The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus to delete, with sentiment in the discussion leaning more in favor of keeping. While it is true that the pre-season is only receiving media attention because it is ongoing, the same could be said of the season itself. The ultimate question is whether reliable sources exist providing substantial coverage of the subject, and in this regard, those favoring the retention of the article appear to be sufficiently supported. BD2412 T 23:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC) reply

2020 Formula One pre-season testing

2020 Formula One pre-season testing (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

We have never dedicated articles to pre-season testing. This subject isn't that notable. Don't see what's so special about 2020 pre-season testing im comparison to previous years, that justifies dedicating a special article. What's worth nothing about this can be mentioned in the season article or if only really relevant to them the articles on the cars and the drivers. T v x1 13:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 13:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 14:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep My thoughts are that it is a well sourced article, which is about a notable subject. The nominator states, "We have never dedicated articles to pre-season testing." ... WP:OTHER would not be a reason to delete. We have room for such articles. WP:NOTPAPER. We also have time to redirect if we later determine that this article is not notable WP:CHEAP Lightburst ( talk) 14:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Why determine notability later? We can easily do that now as well. T v x1 14:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

My own determination is that this subject is notable. My point is there is time WP:NORUSH and WP:LOCALCONSENSUS may change. Sorry for the confusing !vote rational. Lightburst ( talk) 15:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Notable enough for a standalone article? I'm not convinced of that. The used sources seem to fall under WP:ROUTINE. And it's not so that if these article is deleted that automatically all information on 2020 pre-season testing is deleted from the entirety of Wikipedia. T v x1 16:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete We don't have articles about sports pre-seasons in any form, plain and simple; nobody won anything, records aren't kept, and this has a bunch of jargon the average reader is incredibly confused to read. This is cruft. Nate • ( chatter) 18:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep I created the article (From reading here, I think I have a vote, apologies if I'm mistaken). I think pre-season testing is notable for a few reasons. It is the first time that the new season's cars will run, and gives a good indication of the relative performance of different teams. It attracts significant media attention as part of the build-up to a new season. There were many other sources that I could have used. It is possibly the first time that drivers will have driven for their new teams. As pre-season testing is limited now by the FIA, I think the sanctioned test is more of an "event" than it previously was: all teams attend and all teams work hard to use the limited track-time available. F1 fans, e.g., on forums such as f1technical, follow the timings closely and discuss testing at length. As it is less constrained than qualifying, it often produces some of the fastest laps ever on the circuit. Of course, no points are won, so it is not as noteworthy as the season. I considered adding a section to the season page, but I think that that page is very concise and focused. I do not think that 2020 is particularly noteworthy (though one could argue that the delay to the season start due to the covid-19 pandemic makes it marginally more noteworthy as the only running of the cars before the summer) and I had planned to do some other recent seasons, though I think the quantity and quality of references may degrade quickly as one goes backwards in time. I don't think this article is overly technical for the mostly likely consumers: people with more than a passing interest in Formula One. I'm willing to hear that some information may fall under WP:ROUTINE, but I was also conscious of not creating a Stub/Start. I'm still learning the thresholds here and was quite happy to get a WP:C-class. I appreciate the feedback, positive and negative. AshSIreland ( talk) 21:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: AshSIreland ( talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AFD. reply

• Your arguments actually describe exactly why it shouldn't be kept. As you point out, this is really only relevant to Formula One fans. Which is not our principal audience. As for the lap-time argument, free practice sessions during the grand prix weekends are equally little constraint and have a very similar potential. Moreover your claim about the track records isn't even true. The current outright track record for the circuit in question was actually set during qualifying of the 2019 Spanish Grand Prix and not during a pre-season test. T v x1 10:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsports-related deletion discussions. A7V2 ( talk) 00:51, 4 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Thanks for sharing the link to Formula One Wikiproject. It looks like exactly what I was hoping existed somewhere. Indeed, I probably should have started there, and would have had I known about it. However, I don't see any mention of pre-season testing there, only season page formats. I'm sorry if you were offended by the way that I have proceeded. My goal, which I think we share, is to improve and expand the content on the site. I will pick off some smaller and less potentially controversial edits in future, if I get the time and energy. Wrt lap times, I think you may have mis-read my sentence: I only say Bottas has the three fastest laps on the circuit, and I note explicitly that the lap in pre-season testing was slower than the previous year's pole position time. AshSIreland ( talk) 13:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep (but also need articles for other years). Agreed that 2020 is not particularly more notable than any other year but I think there is generally a notability case for pre-season testing in respect of each season. It will take someone time to create an article for each season and I agree a sensible approach would be to start with 2020 and work backwards. On notability, it is a well reported on sporting event (BBC dedicates a live fee to testing (see as example https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/formula1/51562641)). On the comment that no other pre-season gets coverage, there are numerous articles on pre-season friendly football tournaments (see this category which includes a number of them /info/en/?search=Category:Association_football_friendly_trophies) Tracland ( talk) 07:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• I would kindly want to request you NOT to start creating these sort of articles on all seasons. At the very least you should discuss this at the Formula One Wikiproject first. General consensus there is that pre-season testing isn't very notable in itself and certainly to such an extent that it merits a stand-alone article and certainly not for every single year. None of the arguments provided here so far prove that this subject is notable enough to merit a standalone article. Whatever needs to be mentioned can be mentioned in due manner in the season article. What is being described in this article is purely WP:ROUTINE. Some teams drivers went to a circuit for a couple of test, set some lap times and covered some mileage. Nothing special happened whatsoever. Wikipedia is a general purpose encyclopedia, not a Formula One fansite. T v x1 10:04, 4 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Apologies, agreed that the creation of further articles should be subject to consensus with the relevant wiki project where possible but I support you being bold and creating this article. As an aside, I'm not particular a F1 fan but when reading up on the current season I found the information in this article to be useful, relevant and well sourced. My view remains that pre-season testing gets plenty of media coverage, is relevant to understanding each season and can be well sourced so would continue to recommend this is not deleted. Tracland ( talk) 05:45, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• No one is requesting that every mention whatsoever of pre-season testing is removed from Wikipedia entirely. The question is merely whether it should have a dedicated article. It can be equally be covered somewhere else in due manner as part of the bigger story. T v x1 14:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete pre-season testing is not notable, only extreme F1 fans are even remotely interested in it, and the results e.g. best times are often completely misleading and worthless due to e.g. different tyres, weather, fuel loads. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 15:18, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep This article is well written and with lots of information, much more complete then most race events articles (not precisely F1 but from other categories) that are just a bunch of tables. Being the first article of this kind or not being important for this user or that user, seems irrelevant. Its a F1 event, and although it isn't a GP, and so there is no winner, its very important for the season itself, as you can see vy the worldwide coverage and the amount of information written about. The article meets the General notability guidelines, has depth of coverage and a great diversity of sources, so this answer to the AfD. Rpo.castro ( talk) 17:51, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep This article is very well written and contains the fastest lap of each driver, which in pre-season testing is not easy to find. I dont think "We have never done an article on pre-season testing before" is not an solid argument, why can't we do something new? More and more people are getting interested in F1 and having this kind of information gives people a small information about the rankings of the teams, before the season start. Styyx ( talk) 21:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• WP:USEFUL, WP:ILIKEIT. T v x1 11:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per Joseph2302. MWright96 (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep per AshSIreland and others. Pre-season testing is generally an event that gathers a lot of media coverage, mostly due to the fact that this is the first time we see the new cars run (which is a BI deal in F1). Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 01:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Yes, but only WP:ROUTINE coverage. T v x1 10:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep The nomination does not give a reason to delete. There are plenty of sources showing that the topic is notable and here's another one. Perhaps this phase of the season is getting more attention because of the lack of races this year. Deal with it per WP:PRESERVE. Andrew🐉( talk) 12:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete The article is written good, but it doesn't pass notability criteria, yes the subject has a lot of media coverage, but it is clearly that not all the things covered in media should be covered in encyclopedia. Do you see any articles about training in other sport? Corvus tristis ( talk) 03:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Not that your question matters to the discussion but the answer is yes. 2018–19 NBL pre-season for example. The media coverage from F1 testing is beyond routine media coverage. Rpo.castro ( talk) 16:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Your comparison will be correct only if during the testing we had races, NBL pre-season at least have games (something that at least have a competition element), not an analogue of free practice sessions which we aren't cover much either. Corvus tristis ( talk)

Its non competitive. Its training matches. Its pre-season, like in F1 or other sport: as it says its to prepare the new season and you have much more new information and in this pre-season tests in F1. The coverage in very depth and worldwide. Calling pre-season tests as "free-practice" is just a biased POV. Rpo.castro ( talk) 11:18, 16 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Pre-season NBL games are competitive, they want to win. In Formula One they don't, teams simply don't care if they set the fastest lap time because no-one tries to set the best lap time. And you can't really gain any information from pre-season testing because there are so many factors the viewer is inaware of: fuel, ballast, engine setting etc. I have to agree that pre-season is comparible to practice sessions, if anything testing is less notable.
SSSB ( talk) 13:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete: Pre-season testing may recieve wide press atention while it is ongoing but this is simply because of the hype that comes with seeing the new cars/drivers being driven/driving for the first. But pre-season testing has no long-term notability (mostly because it doesn't tell you anything). WP:PERSISTENCE, WP:ROUTINE and WP:NOTNEWS apply here.
  SSSB ( talk) 13:21, 16 June 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment: I've done a source evaluation of all the sources in the article, and they don't demonstrate significant coverage:
  • [1] - good source, but as it says, testing times are misleading
  • [2] - decent write up about it
  • [3] - decent write up
  • [4], [5], [6] - just results lists
  • [7]- just dates for the testing
  • [8], [9] - really about McLaren & COVID in general, with small mention of testing
  • [10] , [11], [12], [13] - live tickers, just because the live tickers exist, it doesn't make the event notable. It was February and not much sport is on, so having a live ticker isn't extraordinary coverage
  • [14] - is about 2019 testing, not 2020
  • [15] - is about 2012 testing, not 2020
  • [16] - about testing in general, not 2020 (written in 2019)
  • [17] - not about 2020 testing, and not sure if even reliable source
  • [18] - about Mercedes Dual Axis steering, focus of the article is not the testing event
• So all in all, not notable enough in my opinion. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 13:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.