Talk:2011 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season

Protected

The article is now semi protected. I did hope that the edit notice I placed would reduce the amount of unsourced edits, it seemed to work for a while, but now the page is getting multiple additions of unsourced data per day from IP addresses, and I do not think it's fair to place such a reversion load on a few good diligent volunteers - if they could not watch the page daily, then it would be true to state that the page would degenerate. There are some editors who feel the need to be first with the news, however Wikipedia is not news, and a wait until properly verified data is released will harm no one. If any IP editor has good referenced data, then I'm sorry that your ability to edit has been spoiled by the many vandals, you may wish to start a section on this page, and place {{Edit protected}} on the line below your new heading - this will raise a flag, and someone else will come to review and if OK, place the data for you on the page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:34, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Bautista - DNS - DNQ or WD?

This started as a one to one on my talk page and expended - better to have a copy here and let others contribute  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit by 217.124.245.61 - Bautista is DNS? Is that correct - according to MotoGP.com he didn't qualify, so should that be DNQ?  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:11, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

(WP:JAGUAR) Does it not all depend on when he crashed and had to withdraw? I am of the idea that if it happened prior to quali, then it should go down as either Withdrew, Injured or similar; if it happened during quali, then yes DNQ; and if something happens after quali but before the race, it's a Did Not Start? TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 22:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I remember last season that I personally had put Pedrosa down as a DNS for breaking his collarbone at Motegi, but I realise now that may be a mistake. DNQ or WD may suffice but I am unsure which one to choose. You got any preference to it? Cs-wolves(talk) 19:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Good - I though DNS was not quite right - I've plumped for DNQ - he turned up, did some practice, and broke a leg - to me, the DNS and WD suggest he qualified and then dropped out. I've done the edit.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:21, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

My feelings on WD and DNS (I could be wrong!) - I see WD as qualified then broke the leg trying for a faster lap, and DNS is just "Did Not Start" - so he's come out to race and bike seizes on start line just before the off. How's that?  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm in agreement with that. Hmm...I like that. WD would apply on the Saturday, and DNS on the Sunday to cover sighting lap crashes per Spies (Estoril '10) and Stoner (Valencia '09). I think? Cs-wolves(talk) 22:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:34, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Excellent; can't say I remember the last person to crash in qualifying and miss the race mind you! Cs-wolves(talk) 22:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

There's always a first time, and now you have stated it... 8-) I've not seen the Q for this weekend (BBC don't normally do repeats of "red button" transmissions), as we live on top of a hill and the recent winds last month killed the aerial that's connected to the TV card in the PC, so I was up a ladder for most of the afternoon, not surprised at Stoner for pole - he likes Quatar.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:24, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it's only the flyaways that they repeat qualifying...Stoner is absolutely mighty in Qatar; doesn't seem so long ago that he was running away with the race last year before dumping a nice red bike into the kitty litter. Think him and Pedrosa may check out from the field tomorrow. Cs-wolves(talk) 23:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

You could be on the money, but I wouldn't underestimate the old No.46 making a surprise or two.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Wolves suggested I chime in here given I replied to your comment on his talk page. Basically, after doing a little bit of research, I would actually say Bautista should go down as either Withdrew or Injured, primarily because of the fact that while he didn't qualify, he didn't exactly DNQ in the sense that is meant by it. Another example would be this weekend's NASCAR Nationwide race, where a driver that was originally entered wrecked in the last practice and couldn't repair it in time for qualifying; NASCAR themselves don't even acknowledge him in the qualifying lineup, so in my eyes he counts as a proper Withdrawal, should that case not apply here also? TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 23:14, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, that's why I asked in the first place - DNS was just so obviously wrong. We don't seem to have an "injured" code in the template - maybe that needs changing? My first check was to http://www.motogp.com/en/Results+Statistics - they have listed Bautista on FP1, FP2, FP3 and QP - but on QP, they show his name at the bottom with no position and no time - hence my suggestion of DNQ. But if people like WD is better, then that's fine by me.

The removal of injured stemmed from a Formula One WP discussion here by the way. Don't know if that linked with the MotoGP legend timing though... Cs-wolves(talk) 23:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I see they also had some thoughts about WD there.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I never understood why we removed Inj frowm the template, to me it was simple enough, and useful in cases like this. Anyway, my 2c: DNS is wrong because it means someone qualified but didn't start the race. DNQ is not right to me also, as Bautista didn't take part in the QP (even though he is listed in the official document). I believe we had a similar case last year for Capirossi, and we simply blanked the cell. Asendoh (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I also support "Inj". It is most suitable for this case. As the official result says "Have qualified for the race having achieved a time within 107 % of the fastest rider in a free practice session" , Bautista is qualified. If we can't use "Inj", blank is the second best.Navian (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Since there is no Inj, blank (Did not participate) works for me  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

WD is a rather specific case when a team or competitor's entry is withdrawn. Mostly its a team decision because of say for example a death in the team, or a fault in the car which make the vehicle dangerous, like when F1 team Minardi withdrew from the Brazilian Grand Prix one year because of rear wing mounting failures. I do not believe it applies to an injured competitor.

Inj was removed because it was never accurate. Injury is a mode of retirment in the same way that engine failure is a mode. To include Inj would mean we would have to conside Eng, Fir, Acc, Col, Mec and other retirment modes. If a rider is injured in practice they are DNQ. In qualifying then are DNQ or DNS depending on whether they set a good lap time or not. During a race, Ret. If they sit out races then because of an injury then they are not part of the race at all and get a blank space. --Falcadore (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I like that, mainly what I felt from the start! So since he was injured in practice, we go back to DNQ, which is what I thought initially.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

DNQ is not right. As I said above, Bautista is qualified officially. Unlike Formula 1, in MotoGP, even the rider who did not participate the qualify session, has a right to participate the race, if he has achieved a time within 107 % of the fastest rider in a free practice session. See the regulations(p23, 1.15.5 "Qualification for the Race"), please.Navian (talk) 01:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I concur. Rule 1.15.5. Bautista got 102.2% of Stoner's fastest lap in FP3. So he did qualify, but was then injured. Back to blank then.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

My understanding has always been that if a competitor officially qualifies for the race but does not take up their place on the starting grid, then they should be classified as a DNS. I would only leave it completely blank if they didn't even enter the race weekend. I have nothing solid to back this up, but that has always been my understanding. Do we not have an explanation of this sort of thing anywhere on the site? Christophee (talk) 15:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I think DNS should be used for only the case if the official result was "Not starting" ( e.g. Ben Spies at 2010 Estoril) at this time. Other cases should leave them blank until we find the official definition of DNS.Navian (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. If we don't have an explanation somewhere of what each one means, then maybe we should create one. Obviously we'd have to work out what they all mean ourselves first. Christophee (talk) 09:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

There is overthinking going on here. These are acronyms, not official designations. Bautista qualified but Did Not Start. It's is entirely appropriate, because that is exactly what happenned. Sometime the answer is simple. --Falcadore (talk) 21:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

† next to Marco Simoncelli in the results tables

I know what that is supposed to mean, but there is no legend anywhere for those who don't. Davepusey (talk) 16:41, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Should be deleted entirely. Firstly Simoncelli is not a driver. Secondly it is not the role of the results matrix to carry information that should be in the season summary. --Falcadore (talk) 00:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Moto2/125cc round numbering

I have proposed a change to the round numbering in the Moto2/125cc/Moto3 Participants tables in the 2010, 2011 and 2012 season summary articles. You are welcome to express any views you may have on the subject at the centralised discussion. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 07:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2011 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/sport/sportresults/MotoGP/2010/June/jun2910-moto3-to-replace-125s/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2011/Japan%2BGP%2Bpostponed
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2011/Pedrosa%2Bto%2Bbe%2Breplaced%2Bby%2BAoyama%2Bin%2BAssen
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101012205225/http://www.twowheelsblog.com/post/4757/casey-stoner-in-honda-official to http://www.twowheelsblog.com/post/4757/casey-stoner-in-honda-official
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://motomatters.com/news/2010/11/06/kenan_sofuoglu_signs_for_technomag_cip_m.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)