Talk:Frank Stephenson

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

Untitled[edit]

This article seems to require additional citations to verify the biographical assertions. Pointillist (talk) 02:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Dkriegls (talk) 20:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some claims are inaccurate, the links to the Escort Cosworth being quite the tale. Documented interviews with Ian Callum, Stever Harper along with factual books covering the design by Steve Saxty and Graham Robson all detail who was involved in the design of the car and the aero package. Fraudbusters (talk) 21:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's all nice and good, but do you have any proof of your personal claim that this well cited claim has been "debunked"? I see you might be a new user, here's an introduction to sources that would be considered support for your claim. Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Please don't delete these well cited claims unless you provide equally reliable claims. And even then it is likely the edit will be to discuss the debate. Competing claims get documented here, they don't get erased. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 06:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple sources that have discredited the claim, I’ll list a few here. Here’s the interview with Steve Harper https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z4z8bZF8tF0 The book by Steve Saxty, Secret Fords volume 2 also details in full the design team https://www.stevesaxty.com/sfvol2

There is also an article in the RS Owners Club magazine listing the designers involved with the Escort Cosworth

Further reading can be found in Graham Robsons book ‘Escort RS Cosworth’

Frank Stephenson was not involved with the Escort Cosworth design and especially not the aero package. FS was actually working on the Escort Mk4 Cabriolet, again all documented in the above sources and from interviews with the likes of Geoff Fox, Rod Mansfield, John Bull, John Wheeler.

Your assertion that the claim is well cited is not correct - by wiki’s own standards one persons self published and unsupported claim is not a reliable source.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers Fraudbusters (talk) 11:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted sources relating to FS involvement with the escort Cosworth are not considered reliable. Entertainment magazine car throttle is hardly first tier. All of the reliable sources have no involvement for FS in the design of the Escort Cosworth or any part of it. The Aero was carried over from the Sierra and had nothing to do with a plane from WWII. Seek out the books by Steve Saxty which relates it all - it comes across as your actively trying to promote a false narrative. Fraudbusters (talk) 03:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are new, I'd like help you understand the nature of this medium. Your personal knowledge is not a source. So, you saying a book says something or citing an interview on youtube and claiming it says something is not a wikipedia:reliablesource. I've taken a time to find reliable sources, add the relevant quotes to the citations, and rewrote the section in question to reflect the limited nature of FS role with the car (as claimed by the sources). If you have reliable information to counter that, then we'll need quotes. Your youtube interview is considered a primary source. If you want to make the argument for it as superseding the reliable source I'm citing, then I encourage you to read Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources first. Direct quotes of what you think is the pertinent claim always helps (not just posting a 30 min video and expecting other editors to do the work for you). As for your book claim, I'm not going to buy it but that doesn't mean it can't be used. What is the quote from that book that you think justifies deleting this section? Again, direct quotes will help us both out. I have no dog in this fight other then measuring the sources and writing the article to the best available evidance. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 08:51, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your sources are actually interviews with FS where FS is making a claim that is unsubstantiated. Entertainment magazines are not primary sources nor are they considered as a reliable source.
There are now multiple sources including the Interview on Youtube, the published book by Steve Saxty and an article within the magazine Rallye News that list all of those involved with the Ford Escort Cosworth design, FS is not one of them.
I've not placed any claim to have personal knowledge as I was not involved in the Escort Cosworth project, however I do know the individuals involved within Ford SVE at the time of the project.
I'll gladly include the quotes from within the book and from within the Youtube video with the actual designer of the Escort Cosworth. Fraudbusters (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Quote from FastFord magazine on the design of the Escort Cosworth as written by Steve Saxty
"Frank Stephenson was a young designer at Ford’s Merkenich design center in Germany. According to his bosses Gert Hohenester and Helmuth Schrader – along with John Wheeler who led the project – Frank played no part in the Escort Cosworth’s design which was styled by Steve Harper and Ian Callum. Instead, completely independent of the Escort Cosworth project, Frank was asked to submit ideas for adding sparkle to the Escort Cabrio" Fraudbusters (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taken from the Youtube interview with Steve Harper, section related to the design of the Escort Cosworth starts 25min:23seconds in
I’ve done the full Escort Cosworth story in there and I’ve disproved the claim by, whats his name, the McLaren man whos saying he put the triple wing on there because that was a complete fallacy. No triple wing was done on the Escort. Fraudbusters (talk) 19:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see much of a conflict between the FS claims and the quotes you've cited. As the article currently reads, it agrees that "Stephenson proposed an innovative, third functional spoiler that did not make it into production." It appears to me that the only conflict is in how one labels that effort/role. Because the quotes you've provided support the claim that FS was asked to submit designs for the escort (i.e., a designer/co-designer). What if we changed the first sentence about the Escort to a less assertive claim about the actual role: "where he was asked to submit designs for co-designer of some distinctive features on the Ford Escort RS Cosworth." Dkriegls (talk to me!)

The designs FS was asked to undertake were on the Escort Cabriolet which is an entirely different platform and vehicle to the Escort Cosworth which is in essence a shortened redesigned Sierra

There was absolutely no submission for a third wing by FS to anyone at Ford. There’s absolutely no involvement of FS in to the Escort Cosworth design, it’s two different projects undertaken by different teams at different locations

I’ve no doubt that FS sketched up a drawing of the Escort Cosworth with a third wing, at best that was for his own self enjoyment given that the drawing is based on the finished & refined design as seen in production.

Credit him with working on the design of the Escort Cabriolet, that is all verifiable.

Whilst I’m typing, the claim that FS was the Chief Designer at BMW is not verifiable either, there are books due out soon that detail all of the designers at BMW and who was the Chief Designer at a given time, FS was not. He did win the design for the mini amongst the 4 submitted designs, a great design and car Fraudbusters (talk) 00:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frank Stephenson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Frank_Stephenson&oldid=1205455014"