User talk:Sjælefred Herm

Welcome!

Hello, Sjælefred Herm, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Corvus tristis (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 Euroformula Open season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ferdinand Habsburg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 European Formula 3 season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Le Castellet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Australian Formula 4 points

Did you add the Australian Formula 4 points? If so, where did you get them from, they don't look right. --Falcadore (talk) 22:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I have only added the results from the last round. I watched the races live and edited the results and the points according to the scoring system. I may have made a mistake when adding, but I don't think so. What I have done is check again and correct some results from race 3 as there were some penalties issued, but the rest are right. I looked at the Aussie F4 official page to see if they matched but the standings there haven't been updated with the points from the last round. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 23:28, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the points weren't right at the previous round. --Falcadore (talk) 00:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

It may be, though if I'm not mistaken they matched the ones in the Aussie F4 web. The only way to confirm this is to look at each and every race result published by Aussie F4 or V8SC (the parent series) to see whether there have been modifications, such as issued penalties, that might have caused a change in points. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 11:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 BRDC Formula 4 Championship season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2013 Formula Renault 1.6 Nordic season

added a link pointing to Dunlop

2014 Formula Renault 1.6 Nordic season

added a link pointing to Dunlop

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Motorsport season articles

Hi Sjælefred Herm, I notice you have been creating a lot of season articles. I have to ask however, do you believe every article meets the notability guidelines? Particularly for Formula Renault and Formula 4, which are at the very bottom of the motor racing pyramid, I really question on whether the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" required by the general notability guideline exists. If all that exists are statistics referenced from various results directories or a season announcement, that isn't really enough. I plan on raising this at WP:Motorsport, but I'll be interested to hear your thoughts. QueenCake (talk) 21:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, QueenCake. I'm a fan of this kind of feeder series in particular, and so it was curious to me how inconsistently series sharing the same regulation, backing or tier were covered. So I was acting using coherence: series that have the same concept should be treated equal. In the FIA Formula 4 case, for example, each and every one of the series yields the drivers the same amount of FIA Super License points, so if one of the championships has its own season article and is deemed to be relevant, all the others should, just because they are equal to FIA's eyes. Same case with the FR2.0 and FR1.6 concepts: if French F4 has season articles, FR1.6 Nordic should as well, just because they are equal in tier to Renault Sport, the governing body that runs both. However, I do have to acknowledge that for some of the series, having more sources apart from the official one is very hard. For instance:

• FR1.6 Nordic has the Renault Sport Sweden website and the STCC one as well, results are stored in SvenskRacing where you can even download the official results documents issued by the championship.
• China F4's main source is the main website, but sometimes it isn't updated and therefore announcements are made through NarCar's Sina Weibo profile, or privately given to the teams, some of which (ART Motorsport) release the information via their websites and social network profiles.
• NACAM F4's main sources are full of flaws: the very few pieces of information released might just be plain wrong. An example of this is when they released the official drivers that would be competing in Round 1, half the names were different from the ones that actually got racing. The only way to perceive that is to follow the series live, using the live timing or talking to journalists covering them at the very circuit. In this one I do personally speak through Twitter with the CEO, Mr. Flavio Abed, in order to clarify the doubts that might arise.

All series, however, provide articles with the outcome of every race or round through their main sources. But as the coverage is generally poor and the information hard to get, there is usually no sources "independent of the subject", and the very few that might exist usually point to the official sources. I understand that for these championships, if we have official reliable sources, we can consider ourselves lucky, so the requirement that I'd ask for would be to provide them in order to verify that the information given here is correct. It's just my thought, though, and I'll understand if it's considered not enough to the Wikipedia standards. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 11:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I get where you are coming from here, but ultimately it's Wikipedia's guidelines that decide what subjects get an article. It may seem reasonable to create an article because a similar one already exists, but there is a well established principle that each article has to meet notability guidelines on its own merits, not because another article on the subject already exists (WP:Other stuff exists). The ultimate arbiter of what is and is not notable are reliable, independent sources, and if the coverage does not exist, we can't include it here.

For lower level feeder series, there should probably be the recognition that some series will always be more prestigious and hence will receive a lot more coverage, even when they are nominally equal to other series at the same level. You'll generally find that international series are above national series, and national championships from the major motorsport countries like Britain, France, Germany, Australia, etc are above those from Latin America or Asia. At Formula Ford/Four/Renault level, it'll probably be hard enough justify an article for British Formula Ford; things like NACAM F4 are probably never going to meet the standards. QueenCake (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

For things that are blatantly made up, you can nominate the articles for speedy deletion under criteria WP:G3. There's no need for it to hang around for a week in these circumstances. QueenCake (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the info, QueenCake. I'm still learning about the matter so I didn't know what to do except for a simple nomination. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 16:17, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree this F4 article is fictional. If you need some confirm - no mention of F4 here. This guy doesn't seem to understand the difference between NACAM and CODASUR and why would a series based in either of those regions vists Upstate New York? It is not even a good fake article. --Falcadore (talk) 19:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Aus GT

The majority of Australian domestic series do not use driver flags after the first instance. Some do not even use flags at all. There is no reason to include them when such a small proportion of the drivers come from outside Australia. It just adds unnecessary graphics to the articles.

As for the empty tables; wait until there are results to enter before creating them. Empty tables are not a good look. – Kytabu 09:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

It's true they don't but there's a bunch of drivers that are not Australian, and this should be pointed. It can be discussed whether to leave them or not though. As for the empty tables, they can be created beforehand and hidden until the results come.

Anyway I'm actually updating the article with the last round entries as well as the first GT Trophy results. I may scrap the flags out of the results, but the tables will be created, only that the Endurance one will be hidden until there are results.Sjælefred Herm (talk) 09:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 IndyCar Series

This edit, and the fact that Dixon got the pole at the very end, is why you don't update these pages until the event is for sure concluded. Thanks, United States Man (talk) 18:41, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

My live timing showed the checkered flag, and IndyCar Radio had assumed qualy had ended, just when Dixon got the pole. Such mistakes can happen, but fortunately they can be corrected easily. Not a big deal. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sjælefred Herm. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sjælefred Herm. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (2018 V de V Challenge Monoplace) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating 2018 V de V Challenge Monoplace, Sjælefred Herm!

Wikipedia editor Willsome429 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating the page. More pages on English Wikipedia about formula racing is always good, provided its reliably sourced, which this is.

To reply, leave a comment on Willsome429's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 22:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sjælefred Herm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Ways to improve 2022 Formula Nordic

Hello, Sjælefred Herm,

Thank you for creating 2022 Formula Nordic.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hello! 10 of the 11 sources on the article are primary sources from the Formula Nordic website.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Grahaml35}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Grahaml35 (talk) 19:26, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Grahaml35:

Thanks for your concern. I understand the lack for non primary sources, however at this level of F4-like motorsport competition it is quite difficult to find non-primary sources for the usual references that are made within these seasonal articles (that is, changes from previous years, calendar announcements and driver announcements), unless we count SNS of teams and/or drivers as non-primary sources. In the example curated by you, for example, I could add a source from a driver's own Instagram account that would serve better than the FN link that is currently added, but other than that I can't see a way to diversify sources for this article with what is the usual practice. Any advice from your side would be gladly received.

I have a general suggestion though. I recently discussed with another Wikipedia motorsport editor that it is not customary to add sources for the race results - we found an article that included them and while we both agreed that these sources could be useful, they were edited out for being non-customary. However, it is definitely easier to find non-primary sources for race results, since specialised motorsports media, such as RaceNews.se, prefer releasing articles over races and results. Many motorsports articles such as this one could immensely benefit from this as we would be addressing this issue directly. I'd like to read your take on this, if possible.

Again, many thanks for your time. Sjælefred Herm (talk) 12:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)