Talk:2005 United States Grand Prix

Zonta tire failure

Shouldn't the fact that Ricardo Zonta's tire failed as well during Friday practice before Ralf Schumacher had his tire failure be included in the article? Or was Zonta's failure proven to be caused by some other fault? The359 17:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Broken reference

It appears that "F-1 teams offer to hold makeup race" (currently reference 29) is broken (the page returns a whole bunch of "The article link is not valid or the article has expired from the system."). I haven't looked around to see if it can be trivially fixed, but I just thought I'd raise it here. Cheers --Pak21 09:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. – AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 21:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Lawsuit

suggestion for post-race lawsuit info to be added:

the class action suit is making its way through the appeals courts - oral argument from 7th circuit at http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?caseno=06-2718&submit=showdkt&yr=&num=, briefs at http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/efn/efns.fwx?caseno=06-2718&submit=showdkt&yr=06&num=2718, summary from plaintiff's lawyers at http://www.price-law.com/CM/Custom/Formula_One.asp.

district court motion to dismiss at http://www.insd.uscourts.gov/opinions/AO9140O1.pdf.

Blurrrr 03:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

TV coverage

This section is turning into a bit of a mess. People keep adding more channels that actually did show the race. As it actually looks like most stations did show it, perhaps we replace the whole section with a very brief comment that one channel (TSN in Canada) didn't show the race and leave it at that. Comments? 4u1e 06:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I fully agree, although it's quite interesting to know what the commentators said during the race. --84.161.251.71 16:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC) (de:Benutzer:Ĝù)

The TV coverage is still a problem, the complaint above was made five months ago. If action on this isn't forthcoming then the article should be nominated for a featured article review, as it no longer meets the criteria. BeL1EveR 11:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

After not much being done about this I have took the article to FAR, the discussion is here. Davnel03 17:39, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't help feeling that's a bit of an overreaction guys - you could have modified the section as suggestion above, or even deleted it! 4u1e 13:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Which is in fact what I've done: The majority of it was about channels which did show the race, which is hardly notable! I couldn't actually find anything on TSN's alleged non-showing, so I thought it best just to delete the whole thing. Cheers. 4u1e 13:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone have a ref for the telecast being terminated early in Australia? I'm pretty sure I remember watching it all the way through. DH85868993 (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I tapped the whole thing and watched it the whole way through. They only skipped the drivers talking at the end after the podium. 11rey619 (talk) 11:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect info

The second ref (F1'S FUTURE LOOKS BLEAK ACROSS THE POND www.motorsport.com Retrieved 2 December 2006) had a wrong title and did not support the point being made about F1 struggling over twenty years in the US. I have removed it pending clarification. Marskell 13:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

This article is about the UNITED STATES Grand Prix. Why would you misspell "tire" so many times?

In the US, t-Y-re is not a word, t-I-re is. Please spell "tire" correctly from now on.

Your change has been reverted. Although it may seem odd to you to see the British (and European) English spelling used here, Formula One is not an American series.

Only one North American driver was involved. All of the teams are based in Europe, including the Japanese ones. Half of them are based in England. The tyre supplier primarily concerned here is French. The other is Japanese. The main individuals involved from the sporting authorities (Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone) are English. Mosley is the head of the relevant sporting authority, the FIA, which is based in France. The other individual quoted at length, Paul Stoddart, is Australian.

You have picked up on the word 'tyre' or 'tire'. however, to fully convert the article into US English (ignoring changes in sentence structure etc.) would also mean changing many other terms, like 'straightaway' for 'straight' and 'push' for 'understeer'. But if all those changes were carried out, we'd have an article about a Formula One race written in language that just isn't used in that sport.

Looking at it another way, which variety of English, UK or US, do you believe that the 2007 NFL match between the New York Giants and Miami Dolphins, played at Wembley stadium in the UK, should be described in? Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 22:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Engvar#Retaining the existing variety. DH85868993 (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the point I was trying to make above is not that UK English is necessarily the right variety for this article, but that it is certainly a very strong contender. As such, and as the existing variety, it should not be changed. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 09:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Broadcast refusal

This section was deleted a while back in the absence of any references to support it, and on the basis that it appears that the race was broadcast in most countries. Someone has added the section back again, without references. What it boils down to is that the race was apparently not shown in Canada (TFN) or France (TF1). TF1 in France apparently doesn't show the USGP live and direct anyway, as it clashes with something else. I haven't found any decent refs for this, only forum discussions. This is enough to make me believe it, but not enough to use as a reliable source. I'll leave the section in for a bit, but if no-one references it, it will have to go. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 11:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't find any refs, and no-one else has, so I've deleted it. If refs are found in future, it can be added, of course. 4u1e (talk) 16:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Tyre vs Tire

I know this has been discussed above, but for ease of reference here is why the article uses 'Tyre':

• There are two possibilities here:
  • Use American English ('Tire'): The race was held in the United States.
  • Use British English ('Tyre'):F1 is an international championship, and almost all of the individuals and organisations involved in the controversy are European, Australian or Japanese. American racing vocabulary is quite different to European, and is not normally used in F1. There are original quotes in the article that use 'Tyre'.
• You can make a case for using either variety, although to my mind the case for British English is stronger.
• The relevant Wikipedia policy is WP:ENGVAR, which says that

"If an article has evolved using predominantly one variety, the whole article should conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic."

• The original version of this article used 'Tyre' (see here, as of 19 June 2005). 'Tire' first appeared on the 20th (see here) and was reverted back again later the same day, on the basis that F1 uses British English.
• To a certain extent we've been going back and forth ever since. The original variety used was British English. The appropriate variety to use can be argued either way, but going by the rules we stick with the original and get on with improving other stuff instead! 4u1e (talk) 09:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that this article is about a European racing series. We are talking about the spelling of a small noun - NOT the racing series itself. It should be spelled "tire". Look at at any other article that happens to mentions the rubber road-hugging devices that fit on the wheels of automobiles and you will see they are spelled "tire" and not "tyre". Tnolley (talk) 12:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Irrelevent, for reasons already given. Original usage, consistency with other F1 articles, and the fact that very little involved other than the location has much to do with the USA all favor "tyre", rather like the above-mentioned NFL game at Wembley being fine using non-English English (I assume it does, although I've not looked). Riedquat (talk) 14:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Riedquat is correct. It's also not true that "any other article that happens to mentions the rubber road-hugging devices that fit on the wheels of automobiles" uses the spelling 'tires'. See Mini, for example. The Wembley NFL game is a hypothetical example - we didn't have an article on it last time I looked. 4u1e (talk) 15:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it should be "tire" because it's in the US. The articles about American soccer teams don't call them football, for the same reason - in the US it's soccer, rather than football. --AW (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

And in the US they're American teams playing in an American league, with American players and American owners etc. This is all slightly irrelevant anyway, since the article started with UK spelling. See WP:ENGVAR. 4u1e (talk) 08:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

"...rather like the above-mentioned NFL game at Wembley being fine using non-English English ..." - Riedquat.

What exactly is "non-English English"? I'd like to see an example of it.209.179.57.76 (talk) 23:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I imagine Riedquat meant "non-British English". DH85868993 (talk) 09:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

A few points:

• I looked at that policy that was quoted, and either they were making up their own, or it has changed SIGNIFICANTLY. I see quite clearly "An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the English of that nation."
• Wiki's main page on Tires/Tyres shows both spellings, yet uses Tire throughout.
• Both main English pages of Micheline and Bridgestone use tire, with the only time the British spelling comes into play is when that region is specifically selected.
• And the very bottom line is this: It is an American race that has been around for nearly 50 years before Formula One. A race might be on the Formula One circuit, but the races are hosted by countries. I'm quite sure there are going to be British articles about an American race that use the tyre spelling, as well as petrol, wind screen and so forth, but that's not a reason to change an article about an American race.
• And as far as "continuity" goes:

• • Prior to this article (going back to 1965's Formula One running), and prior to subsequent articles that were "changed for continuity", there were 21 US Grand Prix race articles that used tire or tyre. 18 of them used tire, while 6 used tyre.

It should be tire - it's an American race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.45.115.10 (talk) 14:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Best race for the portuguese guy

I remember hearing that the position that Tiago Monteiro was the best a portuguese f1 driver has ever got... I think that should be added :) - added by 213.138.247.97 (Talk) at 00:12, September 6, 2008

The article states that it was the first podium finish (and therefore, by definition, the best finish overall) for a Portuguese driver. DH85868993 (talk) 00:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Why in British English?

Couldn't help but noticing that this page is in British English. Being that it is about an event in the United States (MOS:TIES), what reason is there for this? One would expect an article on a sporting event (or anything else) held in the UK not to be written in American English standards, so what reason is there for this article to comply with British spelling? Just my $0.02. --L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

See Tyre vs Tire above. DH85868993 (talk) 03:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah read it already; I am still not convinced, but whatever. The analogy to an NFL game or whatever it was being held at Wembley is different because NFL teams are all American owned, but F1 teams are not all British owned (and there have even been American drivers in the past), and is more comparable to say, an international soccer/football qualifier match were held in the UK, but the game had the US team versus Germany or something (which I believe should be in UK rather than US English, because the UK is hosting said event). But again, whatever. Just voicing an opinion.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 04:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

The reasons why the topic has ties to UK English that are as strong or stronger than those to US English have been rehearsed at great length above. WP:ENGVAR says: "When an article has evolved sufficiently for it to be clear which variety of English it employs, the whole article should continue to conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic." The article originated in UK English and there doesn't seem to be any strong reason to change it, especially bearing in mind that this will compromise consistency within the article (another of the tenets of WP:ENGVAR) due to the use of UK English quotes within the article. 4u1e (talk) 19:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, the European Union (EU) where most of the Formula One teams originate uses British English for its official English, as indeed does NATO, both organisations using the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as their spelling references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.221.50 (talk) 10:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189457
  • In 2005 United States Grand Prix on 2011-05-25 08:06:57, 400 BAD_REQUEST
  • In 2005 United States Grand Prix on 2011-06-12 03:17:24, 400 BAD_REQUEST

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189438&FS=F1
  • In 2005 United States Grand Prix on 2011-05-25 08:06:57, 400 BAD_REQUEST
  • In 2005 United States Grand Prix on 2011-06-12 03:17:26, 400 BAD_REQUEST

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The 2nd-longest non-winning streak of Schumacher's career

"The win, Schumacher's only victory of 2005, ended the second-longest non-winning streak of his career and moved him from fifth to third in the drivers championship". This needs some clarification.

Till 2010, the two longest non-winning periods (17 races without a win) of Schumacher's career were both in the beginning of 90s -- from BEL'91 to HUN'92 and from ITA'92 to POR'93; at that time the period from BRA'04 to CAN'05 (9 races) was only the third-longest.

Now there's one even longer period (37 races, if one would count that way, or 5 years and 8 days), so the quote needs to be rephrased. Say, the win "ended, to time, the third-longest non-winning streak of his career". Any considerations? Ximaera (talk) 13:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Or we could (and I believe should) just remove the "non-winning streak" clause altogether. "Third longest non-winning streak" is starting to get pretty trivial. DH85868993 (talk) 21:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

So I did. Ximaera (talk) 10:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Practice and qualifying

This article doesn't have a practice or qualifying report. Would it be necessary adding it, or are there basically no sources on it? The article is already an FA, so am I missing something? Bigdon128 (talk) 11:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

editing error?

Michelin had been providing working tyres for the race since 2001. The situation was worsened by the 2005 Formula One rules, which forbade tyre changes during the race.

So the rule change worsened the fact that Michelin had been providing working tyres for the race since 2001? 188.207.95.150 (talk) 06:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on 2005 United States Grand Prix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121122142319/http://www.formula1.com:80/results/season/2005/ to http://www.formula1.com/results/season/2005/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111223202745/http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/6/3218.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/6/3218.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111224022414/http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/7/3316.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/7/3316.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140322001941/http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/1/2558.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2005/1/2558.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

1914 International Grand Prize

I've just moved a reference from the lead that said that this was the lowest number of finishers in an International Grand Prix since the 1914 American Grand Prize. As stated, this is not true - the 1966 Monaco Grand Prix had only four finishers, and I think some other Monaco GPs had as few as five during the 1990s.

Was it intended to mean that it was the lowest number of finishers in an international GP in the States? If so, can I suggest that it should be reinstated somewhere in the body of the article, not in the lead, which is supposed to function as a summary of the whole article. The lead here is now very, very long compared to the body of the article. --4u1e (talk) 19:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2005 United States Grand Prix. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606150344/http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189438&FS=F1 to http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189438&FS=F1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080630003918/http://www.crash.net/news_view.asp?cid=1&id=113296 to http://www.crash.net/news_view.asp?cid=1&id=113296
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607212051/http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189457 to http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189457
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930013042/http://motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189438&FS=F1 to http://motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=189438&FS=F1

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:25, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Why is turn 13 such an issue

There is a lot of mention of turn 13, but there is no context for the reader to understand why this high-speed banked turn was an issue for the tires. Some background information would be helpful for those unfamiliar with F1 or the course. Closetsingle (talk) 19:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)