they are related after all)
    • Diana > Lady Diana?
      • Done, Apart from pre Marrage Tommy turrell (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Just a thought, I was worried that Lady Diana would sound too much like the Daily Mail's favourite dead royal. Shouldn't be any chance of confusion, though. 4u1e (talk) 08:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oswald > Sir Oswald?
    • "Their children were refused entry to several schools, due to a combination of their wildness and their parents' reputation, and were initially tutored at home instead." needs cite?
      • Done - This was also brought up at peer review, it was rejected at the time becasue it is covered in other ref but seeing as this has come up twice now its possibly best to have a direct ref.Tommy turrell (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • End sentence of the same paragraph clumbsy and overlong.
      • Sentence now split. 4u1e (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Stein an der Traun - red link. Any alternative?
      • Only on the German wikipeida, is this acceptable? in the mean time i have linked to Traunreut of which is Stein an der Traun is a district.Tommy turrell (talk) 21:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • In politics section: "Trevor Grundy, a central figure in the Union's Youth Movement, writes of the 16-year-old Mosley painting the 'circle and flash' symbol on walls in London on the night of the Soviet Union's invasion of Hungary (4 November 1956), describing him as "a tall slim boy, with golden hair...He had a lovely face." -- I fail to see what his physical description has to do with either the section in general or the Soviet invasion of Hungary in particular.
      • Agreed, removed for now but added to discussion page to find a home for later, early physical description is quite interesting. Tommy turrell (talk) 21:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • You're right, it doesn't. Frankly I included it because I found it so striking! That aside it's interesting to have an early physical description, particularly since we have no photos, but I'm happy for it to be left out. 4u1e (talk) 08:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I don't see a problem of keeping the physical description bit - just not with the Soviet Union/Hungary bit. Mark83 (talk) 16:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • But then where? It was where it was (Hungarian invasion and all) because it was part of the same quote. Agreeing that this is not a great place for it, I'm not sure where to put it now. It feels like it should go somewhere early on (i.e. early life), but I can't see anything it can be seamlessly joined with! 4u1e (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • I don't understand, why not just use the ref without the Hungary bit? Trevor Grundy, a central figure in the Union's Youth Movement, writes of the 16-year-old Mosley painting the 'circle and flash' symbol on walls in London on the night of the Soviet Union's invasion of Hungary (4 November 1956), describing him as "a tall slim boy, with golden hair...He had a lovely face."[10] Mark83 (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                • No, I get that bit! ;-) Whereabouts in the article is it appropriate to mention it? 4u1e (talk) 23:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Sorry, gotcha! Family and early life seem fine
    • WP has a Flash and Circle article which should be linked.
    • It doesn't look overlong, but just consider if any of the March Engineering section is more March-specific than Mosley-specific.
      • I can see the danger here but from my pov it seems ok, some of this section is there to give context to other events. 4u1e any thoughts?
        • I've reviewed today: it's mostly OK, but the third to last para probably is more about March than Mosley. I've revise it. 4u1e (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Mosley left his role at FOCA, and Formula One, soon after this." Did he really leave? Totally?
      • According to Lovell, when Mosley became president of the Manufacturer's Commission in 1986 "he had been out of motor sport since the end of 1982 to try his hand at politics..." We've been looking for something on this for a while, so I've also added something to the 'Politics' section. 4u1e (talk) 20:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it fair to say HANS devices were introduced as a result San Marino '94? It was about 15 years later wasn't it?
      • I have found a source that says HANS was introduced as a result of an accident in 95 (apparently took a long time to develop), I have updated the article and referenced it. Tommy turrell (talk) 19:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Re. engines: "which some say have little applicability to road cars" -- 'some say' is weasel words. Also a bit of a throw away line for a complicated point; It would seem obvious that ~700bhp engine technology is not applicable to road car technology. However there could be a space-shuttle phenomenon here, i.e. technology designed for the most extreme applications having benefits for everyday applications. Perhaps better to take this out for the minute & focus on the cost savings achieved by engine homolgation.
    • Large section about his lobbying British Labour Party about tobacco advertising all uncited. Particularly worrying considering the wider impact - the first major scandal of the young Labour government. Perhaps a mention of the withdrawal of tobacco advertising following the EU directive (with expection of Altria Group/SF)
      • Found some refs, haven't gone into the wider impact (i.e. the cash for fags scandle) as that is a bit off topic, but I have added a mention of Bernie Ecclestone who attended the same meeting.Tommy turrell (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The previous version of that section all came from the single ref at the end of the para (47, I think). As it contained no direct quotes, that met the referencing requirements. Is the new version too long? 4u1e (talk) 08:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Following the racist abuse aimed at McLaren's mixed-race driver Lewis Hamilton during testing ahead of the 2008 season, Mosley has said he will impose immediate sanctions if there is a repeat.[60]" -- nothing to do with the section it's in. Not noteworthy for any other section either IMO. Mark83 (talk) 17:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Tricky, This used to have a section of it's own but I agree is does not warrant one. And you are right it has very little to do with 2007 criticism. However I believe it is an interesting comparison to Mosley’s early involvement in the Union Movement. It’s the only comment from Mosley that I know of that gives and insight in to his current thoughts regarding racism. We don’t know what his views on racism where when he was a member of the Union Moment but we know what his current views are. It may also help avoid edit warring in the future as there used to be much speculation in this article on his attitude towards Lewis Hamilton. Views? Tommy turrell (talk) 19:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I agree it's notable in contrast to Mosley's earlier involvement with the UM (although one could argue there is little else he could do: in today's (much improved) climate you simply can't be seen to condone such things). We're veering towards original research here if we make the connection too obvious, though, unless we can find someone else who has already made it. 4u1e (talk) 08:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, pending changes:
    • Could we possibly have an image of Mosley in the infobox?
      • Only if you can find a free one. I've tried and failed. While I agree it would be great to have one, strictly speaking I believe a photo of the subject is not an FA requirement. 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Family and early life - "In addition to his brother, Mosley has five older half-siblings. On his father's side they are Vivien Mosley, the novelist Nicholas Mosley, 3rd Baron Ravensdale and Michael Mosley. On his mother's side they are the Irish preservationist, Desmond Guinness, and the writer, Jonathan Guinness, 3rd Baron Moyne." - unsourced.
      • Also uncontroversial ;-) Easily sourced, so since you ask, it shall be done. 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • 2nd paragraph of "Racing career" - maybe have it in quote so it would be:
    • "Mosley also negotiated sponsorship from tyre maker Firestone and oil additive manufacturer STP." - 2nd para of March Engineering - source?
    • "March-BMWs won five of the next 11 European Formula Two championships." and "March continued as a competitive manufacturer of customer racing cars until the early 1990s." needs sourcing.
      • First one, will do. Second one, I'm not so sure. It's uncontroversial, but not the sort of thing you'll necessarily find easily wrapped up in a quote. I could be facetious and give the second half of Mike Lawrence's book as the ref, but I'll try and find something a little shorter. 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done the first one. Ended up just deleting the second one. Although true and uncontroversial, it's not easy to find a simple reference to stick in there and it's not directly relevant to Mosley. 4u1e (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • 3rd & 4th paragraphs of Formula One Constructors Assosiation - merge together into one paragraph.
    • Last bit of last paragraph in Formula One Constructors Assosiation section unsourced.
    • "FISA immediately re-elected him for a four-year term. Balestre remained as FIA president until 1993, when a restructuring of the FIA led to the demise of FISA." - needs sourcing.
    • "...the introduction of the HANS device to protect drivers' necks in accidents[47], circuit re-design and greatly increased requirements for crash testing of chassis." ref after comma, and needs to be fully completed.
      • Understand first bit, don't understand second bit: what needs to be fully completed? 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ah, I didn't think being half-a-sleep reviewing an article was a good thing! :) Anyway, I mean it needs to be referenced the last bit. D.M.N. (talk) 10:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • OK, undrstand both bits now. 4u1e (talk) 11:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Added a ref. Has lots more info on about seat belts, foam etc, etc. Tommy turrell (talk) 13:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Motor racing was a world class industry which put Britain at the hi-tech edge. Deprived of tobacco money, Formula One would move abroad at the loss of 50,000 jobs, 150,000 part-time jobs and £900 million of exports.[51] - put into quote as with earlier.
      • A no-no, according to Sandy. And she should know what she's talking about. 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • See above comment I made directed to her. D.M.N. (talk) 10:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • References need to be as full as possible, with every single little mint of detail. They also need to be consistent in the way it looks to the reader.
      • They can't be fully consistent, about half are web and half are books. They're inherently different. Which detail is missing (I'm not saying there isn't any, I'd just like some help! :))
        • OK. I'm going to change some of them myself so they are consistent. :) D.M.N. (talk) 10:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Fair enough. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 11:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • I have placed three requests at flickr asking the photographer to consider relicensing their image from "All Rights Reserved" to a suitable Creative Commons. I average around a 50% acceptance rate, so cross your fingers. Royalbroil 16:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye on the FAC to see if progress is made. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Side Comment - is anything going to be done with the things that are hidden within the article, or isn't there enough information to have suitable sections for them? D.M.N. (talk) 20:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • At this point, when the article seems to be at or close to FA standard, it's probably better to remove them and put them on the talk page. From memory it's stuff that either doesn't fit very well, or is true but we can't reference. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The Mosley/Ron Dennis relationship isn't mentioned. It's common knowledge that the two dislike each other at the very least and it is significant for a man in Mosley's position to [possibly] let personal relationships enter into decision making. -- I realise there's an original research danger, but a summary news articles without editoralising would be beneficial. I'll have more time after Monday to look into it. Mark83 (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now on 1a. A copyedit and quite a bit of polish needed. This should have been posted at Peer Review before coming here. Many examples follow, but these are not all. As these took me almost an hour, I suspect no one has had the constitution to thoroughly review the entire article.
    • Check the MoS for how to do quotations. A lot of times your quotes are full sentences but you omit the leading comma, begin them with a lower-case letter, and fail to place the ending punctuation inside the quote.
    • The first sentence reads like the FIA represents all motoring organizations.. that's not true, is it?
    • I don't think "Fascism" is supposed to be capitalized in the middle of the sentence.
    • There seems a bit too much about Mosley's early life in the lead. You should leave it out unless it's a key point of the article; as is, the article seems to be mostly about his racing career.
    • You mention in both the lead and the Retirement heading that people have speculated about Mosley's retirement since his announcement and retraction in 2004. I don't see that backed up in the citation for that passage. Since the lead isn't cited, you need to cite that statement where it is made in the Retirement heading. You also need to cite a source that backs up the statement that the controversy has led to the speculations.
    • "As a result, Mosley and his older brother, Alexander, grew up separated from their parents for the first few years of their lives." Bad prose.. if you take out the phrase "separated from their parents" look what you have.
    • This may be a yankee's ignorance of British terminology, but why do you say "Sir Oswald Mosley" on first mention but only "Diana Mitford", later called her Lady Diana?
    • "Their children were refused entry to several schools, due to a combination of their wildness..." Suggest a better term than "wildness". Perhaps "wild behavior" or such, as I'm sure the children were domesticated.
    • "Mosley, like many people involved in Formula One, lives in Monaco." Really? I looked up three random Formula One drivers that I could think of and none of them live in Monaco. Needs a citation.
    • "Trevor Grundy, a central figure in the UM's Youth Movement, writes of the 16-year-old Mosley painting the 'flash and circle' symbol" Why the single quotes? Also, why do you call it "circle and flash" after that?
    • "As a result of his involvement in this fracas, Mosley junior..." No junior. You have consistently been calling him "Mosley" and his father "Sir Oswald".
    • "Mosley was a member of the Territorial Army during the early 1960s, training as a parachutist. This training led some national English newspapers to link him to the French right wing Organisation de l'armée secrète (OAS), which was involved in the Algerian War at that time." I don't follow why training as a British parachutist would link someone to the OAS.
    • Is he related to Alf Mosley?
    • "His father told him that the company 'would certainly go bankrupt, but it would be good experience for a later career.'" Check your quoting.. if the word "would" replaces "will" in the quote, you need to place parens around it.
    • "Two of these were run by March's own in-house 'works' team and the rest by customer teams." Single quotes again?
    • "The March works team's contract with their lead driver..." I don't get why "works" is in there.. leftover from something else?
    • "Motorsports author Mike Lawrence has suggested that the shortfall forced him into short-term deals, which maintained cashflow, but were not in the best long-term interests of the company." Motorsports has been two words, now it is one? No commas, use that instead of which.
    • 'spend to succeed', more single quotes.
    • "March-BMWs won five of the next 11 European Formula Two championships." Why hyphenated?
    • "During the 1977 season, Herd was pressurised by BMW" Surely "pressured".
More later. --Laser brain (talk) 04:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  • Oppose—1a. For example:
    • Remove "currently" from the first sentence.
  • "motoring organisations and motor car users worldwide"—why repeat "motor" by using the archaic "motor car"? Just "car", and then we avoid the neglect of the hyphen, too.
  • "separated from his parents while they were interned in Britain during the Second World War."—um ... they were German-born? If so, say so, or the readers will wonder why they were gaoled.
  • "before going on to attend"—no, "before attending". The chronology is already obvious.
  • Why is "Formula One" linked twice in two paragraphs? And there's a related link in the next para, which is fine. But not the straight repetition, please.
  • "He became president of the FIA, FISA's parent body, in 1993."—No comma, please. In reverse, a comma after 1993 if at the start of the sentence, yes.
  • "... which has led to speculation on his retirement." Vague. Do you mean "on when he will retire", or what?

These issues are representative of problems throughout the text. Tony (talk) 06:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose 1e, currently protected due to edit warring and I suspect it won't be stable until the allegations have finished having their day in the press. -- Naerii 19:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Max_Mosley/archive1&oldid=1142602709"