Talk:Mario Andretti/Archive 2

Famous Quotes

He's been attributed with a few famous quotes, the most impotant of them being "If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough"

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Mario_Andretti/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.17.142.146 (talk) 10:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The place for quotes is Wikiquote, and it is already there. Royalbroil 16:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

The material claims that his name "is synonymous with speed." Although this may be accurate with many if not all auto racing fans, I have met some people who have never heard of him (shocker though that may be to open-wheel auto racing fans)...and as such, it is a pro-subject perspective. --Chr.K. 12:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Mario Andretti: a few thoughts

I am not really sure if it is correct to say that Mario Andretti won four Champ Car titles. I think it would be more accurate to say that he won four titles in USAC and CART combined. He raced in the 60s and 70s and Champ Car was born only in 2004.

"In 2000, the Associated Press and RACER magazine named him 'Driver of the Century.'" This claim is quite an exaggeration. Mario Andretti is a legend, but he isn't the number one on the planet. Those Associated Press and RACER magazine folks have never seen Senna, Prost, or Schumacher in action! -- ICE77 84.222.103.55 21:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. The "Driver of the Century" is actually for the United States only, and it has been reworded and cited. The term "Champ Car" is being used in the general sense in this context to describe "Championship Cars" - the family of cars originating from the AAA and the Indy 500, continued by USAC and CART, then split into IRL and "Champ Car World Series". Royalbroil 16:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

High school

I am trying to update high school affiliations for Lehigh Valley people. Does anyone know where he went to high school? PAWiki 18:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Quite possibly in Italy, judging by the biographical details at the start of the article proper, which indicate (but don't confirm) that he may not have arrived in the States until he was 18 or 19. 4u1e

He was 15 when he moved to the US, so he likely went to high school in the Lehigh Valley. I am expanding and sourcing the article to prepare it for a Good Article run. I haven't found anything yet, but I'll keep my eyes open for it. Royalbroil ^T : C 18:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Who?

The article says, "and claimed his fourth CART title. It was Newman's first series title." Now, I'm guessing the writer meant Newman-Haas Racing, but it'd be nice if it was clear.... Also, how old was Mario when he did it? (He's oldest driver to take a CART win, BTW.) Trekphiler 04:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Assessment against GA criteria

I thought it might be helpful to do a dummy assessment against the GA criteria, in response to the request for an assessment on progress posted at the WP:MOTOR talk page. So here goes, this may take a little while :) 4u1e 7 March 2007, 13:02

6. Images PASS - Not essential to have anyway - we have a couple here illustrating the subject and both are licensed appropriately.

5. Stability PASS - no major changes in last week or so, and no apparent arguments.

4. NPOV FAIL on minor concerns - 'banner year', 'gruelling' Daytona (unless it was more than usually so), 'impressive pole position', 'Andretti's futility at Indy is legendary' (harsh wording, I wouldn't say he was futile!), 'horrifying accident' are not neutral terms. Actual structure and content seem neutral.

3. Broad coverage FAIL - Not because of a lack of breadth, the article covers all of his racing activities, although to varying degrees of detail. Only area not covered I could think of was one particular element of his personal life: who did he marry? Not directly relevant and some think we shouldn't include that kind of thing anyway.

The failure comes from 3b - staying focussed on the topic without going into non-notable detail. There is a largish list of trivia - most of which is non-notable. Much of it can be deleted - the remainder could be re-written as a short para to support the point that Andretti has (in a fairly minor way) entered American culture as a synonym for speed. This would go with the Barney Oldfield point.

2. Factual and Verifiable FAIL. All looks factually accurate to me, but not (easily) verifiable in its current form. I think this is mainly to do with the placement and selection of references. The inline citations don't always appear to cover all of the text, and sometimes don't relate to the point being referenced. What I normally do is to try and find one reference that covers the whole of each paragraph and link that ref at the end of the paragraph. If a further reference is required to cover a point within that paragraph I would place the ref where that point arises. The actual references used are OK (although I'd avoid IMDb as a source - it's a bit like using Wikipedia as a reference.). Try www.grandprix.com and www.formula1.com for info on Andretti's F1 career. Ideally I'd like to see more hardcopy references, but we can't always have what we want....

1. Well written The most difficult one to assess, so I'll come back to it. Cheers. 4u1e 7 March 2007, 13:38

Thank you for your review so far. As a member of WikiProject IROC, I need to add some of his IROC finishes, at least his 2nd in 1976 & 1978 and 1st in 1979. [1] It would interrupt the flow if I added in the middle of the Formula One section. Creating its own section would disrupt the chronological order. Any ideas on how to proceed? Royalbroil ^T : C 03:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Like I say, I hope it's helpful (looking back at it I'm now worrying I sound a bit harsh - apologies if so!). I can work on the F1 section, if you like, I have a few hardcopy refs I can use for that bit.

Regarding structure, with a career this complicated, I'd be inclined to do separate sections on each racing category and put them in roughly chronological order. That's probably the least confusing, given that there are significant overlaps between all of Mario's 'careers'. Would this order work:

• Stock cars (inc IROC?)(59 - IROC in 1980s?)
• Indycars (64 - 94)
• Sports cars (6? - 9?)
• Formula One (68 - 82)

I already knew this of course, but that's an incredible record, three decades in all categories! Where would dirt track racing go? F5000? I assume he competed in Can-Am as well? Maybe an 'Other categories' section as well? 4u1e 08:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't take your comments at all harsh. I had asked for a critique, and I expected it to be critical. I found your comments to be quite helpful, and I have started on your suggestions. This is the first article that I'm attempting to get up to Good Article status. I may push for Featured Article. I appreciate your help in this process, and feel free to tell me whatever you need to help with the process. I like your idea of organizing by racing category in roughly chronological order. I'll think more on that topic. Do you think that he have enough sports car racing to warrant its own section? I am not very familiar with Formula 1, so I would appreciate help completing and sourcing that part. I am very familiar with nearly all the other racing series. Royalbroil ^T : C 14:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know that much about Mario in sports cars, the thing that seemed most notable to me is his continued attempts to win at Le Mans, until really quite recently, which seemed an appropriate way of rounding up his career. I also noted 3 wins at Sebring, so he must have competed a fair bit (or had a phenomenal strike rate!) 4u1e 23:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added a wee bit on Le Mans. Probably a bit long now I look at it - lose the second quote? 4u1e 17:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the second quote as it was somewhat off topic and speculative. The Triple Crown article is about winning Monaco, not the F1 title. I have heard several other combination of wins to produce the "triple crown", so I wonder about the accuracy of that article. A quick google search didn't support my combinations. I assume that this article from his official website cannot be used as a source since I intend to seek GA/FA. I really appreciate all your help in this process! Royalbroil ^T : C 18:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding using the Andretti's official site as a source. Probably depends what for. Should be OK for factual stuff, number of wins etc., but those can probably be sourced as easily elsewhere. Definitely OK if what you are talking about is Andretti's own views, I would say (i.e. Andretti believes that....). Not OK for views on Andretti's notability etc. Well, that's what I think, anyway! 4u1e 08:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that was probably the right decision. Although the Triple Crown has been defined both ways, I think the ambiguity comes from the fact that only one man has done it, and he had won both the Monaco GP and the F1 title. Perhaps I should edit that into the Triple Crown article too. 4u1e 18:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Please feel free to tinker with any words I add, by the way. I'm an 'eventualist' editor, and tend to write long (or bad!) and then work away at what I've written to make it shorter (or better). If you feel stuff needs editing for length, or needs moving around, go for it. 4u1e 18:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have usually seen the term winning the triple crown used for things that don't involve F1. There is a triple crown for winning all three USAC divisions. There is a triple crown for winning all 3 major NASCAR series. Other times it referred to winning three of the following: Daytona 500, Indianpolis 500, LeMans, 24 Hours of Daytona, other major races in different genres, etc. You're far too hard on your writing! Royalbroil ^T : C 19:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Questor GP

I've deleted the material on the Questor GP from the article. An account of the race can be found here [2]. Mistakes included the claim that Phil Hill (retired 1967) and Jochen Rindt (died 1970) competed in this 1971 race, and that Andretti won from the back (he did win, but qualified 12th of 30). The race also isn't all that notable, Andretti had already beaten Jackie Stewart, and many of the other drivers involved, at the 1971 South African Grand Prix to take his first F1 win. 4u1e 18:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I am unfamiliar with the race or too much with Formula One in general, so I'll stick with your better judgement. Royalbroil ^T : C 19:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I've put a brief mention back in, the details were all wrong, but it's his only other F1 victory until the '76 season. Cheers. 4u1e 07:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Formula Junior

I added that he raced in Formula Junior in Italy before he moved to the U.S. (with citation). The time was before the series existed according to the Formula Junior article. Any thoughts? Royalbroil ^T : C 16:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

1958 looks pretty solid for the start of Formula Junior. I would guess that the Texaco website is wrong - more likely a 500cc Formula 3 in 1953? Any other references to it? 4u1e 17:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I found several references, here's a few: [3] [4] [5] (taken from a print reference). It looks like from this reference that it was "a new youth racing league in Italy". Probably a coincidence in named, or a precursor to the better-known later series. Royalbroil ^T : C 19:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This is the only indication I have of a Formula Junior existing before 1958, but it says nothing more about what it was. <Shrug> 4u1e 20:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I worded it so it shouldn't matter, and placed a comment in the text that it shouldn't link to the Formula Junior article. Royalbroil 04:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Structure

We discussed messing about with the structure of the article above. I'e done a dummy version of what that might look like at user:4u1e/sandbox3. What do you think? I'm still not sure what to do with some of the elements, although F5000/USAC/CART could be combined into 'North American single seater racing'.4u1e 17:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I like the chronological order much better. The topical version doesn't make sense to me. The time discontinuity confuses me. Also, I have never heard a CART/USAC car called a 'single seater' except here in Wikipedia. Maybe it's a European term. I would agree with the term 'open wheel' and then lump in his sprint car racing if I wasn't against topical order. Royalbroil 03:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, we'll scratch that idea.:-) You're right of course, single seater is a European-ism. 4u1e 04:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Good Article

4u1e: Do you think this article is ready for an attempt at Good Article? If not, please point out specific things that I can work on. Royalbroil 17:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops - sorry, been occupied elsewhere, and I've never gotten into the habit of using my watchlist. Give us a little while to read through again. 4u1e 9 May 2007, 14:33

OK, one minor niggle: Shouldn't nationality just be American? He's always competed for the States, and I guess US passports don't differentiate between naturalised and 'native' American (yeah, I know...). Or does he hold dual nationality? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.109.66.150 (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Oops, that was me. 4u1e 17:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I have not seen any evidence of dual citizenship/dual nationality. I consider him an American in all ways, although Italians likely consider him to be a native Italian. I would consider an "Italian American" to be either a native Italian who became naturalized as an American (like Andretti), or someone born in the United States who has Italian ancestry. The later is less pure, especially if only from one parent or if several generations have passed. I have 15/16 German ancestry, and I do not consider myself German American (since my ancestors immigrated well over 100 years ago). So my short answer is that I consider Andretti to be both American AND Italian American. I like how the article addresses this topic. We could address this topic with the GA reviewer if you want. Royalbroil 18:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, should have been clearer - I agree with the wording used in the lead, it was the infobox I was thinking of: For Formula One articles we have an agreement that the flag and nationality in the infobox should be the one under which the driver competed. This is then easily referenceable and unarguable. Nationality, or even worse, ethnic identity, can get to be a vexed issue otherwise (see talk:Eddie Irvine!) - I'm sure someone will want to claim Andretti as Croatian as some point! This is a minor point, anyway, it's just that I haven't had time to read through again properly and that caught my eye. Will look at it soon. 4u1e 08:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

More quick comments - Lead looks a little short, although possibly that's just because it's three paras, could they be merged? Some sections have some very short paras, including some one sentence ones - can they be merged into meatier paragraphs (particularly the latter indycar & Indy 500 ones). I'm still not happy with the structure - in particular I think the section 'Racing in several series' may confuse readers. Perhaps we should get views from other editors to help us on that one? 4u1e 08:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Good criticism that the introduction is good short. I also agree that we should get some other racing people review this article especially for the structore of that problematic section 'Racing in several series'. I'll ask User:Barno and User:Recury who both are U.S. wikipedians with broad racing knowledge. Royalbroil 12:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll look at it in more detail tonight and provide some comments and copyedits. Maybe I can dig for some documentation of his dirt racing. Barno 14:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Great. Please look for more to expand on his CART career after F1 too. I expected to find more than I did. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Royalbroil (talk • contribs) 14:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

• Several comments so far: (1) I added a list of several more books (next section). There are also some where Mario is one of several racers or several athletes featured in their own chapters, but those are less important. Found some through Google Books, some through a regular Google search, and others like Biblio and Alibris could be used in more detail than I've tried so far. (2) The first two paragraphs of the "Racing career" section should be made into subsections, with titles such as "Childhood involvement with motorsports" and "Sportsman and Modified racing". (3) The "Legacy" subsection should be raised to a section (since it's not about his Racing Career), and possibly renamed. (Maybe split between "Awards and Honors" and "Influence on racetracks and sanctioning" if more examples of the latter are found.) (4) In the "Return to IndyCar racing" subsection, it should be added (and sourced) that he is the all-time leader in Indycar wins with 36. Perhaps also that he's among the all-time leaders in Indycar poles with 30. (5) In that section, the sentence ending "in the 1982." should have "season" added. (6) The "Head of racing family" section should probably be renamed to "Descendants in auto racing", although Jeff Andretti isn't a descendant. (7) That section should probably include Marco Andretti's first Indycar win, the August 2006 Indy Grand Prix of Sonoma. (8) That section should also include, for John Andretti, not just "NASCAR" but Winston/Cup/Nextel Cup (mentioning the 37 team and the Petty Enterprises 43) and Busch Series. (9) The "Current Life" section might perhaps be renamed, or at least have the last word not capitalized. (10) The "Movies appearances" section should have the first "s" removed. (11) A "NASCAR Grand National career" section should be written, with more detail on his Daytona victory, and with a few stats citing this source: Mario Andretti page of Racing-Reference website [6]. Barno 01:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• More comments: (12) I agree that the "Racing in several series" subsection isn't clear in terms of organization. Rather than try to split the "Racing career" section chronologically, it would be better to split that nine-year content among the series in which he raced. Perhaps the section could lead with a brief chronological description of what type(s) of racing he did in each period. (E.g. "In these two years he ran the full USAC Championship Car schedule and drove prototypes in the Le Mans, Daytona, and Sebring endurance races.") (13) In the same subsection, it mentions "USAC's dirt track division in 1974"; please check the formal name, which I think was USAC Dirt Championship Car, unless it had already been given the "Silver Crown" name by then. (I think the USAC page oversimplifies by using the Silver Crown name for that series from its 1971 split from the main USAC Championship Car Series, and I know it errs in not using the "Silver Bullet" name for a few recent years.) (14) At the start of the "Racing career" section, it mentions the book What's It Like Out There without describing it as his autobiography. Changing "the" to "his" would be a brief way to fix this. (15) We need to find some sources for his USAC Midget and Sprint racing, and whatever he did in drag racing, and add subsections describing these. Barno 01:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I have implemented suggestions 1 to 5. On #6, I agree that the section should be renamed, but I don't like your suggested name for it. Might the wording "Patriarch of racing family" work for his sons, nephew and grandson? I think that you mean John isn't his descendant, not Jeff. I dislike suggestions #7 & #8 because I think that they are going off topic: this is an article about Mario. I could support an increase to a short phrase about each or at most a sentence. Please give your idea a try and we can discuss. More comments to follow. Royalbroil 02:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

My comments, fwiw: 6) Why not call it 'Racing family'? 7) & 8) - OK, but briefly. 9) I think you've renamed this to 'Later life' (per Damon Hill and Alain Prost). 10) True. 11) Seems fair - but by someone who knows about it (i.e. not me!) 12) Matches what I've previously suggested, but I know Royal's not taken with the idea! 13), 14) & 15) - all sound fair. 4u1e 10:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

For points 7 and 8, I now agree that those bits should not give much detail, since we have articles on Michael, John, Jeff, and Marco. (I was thinking about Dutch Hoag where there's enough magazine and trade-paper material for a paragraph each on his son and grandson, but not enough notability for a standalone article.) I suggest a sentence each for Jeff and Marco, two sentences for Michael (one as driver, one as team owner), and two sentences for John (one for Indycars and previous open-wheel series, one for NASCAR Truck/Cup/Busch). I'll try to find material to write the Mario-in-NASCAR, sportsman/modified, and sprint/midget sections. Maybe I'll hit a library this weekend (but it'll be sunny here in NYS so I'll be outside hiking) and try to find some of the added books. Barno 13:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

One more comment for the "racing family" section, whatever it gets titled: There were some 24 Hours of Daytona year(s) (and maybe a Le Mans 24-hour) when several of the Andrettis shared a car, and it was widely noted in press coverage. If we can find references to this, it should be mentioned. Barno 13:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Barno's last 2 comments: I'm fine with the short details about the family as you suggested. I bet there is enough about the Andretti family racing together to make its own section! Go for it! A moderate expansion about Andretti's sprint car/sportsman/modified days sounds good. Go hiking if the weather is so good - the 'pedia will still be here on Monday! Royalbroil 18:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Hope the weather's better there than it is over here - I'll be hiking for about four hours in the pouring rain tomorrow. :( (Yeah, I know, WP's not a forum....) 4u1e 10:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Barno's comment on record wins - presumably this is the CART total? I've seen a figure of 52 somewhere (Autocourse?) for total wins, but I guess that's USAC and CART combined? 4u1e 11:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Continuation of 15 points: completed points 9, 10, and 14. #11:Do you really think that 14 races is enough to warrant a section? His victory at the Daytona 500 does increase the need for the section. #13: ESPN is the source on the USAC dirt racing, and it only says what is written. I cited the ESPN article if you would look at it further. I would love to link it to Silver Crown if that's what it really was. #15: The Motorsports Hall of Fame of America says that Andretti won a match drag race in a Mustang in 1968. Royalbroil 04:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Reorganization

I started a reorganization of this article in my sandbox here: User:Royalbroil/Sandbox. Please review the structure and comment. Feel free to edit it. I have removed the categories and links to other language Wikis. Thanks! Royalbroil 16:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

With apologies for the long delay! I like the revised version, Royal, but I'm still not entirely happy with the 'Racing in several series' bit. In all honesty, I'm quite confused about what Andretti was concentrating on in those years - he seems to have been competing in an alarming number of series! From what I've read, I make it the following:

1967 USAC Championship Car (Full season), Grand National (part season), Le Mans, sportscar world championship (part season)

1968 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F1 (part season), Grand National (part season), drag racing (see here. Was this a one-off?)

1969 USAC Championship Car (Full season - champion, includes win at Pikes Peak, which was part of the championship then), F1 (part season), Grand National (part season)

1970 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F1 (part season)

1971 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F1 (part season)

1972 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F1 (part season)

1973 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F5000 (Full season)

1974 USAC Championship Car (Full season), F5000 (Full season), USAC Dirt Track championship (Full season - champion), F1 (part season)

1975 F5000 (Full season), F1 (Full season)

Collating all that together has helped me understand the picture much better; in particular that the Pikes Peak is sort of a red herring - Andretti competed there three times (and won once) while it was a round of the USAC National Championship! (That may not be news to you, but it caused my jaw to drop. This site was very helpful - I hope it's accurate!

If I'm reading all this right then, we can generalise very broadly by saying that from 1965 to 1974 Andretti focused on the USAC National Championships, while competing occasionally in F1, USAC dirt track, Grand National and Sports cars. From 1975 to 1981 he focused on Formula One, while continuing to compete in USAC National Championship and dirt track races. He also did three full seasons of Formula 5000 from 1973 to 1975, which overlap the changeover. Phew! 4u1e 14:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Going on from that, we can merge all of the content from the 'Racing in several series' section into either the Indycar or Formula One sections (assuming that the sportscar stuff goes into a separate 'Sports Car' heading, as proposed by Royalbroil in his sandbox. Pikes Peak and the dirt track championship can be referred to in the Indycar section (should this actually be USAC National Championships?). That leaves only the question of whether the F5000 stuff should be in its own section, or just mentioned in the USAC and/or F1 sections. Views? Since he transferred to F1 full time with his F5000 team, Vel's Parnelli, you could see that as a neat way of handling the transition. I may fiddle around with some of this stuff in the article. Cheers. 4u1e 15:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for compiling the list of what he did each year. I didn't have my arms completely around it. I completely agree with your assessement about what he did each year, and the broad groupings that you propose. I do remember hearing somewhere that Pikes Peak used to be part of Champ Car series, but I didn't think about it in this article. I remember User:Barno saying that he thought that the USAC dirt track championship became what is now the USAC Silver Crown open wheel cars, so grouping it with the Champ Cars would be natural (Silver Crown had been the second tier in USAC below Champ cars for a long time). I agree that the Formula 5000 goes with his development towards F1, so it should be either the first section or paragraph in the F1 section. So my opinion is split the 'Racing in several series' on those lines. Would you please make the edits to the article? Royalbroil 16:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) What do you think about using the Andretti Family website as a reference for some of the non-exceptional claims, such as the list of the bottom of this page listed the five one-hour television shows have aired about Mario’s life? Royalbroil 17:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

If it's just covering facts, I can't seen an issue with it (unless it's contradicted elsewhere!). Go for it. I've sort of implemented the changes I suggested, but I need to keep picking away at the wording, I doubt it's very clear at the moment to anyone who's not reasonably familiar with racing! So many series, and the subtleties of USAC/CART/Champ Car/Indycar etc probably need some explanation as we go along.... 4u1e 17:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

• I'm happy with today's version; thanks to both of you. I'm away the next four days but I'll try to look at it in more detail, and will try to find more sourcing and details, especially for the early URC and ARDC stuff. I still don't have any of the books but I believe at least one has its text on ibiblio. Barno 18:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Books about Mario

In support of the above request, I've found a bunch of books not previously mentioned in the References or Further Reading sections. I think the three autobiographies should be mentioned in the inline text, in a new "Autobiographies" section. The rest should be added to the "Further reading" section until such time as any gets referenced. These listings aren't quite in citation format and have a mix of ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 book numbers. Autobio's:

• What's It Like Out There, Mario Andretti and Bob Collins. Henry Regnery Company, 1970. ISBN 978-0809296729.
• Mario Andretti: World Champion, Mario Andretti and Nigel Roebuck. Hamlyn, 1979. ISBN 978-0600394693.
• Andretti, Mario Andretti. HarperCollins, 1994. ISBN 978-0006383024.

Bio's:

• Sports Hero, Mario Andretti, Marshall Burchard. Putnam, 1977. ISBN 0-399-20588-8.
• Mario Andretti: The Man Who Can Win Any Kind of Race, Lyle K. Engel. Arco Publishing, 1970. ISBN 978-0668021937.
• Mario Andretti: World Driving Champion, Lyle K. Engel. Arco Publishing, 1979. ISBN 0668047542.
• Mario Andretti, Mike O'Leary. MotorBooks, 2002. ISBN 0760313997.
• Andretti, Bill Libby. Grossett & Dunlap, 1970. (ISBN not found.)

Barno 00:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

GN history

• Besides the one win, there should be a sentence or two (in some part of what is currently the "Racing in several series" section) on the 14 races in 4 years Mario ran in GN from 1966 to '69. The stats are here: http://racing-reference.info/driver?id=andrema01 which is currently cited as ref 8. Were they all for Holman Moody? If we can document that, it's worth including. Barno 00:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
  • His first 4 were from different people, but the last 10 were for Holman-Moody according to Racing-reference. I would love to see a mockup of how to reorganize the article if someone wants to spend the time. Royalbroil 03:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

GA thoughts

I was asked to give some thoughts about potential GA status on this article. In my opinion it is almost there, just a few quick points:

• Might want to expand that intro a bit more, summarizing some additional points covered in the article itself.
• Awesome job with the images, all of them are free use, I think though there is one image that is GFDL and could be transwikiied to the WikiCommons, which would be even nicer.
• Lots of little paragraphs throughout the article - this is not a sticking point - but the article would look a lot nicer if some of the shorter paragraphs and subsections were either expanded, or instead merged together.
  • I think that's all I have for now, but message my talk if you have other questions. Yours, Smee 05:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC).
    • Oh, also, if you are unsure about GA, you could first try for a Wikipedia:Peer Review, and in your formulating question specifically ask about pointers for going towards GA. Smee 05:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC).
      • Thanks for your thoughts, Smee. I requested Smee's quick review. I'll transwiki the image. I haven't done a detailed thorough read through of the article since it was rearranged. Royalbroil 14:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Last American winner in F1

For this request.[7]

No American has won a Formula One race since Andretti in 1978.

To my regret, this sentence is correct at present (by 2007 Canadian Grand Prix). There are eight seven American-drivers who entered Formula One after the 1978 Dutch Grand Prix:

• Brett Lunger (1975 - 1978)
• Danny Ongais (1977 - 1978) *1978 Dutch GP was the last F1 race for him
• Eddie Cheever (1978 - 1989)
• Bobby Rahal (1978)
• Kevin Cogan (1980 - 1981)
• Danny Sullivan (1983)
• Michael Andretti (1993)
• Scott Speed (2006 - )

Cheever has finished several times on podium (2nd: two times, 3th: seven times, but did not win), and his son, Michael, finished only one time at the 1993 Italian Grand Prix. However others were not able to have finished a race on podium. Therefore, Mario is still the last American winner in Formula One...--Morio 04:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I flagged it because we are going for Good Article status. I want it either cited or removed - I don't want it to hold up the article. I found a reliable reference. Royalbroil 05:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Indycar terminology

I'm trying to get the references to North American open wheel racing correct. Am I right in thinking that the premiere North American series was named as follows over the course of Andretti's career:

• 1964 - 1980 USAC National Championship
• 1979 - 1994 CART Indycar World Series (1979 was a joint championship)

I know the switchover between the two isn't as clean as that, USAC ran a rival championship, renamed the USAC Gold Crown championship, for a few years after CART started up. From 1985 this consisted solely of the Indy 500, which USAC organised until the mid 1990s. The Indy 500 continued to count as part of the CART championship, with the exception of 81 and 82 when CART and USAC were still rivals. This is all based on the source I used above to get a handle on what Mario was doing in the late 60s to early 70s, but it tallies fairly well with what is at American Championship Car Racing.

Having got that out of the way, I guess we should either

a) refer only to Indycar racing and not mention the distinction between the USAC and CART series. This has the advantage of being simpler for a reader new to the topic.

b) refer to USAC championship car racing for Mario's first full time stint in North American open wheel racing and refer to CART Indycars for the second stint. This has the advantage of allowing us to explain some of the discrepancies in numbers of race wins (depending on whether USAC and CART figures are treated together). It also gives us a way of explaining how different the series was in the 1960s and 1970s: dirt track racing never formed part of the CART series.

Advice requested from North American racing fans! 4u1e 23:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I definitely like b) MUCH more. We could easily explain it by saying at his return that the series had changed to CART sanctioning while he was gone. I wasn't aware of the USAC Gold Crown - it was just barely before I watched IndyCar regularly on TV. The Gold Crown explains USAC's "Silver Crown" series! Royalbroil 03:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Good, 'cos that's kind of what I've gone with so far! It does indeed explain the Silver Crown; It also probably means that Barno is right in thinking that the 1974 championship won by Andretti was the 'USAC Dirt Championship Car', rather than the 'Silver Crown', which presumably came in at the same time as the Golden Crown. That is an assumption, though, albeit a logical one!4u1e 07:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I know it's not relevant to this article, but I remember watching a Silver Crown race and an announcer said that the Silver Crown cars have decended from the Indy 500 cars. Anyhow, I like how the article describes the transition. I still need to do a detailed re-read of the article. Royalbroil 12:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I read the article and I am happy with it. I also expanded the article from a new source. There is a new article on the Andretti Curse that just survived AfD. It talks about the curse ending extending to LeMans. I will add some of it to expand the sports car section. Thanks for pointing out that I was doing referencing wrong - I looked it up. While I think the space is important for readability, I will live with consensus. Royalbroil 16:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Personally I'd prefer refs before punctuation, but I've kind of got used to the 'official' version! 4u1e 17:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Would you look at this [8] reference, because I don't have the background to understand several paragraphs. Starting with the paragraph that begins with "Mario wasn't ready to race" and ending with "Ferrari Championship of Makes". Thanks! Royalbroil 17:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

First para is referring to Mario's sporadic drives in F1 in 1969 for Colin Chapman's Lotus team (I guess you know them, they visited Indy with a couple of chaps called Jim Clark and Graham Hill in the mid-1960s! :D). F1 wasn't as regimented then as it is now, so Andretti was racing an occasional third car for Team Lotus. One of the races Andretti did (I assume these were decided by the gaps in the USAC schedule) was at the Nürburgring circuit (the 'Ring) in Germany (see 1969 German Grand Prix), and on this occasion he wasn't driving the same Lotus 49 as Hill and Jochen Rindt, but an experimental 4WD Lotus 63. After the introduction of a 3-litre formula in F1 in 1966 (up from 1.5 litres) constructors were trying to find ways of of dealing with all the extra power. One approach was to use four wheel drive (4WD): it turned out not to be a good solution. There was a close technical relationship between Lotus' F1 and Indycars at this period, and I guess from this para that the four wheel drive Lotus 63 (F1) and 64 (Indycar) were pretty much the same vehicle - evidently Andretti had already had a big accident in a very similar car! I shouldn't read too much into 'Andretti's poor performance' - that will have been down to the car. 4WD means a big, heavy car. Although a lot of teams experimented with them in the late 1960s, only one driver (Johnny Servoz-Gavin) has ever scored a point in a 4WD F1 car, and that one was effectively set up as for rear wheel drive anyway.

The second para tells us that Granatelli (Andy?) - he's from your side of the pond, anyway - sponsored further F1 races for Andretti in 1970, this time for the March Engineering works team. Again, his involvement was sporadic. The 512S is the Ferrari 512S sportscar. Mario drove for Ferrari in F1 in 1971 - possibly leading on from his association with them in sportscar racing, but not necessarily: lots of F1 drivers drove for Ferrari in sports cars, and not just those from their F1 team. I think Mario's first connection with Ferrari was via the North American Racing Team (NART). The World Championship for Makes was the contemporary title for the World Sportscar Championship, the title went only to the constructor, not the team or the driver. The article is possibly overstating his role a bit, obviously many other drivers were involved, several for each car and Ferrari would have had several cars at each event. The BOAC 1000 km was held at Brands Hatch in the UK.

Is that the kind of thing you need, or have I made it more confusing? ;-) 4u1e 18:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry that I put you through all that analysis. I was just wondering if any of that information would be useful to include or source Mario's article. I figured it was F1 related, and I know little about F1. Royalbroil 01:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I just caught your edit to the F1 section. When I read the phrase "auto racing's world-wide governing body" I take it to mean that FIA governs all the races (or at least all series) in the world, which we both know is not true. I realize that you are trying to word it carefully, so would you come up with a minor change in the wording? I am okay with the rest that you wrote. This should be easy to clear up. Royalbroil 02:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, might not be that easy! While you're right of course that it doesn't govern all motorsport, it is also true that the FIA is the only international governing body. The 500 has, on occasions, been run as an FIA sanctioned race, I think. Most national motorsport associations are subsidiary to the FIA. I'll look into it in more detail and try and tweak the words to avoid an incorrect implication.

Regarding the source on Andretti, there are a two points that stand out as notable to me: One is how did Andretti start racing for Ferrari in F1?. Was it connected to the sportscar racing? And how did he start in Sportscars, was it through NART? (I like to know how and why things happened!). The other is that Andretti contributed to at least one World Championship for Makes, which as there was no sportscar drivers championship, is probably worth mentioning. 4u1e 11:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I was googling around trying to find how the various bodies connect, and found this page. Trouble is, the description of FIA's role there almost exactly matches what I wrote! I think the difference that we are trying to bring out is that most race series are governed by national or local bodies (or commercial organisations like IRL), not direct by the FIA. However, the organising bodies do tend, directly or indirectly, to be members of the FIA. As I understand that page, USAC is a member of ACCUS, which is a member of the FIA. I'm not all that clear personally what that means in practice - In the UK national rules & regs for motorsport are contained in the Motor Sport Association 'Blue Book', if I remember correctly. Specific rules for a specific championship are issued by the championship organiser. Same sort of arrangement in the States? 4u1e 11:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I looked at the link about ACCUS. It sounds like ACCUS might be a go-between/connection between the various sanctioning bodies and FIA. They put events on the FIA calendar. Everything you put in the last paragraph sounds reasonable to me, and the rules for a specific championship (or we call them series) are issued by the organizer. I know NASCAR is owned by the France family (descendants of Bill France, Sr.. France made up the rules completely independent of FIA. I am shocked that they are members of ACCUS - as I thought they were in no way related to FIA. We could use the phrase from the website "international body that governs the highest levels of motorsports" since it is sourced - although it sounds like a WP:PEACOCK/POV statement to me. You're right - the Indy 500 was run under FIA sanction for most of the 1950s, and the points counted towards the F1 championship (even though F1 drivers didn't race it!).

I pasted the main text from the article into Word, and I says that the article has around 20k text. The tables and infoboxes must be very large. I was expecting the article to be too large. So there is room to expand if we want (FA is regularly 30k to 50k). I would like to see expansion on his second IndyCar career and more on the sports car racing. I agree to connect the dots between series too. Royalbroil 14:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Bill France started NASCAR independently with no consideration for FIA. I'm not sure when ACCUS was organized, but the comment two items up is correct: it exists to coordinate between various US sanctioning bodies (often very independent, and occasionally competing) and the FIA (before FISA existed). I'm not sure when NASCAR joined ACCUS, but it was by the mid-Sixties. Maybe research into NASCAR's Speedway Division might show a FIA connection regarding the engine size/vehicle weight formula, and that might show whether NASCAR cared about FIA by 1959. Barno 16:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Given that this is really only about how we describe F1 I think we can short-circuit this (although it is interesting!) by referring to the FIA as 'motorsport's international governing body'. I don't believe there is any other international governing body for motorsport - of the US series only CART has really competed outside North America, and as I recall they had to reach an agreement with the FIA to do so (They got into an argument over Surfer's Paradise sometime around 1990 iirc).4u1e 06:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the phrasing you suggest is valid and NPOV. Barno 17:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

'tis done. I think the article's looking pretty good for GA now, but as we still seem to have the material (and time!) to add further value I suggest we do so. Smee noted above that some paras were rather short - I agree. Indy 500 is probably the worst culprit and reads a little bit like a list - can we join the dots a bit? 4u1e 17:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Calling it "motorsport's international governing body" is still not great in my opinion, but I it's better than anything that I can think up. I'll discuss if I come up with better wording. NASCAR just started up a series in Canada and a series in Mexico, but it's no where near FIA. I'll think about how to better connect the dots at Indy. Royalbroil 02:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

(reset) Happy to discuss wording further, but I can't think what else we could call it. There's probably something significant in the fact that (other than CART) excursions outside the States are limited to North America, but I'm not sure what. Cheers. 4u1e 06:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I will leave the FIA phrase alone. I can't think of anything better. Let's move on.

How far do you think this article is from featured? Should we consider skipping good for featured? Should we request a peer review? Royalbroil 12:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I'd go through GA on the way - it's useful in itself and looks better when you go to FA. I'd also recommend getting a peer review after GA (probably from other WP:MOTOR regulars, although the WP:BIO crowd usually do a good job too). I'd say this has a fair chance at GA now - it depends on who reviews it, in theory the standard isn't much lower than FA, with just 'brilliance' of writing and comprehensiveness of coverage being the difference. Why don't we go for GA now - it takes a while anyway , and I think we could both use some input from outside (and hopefully some encouragement!). I'll leave you to nominate (just follow the instructions at WP:GAC. 4u1e 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Good comments. I will nominate it after waiting another week to prove that it is stable. Royalbroil 12:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You might as well nominate it now. It generally takes several weeks for an article to get reviewed (or maybe that's just my articles.....). If stability is raised as a concern, I would expect the article to be placed on hold rather than outright failed, since changes are not down to an ongoing edit war, but to agreed improvements. Cheers. 4u1e 13:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

McNamara

Andretti's listed as driving a McNamara in some Indy 500s. It's wikilinked, but to a disambiguation page, and none of the options there seem relevant. Should this be de-linked, linked to some other article I don't know about, or red-linked to a new McNamara (constructor) type page? 4u1e 18:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I know very little about chasis. I'll ask at WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing. My thought is to red-link to McNamara (constructor). Royalbroil 02:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Found it. Oddly, it was a short lived German single seater constructor, run by an expat American. See here and here. 4u1e 13:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold

I reviewed this article not out of actually being a fan of Andretti but because I wanted to know more about him as I recall seeing him guest appear on the US comedy Home Improvement with Tim Allen. Unfortunately I could find no reference to him appearing on the show (he went on at least three times). Nevertheless his life and career is well researched. The article on a whole is almost at GA, though there are a few points (see WP:WIAGA for exact criteria) as to why I havent passed the article. I have placed the GA on hold until these points are resolved. Please update your progress here as you complete them. Once these concerns have been met the article can be passed as GA. Please address the following:

• The following sentance is pov, please change or remove: "1969 was a banner year for Andretti"

Removed. Royalbroil 04:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please reference: "While continuing to compete in the USAC National Championship, Andretti also competed two full seasons in the North American Formula 5000 series in 1973 and 1974, and finished second in the championship in both seasons. He also competed in USAC's dirt track division in 1974, and won the dirt track championship while competing in both series."

Cited. Royalbroil 00:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please reference: "Andretti told Chapman of his ambition to compete in Formula One and was told "When you're ready, call me."

for User:4u1e to address. Royalbroil 03:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Already ref'd - the ref at the end of that para covers all of its content. I would suggest that repeating the same ref twice in a para doesn't add to the article particularly. If the reviewer disagrees, I will repeat ref 13 directly after the quote. Cheers. 4u1e 08:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I would prefer to see a quote referenced inline, so please cite it. I would cite it myself, but I don't know the exact page. Royalbroil 20:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Cited. Royalbroil 01:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I've given the exact page number as well. 4u1e 11:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please reference: "When the Parnelli team pulled out of Formula One after two races of the 1976 season, Andretti returned to Chapman's Lotus team, for whom he had already driven at the season-opening Brazilian Grand Prix. His ability at developing a racing car soon progressed the Lotus towards the front end of the Formula One grid, culminating in lapping the field in his victory at the season ending race at the Mount Fuji circuit in Japan. In 1977, at Long Beach, he became the only American to win the United States Grand Prix West in the Lotus 78 "wing car". Andretti's development work at Lotus was to result in the revolutionary "ground effect" Lotus 79 of 1978. He won six races in 1978, and took the title. The championship was a bitter-sweet victory in the light of the death of his teammate and close friend Ronnie Peterson."

for User:4u1e to address. Royalbroil 03:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a duplicate of the next point, so it has been skipped. Royalbroil 01:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please reference and rewrite to remove pov: "When the Parnelli team pulled out of Formula One after two races of the 1976 season, Andretti returned to Chapman's Lotus team, for whom he had already driven at the season-opening Brazilian Grand Prix. His ability at developing a racing car soon progressed the Lotus towards the front end of the Formula One grid, culminating in lapping the field in his victory at the season ending race at the Mount Fuji circuit in Japan. In 1977, at Long Beach, he became the only American to win the United States Grand Prix West in the Lotus 78 "wing car". Andretti's development work at Lotus was to result in the revolutionary "ground effect" Lotus 79 of 1978. He won six races in 1978, and took the title. The championship was a bitter-sweet victory in the light of the death of his teammate and close friend Ronnie Peterson."

for User:4u1e to address. Royalbroil 03:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

??? 4u1e has edited, plus I have made an attempt to cite and explain. I am very weak in Formula One history. Royalbroil 01:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know - I reckon you're picking up a fair bit! I've tweaked a bit more and ref'd - think it's OK, if LordHarris could confirm? (Between Royal and Lord, I'm feeling a bit plebian here :D 4u1e 11:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please split this paragraph into two or more paragraphs adding references for earlier sections: "Andretti had continued to race, and win occasional races, in the USAC National Championship during his time in the Formula One world championship. In 1979 a new organization, Championship Auto Racing Teams, had set up the Indycar world series as a rival to the USAC National Championships that Andretti had won three times in the 1960s. The new series had rapidly become the premiere open wheel racing series in North America, and it was to this arena that Andretti returned full time in 1982, driving for Patrick Racing. In 1983 he joined the new Newman/Haas Racing team, set up by Carl Haas and actor Paul Newman using cars built by British company Lola. Andretti took the team's first win at Elkhart Lake in 1983. He won the pole for nine of sixteen events in 1984, and claimed his fourth Champ Car title at the age of 44. He edged out Tom Sneva by 13 points. It was the first series title for a second year team. Mario's son Michael joined Newman/Haas in 1989. Together, they made history as the first father/son team to compete in both IMSA GT and Champ Car racing,[8] as for the former, it was their fourth time in an endurance race together as co-drivers. Mario finished seventh in points for the 1991 season, the year that Michael won the championship. Mario's last victory in IndyCar racing came in 1993 at Phoenix International Raceway, the year that Michael left Newman/Haas to race in Formula One. The win made Mario the oldest recorded winner in an IndyCar event (53 years, 34 days old).[18] Andretti qualified on the pole at the Michigan 500 later that year with a speed of 234.275 mph (377.028 kph). The speed was a new closed course world record.[12] Andretti's final season, in 1994, was dubbed "The Arrivederci Tour." He raced in the last of his 407 Indy car races that September."

Could we change the word "premiere" to something less pov like "de facto standard" or "most prominent"? Royalbroil 13:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I am finding this point difficult to deal with since I don't see the problem. We added the introductory portion of this paragraph (and a simular introduction in the Formula One section) expecting them to be non-controversial (thus not needing citation). This introduction was added as a courtesy to give the reader some background about major changes while Andretti was away racing in Formula One. This is not the article about the history of IndyCar racing. 4u1e, should we just remove the introduction? It doesn't appear very important to me. Second, where is there a break in thought where a new paragraph could be appropriate? Royalbroil 20:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we definitely need the intro - a reader new to the topic will otherwise have no idea what these different series are or why it's of interest that Andretti competed in them. I'll have a look at the split and refs. 4u1e 10:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I've split into three paras and ref'd as best I can: Have we got a ref for Newman/Haas being the first second year team to win the championship? I've replaced premiere with top: I think this is factual, it was at that period the highest you could go in open-wheelers in the States - USAC (except Indy) and F5000 having died and IRL being 15 years away. 4u1e 11:36, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I looked throught the diffs, and the Newman/Haas sentence was reworded to the point where it took on a different meaning. I changed the meaning back. It should not be controversial anymore - since it was the first title for the second year team. Royalbroil 13:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, that would make more sense! Cheers. 4u1e 13:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• This DEFINATELY needs a reference/rewrite or removal: "Andretti made the saying "Mario is slowing down!" famous at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Andretti has had so many incidents at the track, and that critics have dubbed the family's performance the "Andretti Curse""

I will address. Royalbroil 03:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Addressed by removing the phrase "Mario is slowing down" even though I think it is a quote from Indy 500 announcers. I reworded the first paragraph in the section and cited the "Andretti Curse". Royalbroil 05:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"Mario is slowing down" is an exact quote from the historical Indianapolis 500 history DVD, 1980s: Decade for the Ages, currently produced (along with the 60s, 70s and 90s) by IMS Corp. itself. The line was not shouted, as Carnegie sounding surprised for long about any development in the Race is few and very far between; however, the exact words were used, and made as famous as they were likely due to its having been without doubt the most famous Mario misfortune at Indianapolis, the race in 1987 when he led 177 of the first 180 laps, and went out while over a lap and a half out in front. --Chr.K. 03:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• The awards and references section could do with references citing the awards e.g. "In 2000, the Associated Press and RACER magazine named him "Driver of the Century." The same year, he was inducted into the International Motorsports Hall of Fame. He was inducted into the United States National Sprint Car Hall of Fame in 1996, and the Motorsports Hall of Fame of America in 1990."

Completed. Royalbroil 03:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Basically those are my concerns for addressing, mainly in regards to NPOV and references/citations. If anyone can perhaps they would be able to add information about his Home Improvement appearances to the film appearances section, changing the title. Once you have addressed these concerns please drop me a message. If you have any concerns or need any help, please ask. Thanks. LordHarris 01:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Royal, do you think we're done now? 4u1e 13:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Several hours ago I asked LordHarris to look it over again. Royalbroil 17:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me, well done and good work on meeting all of the points I raised. Ive updated the article to GA status. As for further suggestions for improvement I think you should nominate the article for a peer review, as a review by other editors would be good for improving the article beyond GA. I would recommend trying to incorporate the movie and television appearences into prose, rather than as bullet points. Also is it not possible to merge some of the info from the second info box to the first info box - as date of birth etc should be at the top of the info box? Anyway good work. LordHarris 14:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Driver of the Year

The article mentions that Andretti has been named "Driver of the Year" three times. Who awards this title and what is the scope, i.e. is it Driver of the Year in Indycars? Or in the USA? Or in the whole world? Depending on the answer, perhaps this should be clarified in the article. DH85868993 03:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I have cited it so the reader can make their own conclusion, and noted that the award is for the United States. Andretti was the first winner in 1967. Royalbroil 03:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll leave it to you to decide whether it needs the clarification and/or cite in the lead section as well. DH85868993 04:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"ć" or "ch"

The two letters "-ch" are often used in non-ex-Yugoslav sources to denote the letter "-ć", just like they are used in translations of Russian names. Besides ex-Yu, the letter "ć" is present only on Polish keyboards. Outside ex-Yugoslavia and Poland, sources in English use the two letters "c" and "h" to depict the letter "ć". Though, sometimes (in recent years) the letter "c" is used without the "h". There is simply no way an English sources could use the letter "ć", and must use the aforementioned alternatives. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for you, but the Mario's family surname changed from "Andretich" to Andretti. All the sources say so. If you have some other sources, plese add your source.--151.48.2.14 (talk) 12:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

...I forgot: the -ich is present ALSO in Croatia today. See here, for example "Barbalich" or "Toich" or "Iovanovich". Please, no POV, thank you.--151.48.2.14 (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Where "-ch" is present is of no concern, it is ridiculous to change the family's name because whoever wrote that article didn't have "ć" on his keyboard. Confirm that his family had the very, very rare "-ich" form, that didn't even exist back then. Don't be "sorry for me", I'm not banned, you can also forget about pushing the term "refugees" for the esuli. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The source says that the form is "Andretich". Please, confirm you the other form.--151.48.2.14 (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The name Andretich is still in use (very, very rare form?!?). See here: [9][10][11]. Please, see your source and stop POV.--151.48.2.14 (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The name "Andretich" is the name "Andretić" spelled without the use of the rather obscure letter "ć", its not a different name (Andretich=Andretić, get it?). Tha vast majority of the world cannot use the letter "ć", so naturally alternatives have spawned. Alright, obviously the matter is rather obscure and none of us will be able to confirm this. I suggest we use "Andretich (Andretić)" as a compromise? (AGAIN you edit-war before consensus is reached!! When will you learn how this place works? No matter how many times you revert to your version, its the discussed version that will "win out" in the end.) --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't made ANY edit-war: you changed the article without consensus and despite the sources here. I repeat: despite the sources! In the article the surname was Andretich, before your changes! Mario Andretti considers himself an " Italian exule": he is also the Mayor of the "Libero Comune di Montona in Esilio" (sure you don't knew it). Every year Mario offers more than 5,000 US$ for the "Libero Comune di Montona in Esilio": 2,000 in memory of his mother Rina Benvegnù.--151.48.2.14 (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Another thing: you wrote "it is ridiculous to change the family's name because whoever wrote that article didn't have "ć" on his keyboard". I know the owner of the web site here (your source). She's a lady and she has the "ć" in her keyboard. See here: [12]. The name changed from "Andretich" to "Andretti", and I repeat: in Italy still live some people with the surname "Andretich" [13].--151.48.2.14 (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know her too, she's my real mom. lets stop this. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Marisa is your real mother? I'm very happy for you, because this means that you are an "Italian esule"...--151.48.2.14 (talk) 14:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

We need to be using whatever the sources say. If there is a well-documented alternative, which it sounds like there is, then we should include it too. So I agree to the alternative Andretich (Andretić). Royalbroil 13:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Very well, agreed. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I have to notice that "We need to be using whatever the sources say" is against the Wiki-rules. Read here and here: "Information in an article must be verifiable in the references cited. Article statements generally should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages nor on passing comments. Passages open to interpretation should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source's author(s). Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references be cited in context and on topic.". Well: where is the verifiable source of the spelling Andretić, in this case?--151.48.2.14 (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

True. I don't have a strong opinion either way on the accented c vs. ch. I'd rather see nothing that something unsourced. I would consider a strong source that says that the accented c is often rendered as ch to be sufficient. The accented c article on Wikipedia doesn't even talk about the rendering. Royalbroil 17:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Birth country

I strongly disagree with how the article is currently worded. The article needs to say that he was born in Italy, not that he was born in Croatia (then Italy). User:4u1e and I worked this wording out because I was so strong in this opinion. The current wording is misleading to the reader. He is very strongly associated with his Italian youth, not with his "then Italy" youth. It's a major part of his identity, and it was always evident whenever he was interviewed by the media. When someone was born in a country and his family had to flee their hometown because a new country had taken over, he takes on the nationality of that original country, not what it is right now. I have ancestors who were born in Germany. It doesn't matter that the land is now part of France, it was Germany when they were there, so that part of my heritage is German. Royalbroil 14:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The matter is heavily controversial, and the region of Istria was annexed by Italy after World war I. I suggest we simply explain the matter carefully to avoid any disputes and/or misunderstandings. I'll give it a try and await your response. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I wrote up a piece of text that explains the situation in as much detail as the context can allow. I realize it may seem a tad bit clumsy, but its the best way to end the perpetual squabble over this and add more data for the reader. I hope its acceptable? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 16:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

100% agree with Royal! Here is very difficult to insert the Italian historical names - officially in use at that time and also during the previous Austro-Hungarian suzerainty - in a way that has been done for Immanuel Kant. See for example Agostino Straulino or Nino Benvenuti (the infobox). If you control the contributions, you can see that even the smallest change of these articles has always caused the reaction of a group of authors. See here: [14] and here: [15]--151.48.2.14 (talk) 16:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I changed a little part of the article. User:DIREKTOR wrote fascist Italy instead of "Kingdom of Italy". But if he wants to write "fascist Italy", then I'll write "Communist Yugoslavia" instead of "Yugoslavia".--151.48.2.14 (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Firstly and foremostly, you are an IP sock of banned user PIO/Luigi 28 and are unwelcome on the English Wikipedia. Secondly, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was a communist state only during an initial period, while it was called "People's Federal Republic of Yugoslavia". We are discussing the country as a whole. With Italy there is a need to denote the exact period in which he was born. Finally, I advise you once more to discuss all edit beforehand. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 16:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

First: I'm not a sock of banned user. Second: your POV edits speak for you. Third: show me when you discussed your edits in this article!--151.48.29.111 (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful your words: "the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was a communist state only during an initial period". Maybe two/three months? And when received Istria and the Andretti's family left the country, was perhaps liberal and democratic?--151.48.29.111 (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Luigi 28, I though you and I were past the "denial" phase... you were banned and you admitted yourself that this IP group is you.

The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was a SOCIALIST state after the informbiro period and the Tito-Stalin split, but since you've completely "demonized" it in your mind I suppose this is a pointless discussion. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

My opinion is that the article was carefully worded to state that the country had been Italy went he was born and that he left with his family when it became Yugoslavia because of the war. Let's try to avoid descriptive terms about the country's like Fascist Italy. I think it doesn't belong here because a nation's history is too much detail for this article - things need to be simple. PLEASE, let's discuss edits to the article because this is getting out of hand. Royalbroil 17:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree!!--151.48.29.111 (talk) 17:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You keep editing the article without discussion. Stop. When I edited I discussed before and after, while your actions are causing an edit war. I've been asking you to discuss first since you started this disruptive behavior. Once again, stop or get reported. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You both need to stopped editing immediately and gain consensus or I will be forced to stop it for you. I just looked at the article's history and this definitely looks like an edit war. Royalbroil 17:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Right, but now i disagree with this part of the article. I quote your words: "the article was carefully worded to state that the country had been Italy went he was born and that he left with his family when it became Yugoslavia because of the war. Let's try to avoid descriptive terms about the country's like Fascist Italy". Please, notice, that mr. Direktor never discussed his edits before. Now he can try to write something more accurate. I'll wait for...--151.48.29.111 (talk) 17:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Consider what is there right now to be temporary until it can be resolved. There are several things that I don't like either, but you don't see me editing it. What happens next is that each of you should propose wording for the article that you are satisfied with that you think the other person and I might be satisfied with. Maybe we can reach common ground. The paragraph being disputed is the "Early Life" section, so let's limit the discussion to it for now. Let's start with the stable version that was active for around a month and discuss from there: Royalbroil

• Mario Andretti was born in the Italian city Montona d'Istria, which is now know as Motovun, Croatia. He was born with a twin brother, Aldo Andretti, to a farm administrator.[6] The Italian province Istria, which contained Montona d'Istria, had been annexed into Italy after World War I, and after World War II it was annexed to Yugoslavia. In 1928, his family surname was changed from Andretich to Andretti.[7] His family, like many other Italians, emigrated from SFR Yugoslavia during the period of the Istrian exodus. The five members of the Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.[8] diff
  • I like how it says that he was born in an Italian city that became part of Croatia. It doesn't get bogged down in the political details. I don't like the SFR part because it gets bogged down in the details of the country's history. Royalbroil 17:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree 100% with the old version. Regarding WP:NCGN, I notice Immanuel Kant and many others, like Tiedemann Giese, Johannes Dantiscus, Luise Gottsched, Otto von Below, Arthur Schopenhauer, Günter Grass etc. etc. etc. For the Germans born in the territories today Poles, here in Wikipedia was possible to do what was absolutely impossible for Italians born in the territories ceded to Yugoslavia, namely indicate the official name of the city in which they are born and brackets the current name. Having spoken with the User:DIREKTOR, you'll understand why. Anyway: it's possible to re-write the previous words in the article? PS About Andretić: show me a single source regarding Mario Andretti with this spelling and I'll agree with Direktor: we have four different sources for "Andretich": here, here, here, here.--151.48.29.111 (talk) 09:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said before, going into the political details may seem unnecessary but it is the only way to write about a region whose history is so controversial. If we generalize we'll end up with POV wording towards one side or the other and this place will get edited constantly. For example: we should avoid "Montona d'Istria", according to WP:NCGN, since the town's name is Motovun, and I do not see why the original spelling "(Andretić)" should be removed if we already agreed to use it. I didn't mention this above, being to busy with the sock, but I agree with your earlier suggestion: we should remove "fascist" from "fascist Italy" and stick to terms as neutral as possible. I also do not see the problem with a few words of extra information. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

<<we should avoid "Montona d'Istria">>: you canceled also <<Motovun (then Montona)>> [16]!!! You don't want neither the name, nor the memory of the name Montona!!! --151.48.29.111 (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You're a fanatic. Memory? These are not two towns we're talking about, Motovun is "Montona", and anyone looking for extra information on the town can find its Italian name in the lead section of the article. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Really? So don't you canceled "the Italian city Montona d'Istria, which is now know as Motovun, Croatia" in the article here? Don't you canceled also "Motovun" (then Montona)'" [17]? Let's go, Direktor, open your mind!--151.48.29.111 (talk) 10:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Open my mind? Hmmmm, let me see, I'm asking myself: "WHY don't I finally take the time to report your IP group, why..., why..." --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I propose: Mario Andretti was born in Montona d'Istria (Italy), which is now Motovun in Croatia. He was born with a twin brother, Aldo Andretti, to a farm administrator. The province Istria, which contained Montona d'Istria, had been annexed into Italy after World War I, and after World War II it was annexed to Yugoslavia. In 1928, his family surname was changed from Andretich to Andretti. His family, like many other Italians, emigrated from SFR Yugoslavia during the period of the Istrian exodus, "knowing their lives would never amount to anything under Communist rule". The five members of the Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with $125. Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.--151.48.29.111 (talk) 10:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

That's against Wikipedia policy: WP:NCGN, but then, so is your editing... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I just said: it's like Immanuel Kant, Tiedemann Giese, Johannes Dantiscus, Luise Gottsched, Otto von Below, Arthur Schopenhauer, Günter Grass etc. etc. etc. Do you agree?--151.48.29.111 (talk) 10:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Does this change Wikipedia policy? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 10:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course no, because "Use of one name for a town in 2000 does not determine what name we should give the same town in 1900 or in 1400, nor the other way around". See WP:NCGN, please. Another time: do you agree?--151.48.29.111 (talk) 10:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm still thinking about my response which is why I took so long to respond. One thing is that WP:NCGN is a guideline, not a policy, so it is not written in stone. That being said, it should generally be followed with occasional exception. I'm not convinced that this should or should not be an exception. I don't understand how nor am I convinced that it applies in this case. I read it several times, and I'm not clear how it explains that a city that changed names when another country took it over. I'd like to see what User:4u1e has to say about this before I say anything more. I may seek additional clarification and an opinion from someone who understand it well who is outside of this situation. He was born in Italy, and saying anything else misrepresents and disagrees with every source that I have seen and used to build this article. He is VERY STRONGLY associated with his Italian heritage. Someone had put up an Italian flag instead of an American flag by his name for some time. I still haven't seen a reliable source that explains that the accented "c" is often rendered in English and/or Roman characters as "ch", so is that topic completed? Royalbroil 14:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

After posting my last message, I read NCGN again. I see that it is a naming convention, which is the method used to determine the name of the article about the city. The city's article is correctly named. Looking at the nutshell, it says "Historical names or names in other languages can be used in the lead if they are frequently used and important enough to be valuable to readers, and should be used in articles with caution." That doesn't preclude use in the article. Using the Italian name does help the reader in this case. The next paragraph says "If English uses different names in different historic contexts, use the name appropriate to the specific historic context." I argue that we are using the city in a different context, the context of what it was when Andretti was born there. General guidelines, point 3 (bold added by Royalbroil): The contents (this applies to all articles using the name in question): The same name as in the title should be used consistently throughout the article. Exceptions are allowed only if there is a widely accepted historic English name for a specific historical context. In cases when a widely accepted historic English name is used, it should be followed by the modern English name in parentheses on the first occurrence of the name in applicable sections of the article in the format: "historical name (modern name)." This resembles linking; it should not be done to the detriment of style. On the other hand, it is probably better to do too often than too rarely. If more than one historic name is applicable for a given historical context, the other names should be added after the modern English name, i.e.: "historical name (English name, other historical names)". Use of widely accepted historic names implies that names can change; we use Byzantium, Constantinople and Istanbul in discussing the same city in different periods. Use of one name for a town in 2000 does not determine what name we should give the same town in 1900 or in 1400, nor the other way around. Many towns, however, should keep the same name; it is a question of fact, of actual English usage, in all cases. For more examples, some of them involving changes within the twentieth century, see below. So I think the original form before this edit war should be used because we dealing with the city in its historical sense. Royalbroil 15:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Another time I agree with you 100%!--151.48.31.119 (talk) 15:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Andretti himself wrote something in his web site. If you see his "Biography", in a section named "Montona, Italy" (!!!) you can read this words: "(...) Montona, located in the Istrian peninsula, was ceded to Yugoslavia as post-war political settlement, leaving the Andrettis trapped inside a Communist country. By 1948, the family decided to leave Montona knowing their lives would never amount do anything under Communist rule (...). Today the town is part of Croatia and is called Motovun." Also here you can read that "Montona Reserve Series. Named in honor of Mario Andretti's childhood home of Montona, Italy the ultra-premium Montona Reserve Series wines are crafted exclusively from estate-grown grapes and other stellar Napa Valley vineyards".--151.48.31.119 (talk) 15:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

...Erm, what about just saying he was born in Istria and leave all the other stuff about Istria changing hands out? That gets mentioned anyway if the article's going to say that his family left Istria after it had become part of Yugoslavia. Readers can find out for themselves in other articles about Istrian history if they are interested. So the article would say something like "He was born into an Italian family in Motovun, known to Italians as Montona, in Istria". An acceptable compromise? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The "stuff about Istria" was in the article from many, many months before the recent changes. I propose to come back to the old version: "Mario Andretti was born in the Italian city Montona d'Istria, which is now know as Motovun, Croatia. He was born with a twin brother, Aldo Andretti, to a farm administrator.[6] The Italian province Istria, which contained Montona d'Istria, had been annexed into Italy after World War I, and after World War II it was annexed to Yugoslavia. In 1928, his family surname was changed from Andretich to Andretti.[7] His family, like many other Italians, emigrated from SFR Yugoslavia during the period of the Istrian exodus. The five members of the Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.".--151.48.31.119 (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Having read some things about the relationship between Andretti and his homeland, I believe that eliminating the part on because his family went away would be a mistake. Even in its websites, he always reminds his relation with Montona and Istria and why he went away, so that he today is the President of the Association of exiles of Montona. Writing "was born into an Italian family in Motovun, known to Italians as Montona" would go against the historical reality. In 1910 (before the WWI) in the town of Montona there are 1,346 Italian-speaking and 8 (eight!) Croatians (G.Perselli, "I censimenti della popolazione dell'Istria...", 1993, p. 165).--151.48.31.119 (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I propose "Mario Andretti was born into an Italian family in Motovun, known to Italians as Montona, in Istria. He and his twin brother Aldo were sons of a farm administrator.[6] His family emigrated from Yugoslavia during the period of the Istrian exodus. The five members of the Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with just $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.".

The stuff I've taken out is just farts and other hot gases. I've also cleaned up your dodgy English, Mr/Ms IP 151.48.31.119. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree another time with you and propose to come back to the old version, before the changes.--151.48.31.119 (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

...My dodgy English was the old version, active for around a month before the changes. Cheerio!--151.48.31.119 (talk) 17:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, why did you say "I propose to come back to the old version" if you knew it had dodgy English in it? Why didn't you use all your skills to clean it up a bit? How silly of you. Cheerio till tomorrow, when no doubt you be editing under a different IP address, as always. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 17:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for my IP addresses, but I have a very bad ADSL connection: I have to disconnect and connect myself many times in a day.--151.48.31.119 (talk) 18:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I do like AlasdairGreen27's version except the first sentence. For that sentence, I like what the anon proposed with a minor modification: "Mario Andretti was born in Montona d'Istria (Italy), which is now Motovun in Croatia. (anon proposal)", "Mario Andretti was born in Montona d'Istria, Italy, which is now Motovun in Croatia. (my proposal)" It is concise and it includes the historic name first which is critical for context, along with the current name for current context. Royalbroil 03:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree.--151.48.16.130 (talk) 15:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

What are we waiting for?--151.48.16.130 (talk) 12:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

What's the matter? Itching to do a little edit-warring? You need to remember why you got your community ban.

Royal, this is not a question of whether we should use the English name (Motovun) or the Italian one, this is about which should be primary. He considered himself Italian? Then the Italian name must be included for the reader's benefit. However, does the fact that he was/is anti-Slavic (or ant-Yugoslav) mean that the article about him should share this, or any, ideological "theme"? The Italian emigrants from Istria ("Exiles"), like our banned IP here, have managed to make this seemingly small issue into a controversial matter. In other words, accepting that the guy was an Italian, does this mean we should overly-"italiaianize" an entire city or an entire Wiki article just because the Italian name would "look nicer" in the context of a text about an anti-Yugoslav person? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I took a wikibreak for the last 2 days for a vacation. DIREKTOR, I doubt that you are familiar with him at all based on your comments. Whenever his heritage was brought up in a documentary about his career, it always talked about how he grew up in Italy. I never heard that the city went under rule of another country until I researched his biography for this article long after he retired from active racing. He is the poster child for an Italian-American. It's far greater than "He considered himself Italian." I've always considered him to be pro-Italy, not anti-anything else. You're trying to force a guideline to fit a rare case where it doesn't fit the historic context of the person. I'm going to bring up this discussion at WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing, the WikiProject that fits him and his career. This is the best group of Wikipedians that understand him and his heritage. We'll see what they say. A larger group should be involved to determine how the guideline fits Andretti. Royalbroil 23:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

We may have a misunderstanding, and I may have been concentrating on the sock's "input" more than I should have. Noone is trying to "slavify" the person or his heritage, in fact I'd welcome the inclusion of any claims or clarifications to the contrary. What we have here is a problem that concerns specifically Motovun and the province of Istria, and while Motovun may from your perspective be mainly represented as the birthplace of Andretti, it is also a living, breathing town with a complex heritage of its own. A heritage that has unfortunately been rendered highly controversial by (mostly banned) "edit-warriors" like our mutual sock friend. If that were not the case, I would not mind the town being represented as "Montona d'Istria", but since users such as Alasdair and myself have been working long and hard towards an end to the edit-wars that have plagued the many articles on Istria and Dalmatia, I feel compelled to mention this wider context. In my view, a one sentence-long elaboration that uses clear facts and English names may not only end the dispute here, but also give a much-needed perspective on Andretti's childhood. Especially since the controversy appears to influence his later life as well (as the sock said, he is an emigrant union "mayor" of Motovun). I really believe this perspective deserves attention, and would welcome additional input on the issue, as long as users remember that this is not a question of the person's identity, ethnicity, or heritage, all of which is undoubtably Italian and should naturally be described as such. (I should not have brought my laptop on vacation :) --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

My concern is that the article should not say that he was born in a city in Yugoslavia/Croatia. That is what I read when I read what you have proposed/edited. If it first says that he was born Motovun, then it says that he was born in Yugoslavia/Croatia. That is why I am so insistent on seeing the city name in its historical context not in it's current context. I don't have a problem with immediately stating after that fact that the city and state later changed nationality (thus name), which lead to his family's emigration to U.S. It's good that we agree that we need to use a short one sentence elaboration that uses clear facts. We have had problems with this article that anon users have changed his country of birth to Yugoslavia/Croatia, including changing the flag by his name. That's just wrong. Hopefully the additional contributors can give a compromise that most of us can agree to (because I don't think that there's a middle ground that you two can agree). Take a true vacation away from your laptop - this can sit until after you return! I let it sit when I was on vacation for the last 2 days. Royalbroil 02:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that Mario Andretti was Croatian from 1 April 2004 [18] to 23 August 2006 [19],

like

1. Marco Polo [20]
2. Fiorello La Guardia [21]
3. Emile Zola [22]
4. Joseph Haydn [23]
5. Pope Sixtus V [24]
6. Pope John IV [25]
7. Diego Armando Maradona [26]

and so on... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.28.126.85 (talk) 19:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I repeat: what are we waiting for?--151.48.10.175 (talk) 16:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Input from WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing so that more than just a few contributors will make this consensus. I'll bring it up at WikiProject Motorsport because he was active in many motorsports genres and Formula One contributors should be familiar with him as a world champion. Royalbroil 19:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Mario Andretti is Italian-born, in a town that is now in Croatian territory. Consensus is universal among every source I've ever heard that Andretti is Italian by birth, not Croatian; Andretti himself marched, in the 2004 Olympic ceremonies on behalf of Italy, so we have that source of his personal stance; the one viable argument I've always heard regarding his nationality being other than Italian is whether he should be called an American winner of the 500-Mile Race and/or World Championship, via nationalization. Noting that the town has since changed political jurisdiction to the hands of Croatia should be included; his Italian-birth should not be in question. --Chr.K. (talk) 07:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

New opinions

Regarding a notice about this on WP:Motorsport, I've read over the early life section of the article. First and foremost, I think it needs to be better written as it's quite disjointed and out of order.

• "Like many other surnames, his family's surname was italianized by fascist authorities from Andretich (Andretić) to Andretti in 1928." The source used does not actually say this. It merely states that the family changed their name in 1928. It doesn't say that they were forced. Needs another source.
• I'm not really sure if his family's original name has any use in the article if the change occured 12 years before he was born.
• "At the time the area was part of Italy (for a total of 26 years), having been annexed in the aftermath of World War I, and was granted to Yugoslavia after World War II by the Allied powers (due to its majority Slavic population)." I think only the date in which the town transfered from Italy to Yugoslavia is important here. The period of time in which it was Italian or why it became Italian initially doesn't really belong here.
• "'"knowing their lives would never amount to anything under Communist rule'" I'm not sure you can quote something which is not directly stated by an individual. The359 (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• The article does not state that the family was "forced" to change their name. All Slavic names were simply changed to Italian form in that period, regardless of whether one had any objections or not. Maybe they didn't like it, maybe they did, who knows?
• Hmmm, I think its an interesting fact... I don't see why it should be removed.
• Ok, adding date, removing the year count, how's this:

"At the time the area was part of Italy having been annexed in 1918, and was granted to Yugoslavia after World War II due to its majority Slavic population."

• Agreed, I thought that was referenced :P

--DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact that the Italian government forced them would have to be referenced, as the reference in the statement made no mention of this fact. I still believe it has no bearing on Mario himself, as he was never Mario Andretich.

I also still see no reason to include the date in which Italy took control of the region as this was once again long before Mario was born. Only the change of hands from Italy to Yugoslavia really matters. The359 (talk) 20:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that is untrue that "All Slavic names were simply changed to Italian form in that period, regardless of whether one had any objections or not". You can see here some different examples:

1. Sen. Natale Krekich[27]. Read the transcription of the statement of 1933 and the name of the proponent: "Fulvio Suvich", another "slavic name"
2. Sen. Antonio Grossich [28]. The same thing.
3. Here you can see the transcription of the Yellow Pages of Fiume (today Rijeka). Many "slavic" names.

It's true that many names changed, but not all the names (my uncle was and today is one of those who never changed the "slavic" name).--151.48.51.68 (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

...and I totally agree with The359.--151.48.51.68 (talk) 20:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The359, those are all important issues which need to be addressed, but biggest issue right now (and why I started the thread) is: how should the name of his town be presented? Options so far: 1) Mario Andretti was born in the Italian city Montona d'Istria, which is now know as Motovun, Croatia. 2) Mario Andretti was born into an Italian family in Motovun, known to Italians as Montona, in Istria or 3) Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born in Motovun, Istria. How should the guideline WP:NCGN be applied in this case? Should an exception be made to state that he was born in Italy (by stating the town's Italian name Montona), or should the city be named as Motovun (the Yugoslavia/Croatian/modern) name? Royalbroil 21:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

...was born in Montona d'Istria (now Motovun), Istria. makes the most sense to me. The359 (talk) 21:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Another time: I agree!--151.48.51.68 (talk) 21:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

born in Montona d'Istria and let the wikilinks tell the story of its transition to Motovun. We should not lose sight that this is an article about a racing driver, and for anyone who is sufficiently interested into the cartographical war of his youth can follow generously supplied wikilinks and read about the subject directly. --Falcadore (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

As I proposed above and do so again, what about: "Mario Andretti was born into an Italian family in Motovun, known to Italians as Montona, in Istria. He and his twin brother Aldo were sons of a farm administrator.[6] His family emigrated from Yugoslavia during the period of the Istrian exodus. The five members of the Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with just $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.". AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the only problem with that is that it seems to imply that the Andrettis spent all those years in Yugoslavia, rather than leaving because the land became Yugoslav. I also think Mario's sister deserves a mention as part of the family, as with his parents names. The359 (talk) 00:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Cool. So what's your proposed wording? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I think the way the article stands now that I've cleaned it up, with the parenthetical mentioning of the difference between Motovun and Montona, should cover everyone's concerns. It gives proper information on the Adretti family without delving too deep into the political nature of Italy and Yugoslavia. Really, I would even remove the "region of mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity" portion. The359 (talk) 01:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Huh? You took out all mentions of Montona! You just called the city Motovun. I thought you preferred that form? The359, we had all agreed to decide the final wording BEFORE editing the article. I would edit the following sentence to remove the struck out part and add the bolded word: "Istria was then a region of Italy with a mix Croatian and Italian ethnicity, but which was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II." In the final sentence of that paragraph, I don't think the month that they settled matters (June). I like the direction the rest of the paragraph went. Royalbroil 04:08, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I edited the article to clean it up, my discussion here was for how to change my own edit, by adding the Montona (now Motovun) part and such. The359 (talk) 15:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

My I suggest: "Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born in Motovun (then Montona), Istria (...)"?--151.48.51.68 (talk) 07:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

"Mario Andretti was born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria."? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DIREKTOR (talk • contribs)

DIREKTOR, you finally found wording that I could compromise to. It says Italian first, then it lists the city, so the reader is forced to recognize that he was born Italian no matter what the city is called now. How does the anon contributor feel about this compromise? Royalbroil 12:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

He'll probably disagree with me out of principle... :P --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:45, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course I agree! I notice that I wrote "Motovun (then Montona)" many days ago, but mr Direktor erased the Italian name (still in use, because Motovun/Montona is a bilingual town[29]): [30]. This whole debate could not even get started, if Direktor had not wanted to press on with its POV. However, well done boys!--151.48.51.68 (talk) 14:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Settled then? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[6] Istria was then a region of Italy with a mix Croatian and Italian ethnicity, but was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. Mario, Aldo, sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus to avoid Communist rule,[7] relocating to a camp in Lucca, Italy. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.[8]. I write in bold the new words. "Into an Italian family" is the propose of Direktor (and I agree) and "(then Montona)" is our agreement.--151.48.51.68 (talk) 15:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

A few tune-ups might be necessary for the entire text. We should resolve all issues. How's this:

"Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina. Istria was then a region of Italy with a mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. Several years after the annexation, Andretti's family's surname was italianized by Italian authorities from Andretich (Andretić) to Andretti in 1928. Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus, relocating to a camp in Lucca, Italy. They emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964."

I removed "to avoid communist rule", (we do not have to open that can of worms here do we?) and removed "As refugees...". If they were emigrants, not refugees. Aside from this, I believe we should keep the reference to the older name of the family. It certainly does not seem totally insignificant in the context of Andretti's childhood. I believe we agreed on keeping it in this form earlier on? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:38, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the history of his family name is relevant since it was never used during his lifetime. I thought we had agreed to take it out! I agree with removing the "to avoid communist rule". Royalbroil 18:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh my God, we have the neverend story: I agree with Direktor, then he rewrites the article another time!

Now we read: Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born in Motovun, Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[6] Istria was then a region of Italy with a mix Croatian and Italian ethnicity, but was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. Mario, Aldo, sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus to avoid Communist rule,[7] relocating to a camp in Lucca, Italy. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.[8].

The words "to avoid the communist rule" come from the biography in the official Mario's web Site[31] (see Montona, Italy): "(Montona) was ceded to Yugoslavia as part of the post-war political settlement, leaving the Andrettis trapped inside a Communist country. By 1948, the family decided to leave Montona knowing their lives would never amount to anything under Communist rule". Like many Istrian Italians.

In this article, we have another time the same edit war of Istrian exodus. Direktor changed that article and stated that the exodus was a "voluntary free-will departure of ethnic Italians"[32]. He hates every word against the former Tito's Yugoslavia, because he "support Yugoslavia not because of its socialist/communist system of rule, but because of the relative harmony, rule of law, and economic prosperity it brought to the various nations of our region." (see here). Now - after the discussion about Montona/Motovun - we have another discussion: to keep in the article the original Mario's thought on his exodus or speculate on beautiful harmony of Tito's Yugoslavia.--151.48.38.112 (talk) 20:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

As I said, if you would care to read my entire post, we agreed on the lead sentence but the rest needs a few improvements in my view.

• "to avoid the communist rule". "His own opinions", if they are indeed that (where's the link, verification?), need not be NPOV and fully in accordance with Wikipedia. "to avoid communist rule" is not neutral wording. "as they did not prefer to live in a communist country" sounds more like it, but since it is too long, I did not include it outright.
• "refugees". This discussion is long concluded. The "exiles" are not refugees, the "exodus" was hardly ethnic cleansing. Unless you came up with some new kind of verifiable proof that the Yugoslav authorities forced these people to leave, I suggest we stop running around in circles. I am not going to discuss this with you (for the umpteenth time), since you are a nonobjective fanatic, and have managed to get yourself banned because of that.

--DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

To avoid the communist rule. You don't read my post. I have already indicated the link and also the full citation.

"Refugees". It's false that the discussion is long concluded. You and some other guys controlled for a long time this article prevented any change of this sentence wich you introduced years after the creation of the article, with a incredible edit war (see the history here). It's the classic point of view of communist Yugoslavia: the exodus was a voluntary act and not caused by a communist regime (like Andretti said). The article Istrian exodus of Wiki-en English is completely different on this point, compared to German Wikipedia [33] wich stated: "Über 150.000 italienisch-venezianische Istrianer verließen als Vertriebene/Optanten nach 1945 Istrien im Zuge der Repression durch das Tito-Regime" (About 150,000 Italian-Venetian Istrians left as displaced/optants Istria after 1945 in the wake of repression by the Tito regime), the French Wikipedia [34] wich stated "La région (...) est le théâtre des massacres des foibe en mai et juin 1945, lesquels poussent la population italophone (majoritaire en Istrie) à abandonner tous leurs biens et à se réfugier en Italie" (The region is the scene of massacres of foibe in May and June 1945, which push the Italian population - majority in Istria - to abandon all their belongings and flee to Italy) and the Spanish Wikipedia [35] wich stated "Durante e inmediatamente después de la Segunda guerra mundial, un gran número de italianos fueron asesinados en la masacre de las foibe, especialmente en el área de Carso alrededor de Trieste y en el norte de Istria. En la posguerra, durante los años del régimen de la Yugoslavia de Tito, se produjo un éxodo de 350.000 italianos de Istria hacia Italia. En 1956, cuando la última ola del éxodo fue completada, Istria había perdido casi la mitad de su población y una gran parte de su identidad social y cultural." (During and immediately after the Second World War, large numbers of Italians were killed in the slaughter of the Foibe, especially in the area of Carso and around Trieste in northern Istria. In the postwar period, during the regime of Tito's Yugoslavia, there was an exodus of 350,000 Italians in Istria to Italy. In 1956, when the latest wave of exodus was completed, Istria had lost almost half its population and a large part of their social and cultural identity). In practice here in the English Wiki the article about the Istrian Exodus was amended by some admirers of Tito like you. Now you're trying to do the same thing here, with Mario Andretti's article. And this is a big problem!--151.48.57.161 (talk) 09:38, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

• "To avoid communist rule" You "don't read" my post either. Like I said, "as they did not want to live in a communist state" is more neutral and encyclopedic. We're not here to judge communism in such a way as to call it "communist rule". Take out your political frustrations on some other website. However, the addition of this sentence is redundant next to the clarification that their departure was part of the Istrian exodus (wikilinked). The Istrian exodus is a complex phenomenon and should not be simplified thusly (in my opinion). Therefore I'd agree to removal of the mention of communism (preferrable), or to a neutral wording such as the one I wrote above or simmilar.
• "Refugees" Wikipedia is not a source, and I do not care what you managed to push on other WPs without a significant number of ex-Yugoslav editors who might disagree and add balance. If you want to discuss this (again), do it on Talk:Istrian exodus. For now, until you actually have some proof of "ethnic cleansing" and "refugees", we should avoid such terms. If the matter is concluded otherwise (on Talk:Istrian exodus!) then you may change this article accordingly as far as I'm concerned. For now, I'm afraid you have no basis for the use of the term "refugees".

Here's the final version with communism mentioned as a reason for their departure:

"Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina. Istria was then a region of Italy with a mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. In 1928, several years after the Italian annexation of the region, Andretti's family's surname was italianized by Italian authorities from "Andretich" (Andretić) to "Andretti". Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus. They subsequently relocated to a camp in Lucca, Italy. The family emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125. Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964." --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

(2 edit conflicts) I changed the wording in the first sentence to one which we all agreed so that dispute should be settled. My opinion on the next topics: "to avoid communist rule" - it adds nothing to the article. Let the reader go the Istrian exodus article if they want to understand the topic. So what if one of his official websites uses the term - it's not a direct quote from him. "As refugees" - while it's true, it doesn't add anything to article. The article already says that they emigrated, so that means they were refugees. Can we be done with this arguing so I can do some more productive work? You both should take your political frustrations to other websites. Royalbroil 12:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

We agree then :) I know this probably became frustrating a while ago, but what you're seeing here is just an extension of the kind of incessant arguing we've had to put up with for moths now. The term refugees is not correct for the emigrants of the Istrian exodus, as there is no real source or evidence for any kind of force being used by the Yugoslav government to "make" the Italian minority emigrate. Until such evidence is presented (probably never), we cannot use such dramatic terms for what was essentially an emigration wave caused primarily by communism and poverty in Yugoslavia. I, for one, do not have any political frustrations, more like "personal frustrations" with banned IP edit-warriors such as this guy, who never give up despite being banned, uotnumbered and "sourceless". --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that your version: "Istria was then a region of Italy with a mix Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. Several years after the annexation, Andretti's family's surname was italianized by Italian authorities from Andretich (Andretić) to Andretti in 1928." is incomprehensible. We talk about the annexation by Yugoslavia, and then goes to say that many years after the annexation - in 1928 - the surname changed. At this point, you should insert a passage explaining that Istria was annexed to Italy and we'll go back again to an old question. I propose to eliminate the entire passage concerning the change of surname, as already suggested by other contributors. Regarding myself, I regret with you to cause your frustrations, but are you who started to change this page with the changes that - in accordance with the agreement - will be completely eliminated. Sorry.--151.48.57.161 (talk) 13:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

It is not "incomprehensible". That's just a new word you're trying out. Here's a slightly modified version that immediately makes it "comprehensible":

"Istria was then a region of Italy with a mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. In 1928, several years after the Italian annexation of the region, Andretti's family's surname was italianized by Italian authorities from "Andretich" (Andretić) to "Andretti"."

• His autobiography has no clue about 'Andretić' surname. This internet reference is dubious and cannot be here in use.--71.252.106.166 (talk) 14:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Naturally, his biography does not mention it because he himself never had the surname. The sentence deals briefly with his family's history. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 18:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Another time... I propose: "Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[2] Istria was then a region of Italy with a mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. In 1928, several years after the Italian annexation of the region, Andretti's family's surname was italianized by Italian authorities from "Andretich" (Andretić) to "Andretti".[3] Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus.[4] They subsequently relocated to a camp in Lucca, Italy. The family emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125. Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964."
Just because who cares here about the changing of the name Andretich/Andretic, many years before the Mario's birth? Another thing: the laws on italianisation of surnames (Regio Decreto Legge 10 january 1926 n.17 for Trento and Bolzano/Bozen and then the Regio Decreto Legge 7 april 1927 n. 494 for the "Venezia Giulia", including Istria) in the early years provided that the change take place voluntarily, consequently we are not sure that were the Italian authorities to change the name Andretich/Andretti, and the source did not explain the point. May also be possible that it was the Mario's father to seek a change of surname.--151.48.57.161 (talk) 17:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

"Who cares"? It is a referenced piece of information about his family history, a very small one at that, it should not be removed simply because of you fanatic POV. Luigi 28, you accepted the wording earlier (above), and are now just stirring trouble. It is possible that his father wanted to change the surname, but it is also unlikely that he did it simultaneously with the passing of a law that changes it perforce. Also, it is ridiculous to pass an "optional law", a law that is upholded "voluntarily". I'd like to see a real source for that rather strange claim before we take out the "...by Italian authorities..." part. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 18:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Incredible: two weeks only for two words. You really don't want an agreement! You don't know the fascistic laws about the "restitution" (so they stated) of the Italian names. Where is the source about "...by Italian authorities"? You wrote that words, so show me the source!--151.48.57.161 (talk) 20:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

No, caro amico, you have to show me a source for something as stupid, unusual, and improbable as an "optional law" that's obeyed "voluntarily" and by preferrence. The matter gets even more ridiculous when we factor in that we're talking about a fascist, nationalist state. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure, my friend! Here you can read a part of an University Doctoral Thesis (in Italian). On page 317 and 318 you can read that: "In realtà, secondo la normativa introdotta nel 1926-1927 (..) la facoltà di cambiare i cognomi di autorità da parte dei prefetti, riguardava soltanto i cognomi che avessero subito la germanizzazione o la slavizzazione da parte delle autorità austriache, mentre per tutti gli altri era necessaria la richiesta dell'interessato." (In fact, according to the legislation introduced in 1926-1927 (..) the power to change the names of authority by the prefects, concerned only the names that had suffered the germanisation or slavization by the Austrian authorities, while everyone else was dependent on request). That is why, for example, my uncles - named Barbalich and exiles in Italy from Fiume/Rijeka - never changed their surname in their family history (see above other examples, like Krekich and so on...). I have said on other occasions that your knowledge of the Italian history and Italian laws is too poor to contribute adequately to the articles that concern Italy and also the today-Croatian Istria (wich you don't know). "Something as stupid, unusual, and improbable..." you stated! I'm still laughing!--87.28.126.85 (talk) 22:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

PS This is another connection, but I'm still the same 151.48.57.161, of course...--87.28.126.85 (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

(Luigi, your style is unmistakeable.) That "source" you gave is just someone's thesis, not an actual published work (please do not try to push it again). Look harder. How about the actual law? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 22:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHA! You are really incredible: this is not a "normal" thesis, but a historical essay published by the High School of Public Administration in Italy in 1999 (Margherita Toth, "L'introduzione dell'amministrazione italiana nelle terre di confine 1918-1928. Dai governatori militari ai commissari civili: l'esperienza dei comuni di Trento e Trieste", in "Instrumenta", 7, Gennaio-Aprile 1999. See Here --> Pubblicazioni --> Instrumenta --> n.7)! You do not even believe in your image in the mirror, if not suited to your prejudices. However, I have also another essay on the issue, which is titled "Venezia Giulia and fascism 1922-1935. A post-Habsburg consolidation in the years of Mussolinian dictatorship", published in 2004 (in Italian). Here is the book: [36]. Really must I copy/translate the steps that make you understand once your ignorance on the issues that we are dealing with? The issue regarding the names is much more complex than what you think, but since about Istria and "Venezia Giulia" (the Julian March) you have not even read the books published in English, I understand perfectly well that you have not read the books published in Italy!--87.28.126.85 (talk) 23:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but "interpretations" of the law are insufficient for such a "wild" claim. I would like to see where exactly does the law state that its application is on a "volunteer basis". I also have cousins who's names have been changed during the Italian occupation, my great-aunt's family had to sign their name "Pezzena" instead of "Pečenić". She was pregnant with a son, and I've often been told the story of how he'd almost been named "Giacomo" by his parents. The poor people thought the Germans were going to win the war, and wanted to conform with the occupation to avoid trouble. Of course, that all changed in 1943 when Split was liberated and the Italian garrison surrendered to the Partisans, gave them their weapons and joined them (If I recall, there's even a plaque commemorating that event near the city market)... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Incredible! You don't like the historians! You don't know the Italian law, don't read nothing on the subject: you have some exemples in your family... and that's all! Now, I try to explain in a few words what it was this law. The law provided for the change for the names slavisated or germanisated during the Austrian rule. They were the prefects to determine which names were italianisated on the basis of repertoires provided by the ministry. In the late 20's, few surnames were changed, and so many prefects decided to change by their decision many more names. This, however, was done "Italian style": in some provinces more, in others less. For example, one of the prefects less active was the prefect of Fiume (today Rijeka), while one of the most active was the prefect of Pola (today Pula). Do you have understood the story? There is all written in the article I just translated wich you don't like. Do you read also Italian? So, my friend, read! Stop to invent a story without sources: read, read, read!--87.28.126.85 (talk) 00:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

About Split in 1943: when Split was freed, the Italian division in the city was the division "Bergamo", who fought with the partisans against the division of Waffen SS called "Prinz Eugen". Meanwhile, the partisans in the city killed about 200 Italians, including the Dalmatian Giovanni Soglian (from Cittavecchia di Lesina / Starigrad), who was "guilt" of being the administrator of the public schools. However, when the Germans entered in Split took the officers of the division "Bergamo", led them to Trilj and killed 45. Among those who were not killed, there was also my father-in-law, who was then dispatched to a Lager in Germany (Wietzendorf). I think that this story is not written in the plaque in the city. After the "Prinz Eugen" came the Ustas'a, and I don't know if this was the liberation expected in Split/Spalato.--87.28.126.85 (talk) 00:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

IP #2

The article appears to have gathered the attention of another IP. May I suggest a temporary semi-protect? I also have reason to believe this guy is just trying to "get back at me" by following my contribs, and knows nothing about the issue. I hope you see the extent of the problem, Royal... When I say "can of worms", I'm not exaggerating, it never ends :P --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps there won't be any more edit warring... false alarm? :P --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 18:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, there are some funny stories about 'Croatian' names of the Italians born and/or lived on the eastern Adriatic coast. So, Marco Polo became Marko Polić/Pilić, Giorgio Orsini whose nick was Georgius Dalmaticus became Juraj Dalmatinac, Meldolla turned to be Medulić etc., etc.
  
  The most amusing 'discovery' to me came from their 'father of Croatian historiography' Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski. That man 'discovered' even that the Roman emperor Diocletianus was - no more no less - an ethnic Croat! Read his 'Glasoviti Hrvati proslih vjekova' book! And, I almost had it forgotten - Michelangelo is a Croat - Mihaljandjelo! Read this funny book online! [37]
  
  To my fellow Italian - 151.48.57.161: Where you are from? Are your folks from Istria, Fiume, or Zara maybe? Mine are from Pola, Istria - we left that place when I was 12 (1967). --71.252.106.166 (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, the IP sock of banned user Luigi 28 (151.48.57.161) claims he's not an Istrian "exile", and may not be for all I know. However, may I suggest you all get together and reminisce about the evil Yugoslavs somewhere else, it-Wiki perhaps? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:51, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Most of that is nonsense. 19th century ideas like those of Vuk Karađić are as equally comical as those of Sakcinski, I do not see the relevance of either of them. Also, nobody (normal) claimed Polo's name was actually "Polić" or "Pilić", look up a bit more on that subject. Noone even claimed with certainty that he was a Croat, just that his birthplace was possibly the (then) Venetian port of Curzola. I suggest you look for actual sources instead of ridiculing Croatian 19th century noblemen... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 18:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Noone even claimed with certainty that he was a Croat?!?!?!? In the Croatian Wiki Marco Polo is between the Croatian explorers! See here! The Croatian professor Adam S. Eterovich from The Croatian Genealogical and Heraldic Society claimed that Marco Polo is Croatian! Some Croatian guy stated that also Mario Andretti was Croatian, here in the English Wiki (see above my previous message with the link)! The Croatian Professor Darko Zubrinic (from the University of Zagreb) said that Marco Polo is Croatian! Anyway, this is another story. Here we have to talk only about Mario Andretti! The Croatian claims are another speech...--151.48.57.161 (talk) 21:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

OMG, I said none have ever claimed WITH CERTAINTY. There are theories, of course, but they're just that, theories. There are many other stupid "they were Croats" theories cooked up by nationalists just like you, though this one is probably the "strongest of the weak". --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Well I bet that this chap DIREKTOR (or, maybe, some of his soulmates) will find pretty soon out that Giuseppe Garibaldi was actually Josip Garibaldić, a pure blood Croat, who betrayed his noble Croatian roots and italienized both his name and surname. Shame on him and on all descendants of him! We definitively must have full confidence in Croatian historians. Here is the one, who might be an Italian, who like me left Istria - for good, for no good reason - lead by his fascist, racist reasons. He says:
    Early medieval Croatian history fits the concluding line to the old jingle: the more you study the less you know. When I was an undergraduate studying Balkan history I thought I knew quite a bit about Croatia; but as I study more about Croatia, one by one the "facts" that I knew turn out to be dubious, based on questionable sources or no sources at all. Most of the existing literature in western languages on medieval Croatia is extremely poor; and frequently it is marred by nationalistic bias. (All from The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century By John Van Antwerp Fine, John V. A. Fine, Jr. Published by University of Michigan Press, 1991 page 248)--71.252.106.166 (talk) 00:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Noone is claiming Andretti is Croatian, what are you on about, anyway!? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 02:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice another time that Mario Andretti was Croatian here in the English Wikipedia from 1 April 2004 [38] to 23 August 2006 [39], like many other guys like Haydn, Maradona and so on.--87.28.126.85 (talk) 02:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

All right, noone at this location in time is claiming Andretti is Croatian, what are you on about, anyway!? People usually do not define all four dimensions when using present continuous. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 02:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how the name that Andretti's family had used before he was born is relevant, so I oppose that sentence. All of this complaining, going FAR off-topic on anything and everything, is very tiring and I better stop typing before I start typing in curse words. This better not affect the article's status as a Good Article. These threads are absolutely crazy. I wish you two would stop feeding each other with anger and would spend time on developing other articles. The first box at the top of the article now says "This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.", which applies to his heritage. Stick to him and take your nationalistic wars elsewhere. Royalbroil 04:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yugoslavia control

I thought we had agreed to mention that Istria went under Yugoslavian control since it was during Andretti's lifetime. I reinserted the sentence "Istria was then a region of Italy with a mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II." I don't mind how it is worded right now, but I don't have a problem with removing the phrase about "mixed Croatian and Italian ethnicity" since it doesn't add much to the sentence. It could be cleanly worded as "Istria was then a region of Italy which was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II." I agree that the sentence about history of the Andretti family name should be removed since it doesn't directly apply to Mario's lifetime. Royalbroil 02:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with: "Istria was then a region of Italy and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II."--151.48.45.178 (talk) 08:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Do you agree?

"Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[6] Istria was then a region of Italy, and was annexed by Yugoslavia after World War II. Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus.[7] They subsequently relocated to a camp in Lucca, Italy. The family emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964". If someone wants to read more, see the links!--151.48.45.178 (talk) 13:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree - keep it simple. Let the reader click the links to find out about the political story. Royalbroil 13:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Just one minor detail. Istria was not 'annexed' by SFRY. It became part of SFRY under the Paris Peace Treaties, 1947, specifically the Treaty of peace with Italy (1947). So we need to clear up or leave out that point (especially as it's POV-based). Therefore, I would propose:
"Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[6] Istria was then a region of Italy, but became part of Yugoslavia after World War II. Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus.[7] They subsequently relocated to a camp in Lucca, Italy. The family emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with just $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964".
A completely neutral text that uses the same form of wording in both instances. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 14:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

That verbiage is even better because it is more neutral. It doesn't mention any of the politics behind the change - it just says that it "became". Thanks for you help! Should it be "now-Yugoslavia"? Royalbroil 15:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Royal - see you've been having fun while I've been away! Alasdair's words look good to me. There is no now-Yugoslavia - the last two republics (Serbia and Montenegro) split up in 2006, according to the article. 4u1e (talk) 16:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Alelujah!!!

Just for funny:

The old article before the edit-war:

"Mario Andretti was born in the town of Montona d'Istria in the then Italian province of Istria, present day Motovun, Croatia. He was born with a twin brother, Aldo Andretti, to a farm administrator.[6] Istria had been annexed to Italy after World War I, and after World War II it was annexed to Yugoslavia. In 1928, his family surname was changed from Andretich to Andretti.[7] His family, like many other Italians, emigrated from SFR Yugoslavia during the period of the so-called Istrian exodus. The 5-member Andretti family left in 1948 and lived in a camp in Lucca from 1948 to 1955. As refugees, they emigrated to the United States of America and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June 1955 with $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964.[8]"

The new article:

"Mario Andretti and his twin brother Aldo were born into an Italian family in Motovun (then Montona), Istria, on February 28, 1940 to a farm administrator named Luigi and his wife Rina.[6] Istria was then a region of Italy, but became part of Yugoslavia after World War II. Mario, Aldo, their sister Anna Maria, and their parents emigrated from the now Yugoslav region in 1948 during the period of the Istrian exodus.[7] They subsequently relocated to a camp in Lucca, Italy. The family emigrated to the United States of America in 1955 and settled in Nazareth in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley in June of that year with just $125.[3] Andretti became a naturalized United States citizen in 1964"
--151.48.54.171 (talk) 17:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I changed the sentence to AlasdairGreen27's wording. I changed the word "emigrated" to "left" because a dictionary says that emigrated means that they left their birth country, which doesn't work in this case. I removed the "now Yugoslavia" phrase (which isn't true because Yugoslavia doesn't exist any more), combined that sentence with the following sentence, and fix the citation on that new longer sentence. Royalbroil 19:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. I've just changed a couple of words. We're there now I think. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)