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. The discussion on whether to merge or move this can continue on the Talk page. A consensus is not going to emerge to delete this information from the project Star Mississippi 16:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC) reply

List of female World Rally Championship drivers

List of female World Rally Championship drivers (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

The references on this page are all of one source which does not confirm the gender of the drivers listed. With a quick search I cannot find a suitable source that can be used as a basis for this list. Whilst it appears as a nice to have list for some contributors, I don't think it meets the needs of verifiability or necessity and exists out of assumptions, which would constitute original research. Additionally, it has not been updated since Croatia 2022 - but I wouldn't know if it is needing it because there is no source. Maybe an article "Women in motorsport" or "Females in motorsport" would be better, given the sources that do exist - including the existence of a "women in motorsport" commission at the FIA. Discussion would be appreciated.

Rally Wonk ( talk) 13:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• comment found this - each name can be re-checked from the database. Also Women through the decades FIA. - Pelmeen10 ( talk) 14:06, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I've always thought Fandom to be a rip of Wikipedia although it appears there is extra information there. Still questionable. Rally Wonk ( talk) 17:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Fandom/Wikia are user-generated content and therefore cannot be reliable sources (just the same as how Wikipedia cannot be used as a source on Wikipedia). The FIA link is another general "women in motorsports" source. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 15:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• comment There is no general source (no source at all actually) for List of World Rally Championship drivers or List of World Rally Championship co-drivers either. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 15:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I'm not sure what purpose these particular lists serve when there are thousands of nominees, but at least they are a yes/no answer with database(s) as general reference. In context to the topic of discussion, there could be a list of left-handed drivers, but why? And how is it proven? Rally Wonk ( talk) 17:06, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• comment: I've noticed some of these drivers have also entered cups and classes for Ladies or Women according to the source. The list could be improved by including that as a basis for inclusion, and removing those who don't meet it. But then the question remains of necessity of the list.

Rally Wonk ( talk) 16:59, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

This list and this list, many have only 1 (local) start. Maybe the inclusion criteria would be a minimum number of starts? ewrc-results (now for subscribers only) and juwra would help. Does it also make sense to include other notable entries (blue links)? Pelmeen10 ( talk) 06:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Lists of people, and Motorsport. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep The topic seems to satisfy the ...a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources WP:NLIST. Unlike comparison mentioned above "list of left-handed drivers" which does not. Examples I found include:

1. https://www.autosport.com/general/news/how-women-are-tackling-barriers-in-motorsport/10425377/
2. Williams, J. (2014). A Contemporary History of Women's Sport, Part One: Sporting Women, 1850-1960. United States: Taylor & Francis.
3. Naess, H. (2014). A Sociology of the World Rally Championship: History, Identity, Memories and Place. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
4. Bullock, J. (2002). Fast Women: The Drivers Who Changed the Face of Motor Racing. United Kingdom: Pavilion Books.

To the question of how we verify the gender of drivers, we would use what is said in reliable sources, I therefore think the concern about original research is not warranted. An articles about "women in motorsport" would be a nice addition to the encyclopaedia. "Females in motorsport" would be a bad title, as it is only humans who do motorsport and human females are best described as "women" CT55555( talk) 18:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

1, 2 and 4 appear to address the topic of women in motorsport. #3 might have WRC in the title at least, but in it he discusses gender within marketing, spectator culture and general perceptions of WIM. He only mentions a couple of women drivers, Mouton, Taylor, who are his sources for a wider topic chat of WIM. None of this is at all topical to WRC!

IMO these belong to an 'equality for women' topic or a WIM topic that doesn't exist. If the article World Rally Championship doesn't have anything on the topic of women/females in WRC because there's nothing to put*, this list isn't needed. If the list is notable, shouldn't there be something in the article, and what would that be?

(*other than a brief mention of the defunct, short-lived, 90s ladies cup which most of these women didn't compete in) Rally Wonk ( talk) 17:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

I do respect this counter argument (that my sources are not exactly the topic) and I am now less confident in my keep !vote. I am reconsidering, weak-keep-reconsidering is probably a fairer representation of my current thinking. CT55555( talk) 15:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Merge into List of World Rally Championship drivers. The contributor above me proves that this can be kept by WP:NLIST. CAN be kept, however, does not equal SHOULD be kept. The list is redundant but for a person's sex (as a general retrieval criterium rather than variable) and great work on the references (missing for everyone in the main). The difference between the lists is insufficient for a WP:SPINOFF. So please redirect and add a new m/f variable to the main list and the references from the female drivers list by way of merge. gidonb ( talk) 02:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Notability guidelines exist to help us determine if subject merits an article. The question they answer is not can we create one, it is indeed should we create one (from WP:V). WP:NLIST is clear that notability is about the topic and the issue to consider is if the topic has been "discussed as a group or set": The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. To establish notability, I do not need to show a list the particular women currently in the article, I need to show you that in general female Rally drivers is a notable topic.

  It is common to categorize sportspeople by gender (as opposed to left or right handed) and I assume we all know this, so any suggestion that this is an odd way to categorise drivers seems fragile. CT55555( talk) 05:14, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Point was that there are more considerations than just notability, on which we two do agree. If other considerations still make the option undesirable we should not choose it, even if we can by NLIST. The can was in my opinion document-specific, and the should integrative. Also, obviously, nothing is inherently wrong with lists of sportswomen. Au contraire. We agree on many points, just not on the conclusion. I do not see it as a problem. gidonb ( talk)

I'm glad we both agree on notability. In that context, I'll say no more. CT55555( talk) 15:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Moreover, I was the first to agree that WP:LISTN is met! gidonb ( talk) 15:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

"It is common to categorize sportspeople by gender"

This would make more sense in sports that are gender segregated, which is most sports! Rallying and WRC (this topic) are not. There are no men's cups and wherever there are ladies/womens' cups in other championships, they are not denied entry into the main 'mixed' competitions. It says here:

"As most notable organized sporting activities are segregated by gender, sportsperson categories constitute a case where "gender has a specific relation to the topic". As such, sportsperson categories should be split by gender, except in such cases where men and women participate primarily in mixed-gender competition. Example: Category:Male golfers and Category:Female golfers should both be subcategories of Category:Golfers, but Category:Ice dancers should not have gendered subcategories."

Except for a Ladies' Cup that ran in the early 90s - which is not primarily - WRC is not segregated thus gender has no specific relation to the topic, same as Ice Dancers.

Same source: "Inclusion of people in a category related to GREDS must be based on reliable sources." I'm not sure we have that. We don't even have a List of women in motorsport or List of female rally drivers where eWRC could be useful as a source. But I wouldn't even say rallying or motorsport is primarily segregated to warrant these lists.

Also, unlike List of sportswomen where every subject is a blue link containing biographies, few of the subjects here have their own articles which raises the question of whether it's useful at all. Rally Wonk ( talk) 15:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

The editing guideline you link to WP:CATGRS is for creating categories. This is a different topic, there is a guideline for creating lists, which I've referenced.

You make a good point about inclusion criteria. I would support a change that included only notable women drivers. I think that would be a good thing and consistent with most list articles that I've seen. But that is an editing decision, not an AFD issue. I am informed by WP:ATD when I say that we should not delete something when improving it is a possible alternative outcome. CT55555( talk) 15:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Why merge a short and sourced list to unreferenced and incomplete list (full list would be hundreds or thousand+ entries)? Where in Wikipedia are lists/wikitables with m/f variables? Pelmeen10 ( talk) 11:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

I do not see a problem with these either. I do see a problem with lists that are so much overlapping. gidonb ( talk) 15:00, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CT55555( talk) 05:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep per available sources and comments above. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 14:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Draftify, expand to prose and rename to Women in motorsports Women in rallying - Sources 1, 2 & 4 provided by CT55555 do not satisfy LISTN for a topic specifically of female World Rally Championship drivers, but provide enough context for a general topic on women in motorsports. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 05:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I find this agreeable. CT55555( talk) 05:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I also think that work on said Women in motorsports article can happen regardless of the outcome of this AfD. I would wait until it closes though, personally. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 05:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I would pedantically suggest Women in motorsport too, given the sources and wp precedent (see Motorsports). I added a RA of that title under Social sciences/Women's studies. Rally Wonk ( talk) 17:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  This is okay with me! - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 20:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  You agree that the creation of that article can happen regardless of the outcome of this Afd, so a bit irrelevant vote in this discussion. Basically completely different content. Would be more suitable if we'd discuss about List of female racing drivers. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 06:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Pelmeen10 If you can explain how the sources provided here meet LISTN specifically for WRC drivers as opposed to generally about women in motorsports, I'm all ears. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 14:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  LISTN: One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles. - has women in World Rally Championship been discussed? Obviously. Dozens here about WRC; [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Or do a Google search with "Michele Mouton" (2 million hits) - they never forget to mention female in WRC. Take any of her interviews. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 16:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I was asking about the sources already provided by you and CT55555, not for new ones. My questioning of those ones is still valid, and with the introduction of these new ones, I now have to ask: why is this even a list and not a full article? My first answer I can think of here is "not all of these are for the World Rally Championship proper, but for support categories." In which case we can rename to " Women in rallying". These new sources don't change my opinion that this article should not be a list, however I now accept that keeping the topic scope on Rallying (the discipline, not the World Rally Chmpionship league) is perfectly fine. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 19:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  An entry in the support championships cannot happen without an entry in the overall World Rally Championship. Rally Wonk ( talk) 20:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I think that given the sources, a potential "Women in rallying" article might well end up merged into Women in motorsport as a section anyway. But with that I yield the floor to the Rally experts and will go back to IndyCar :] - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 20:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  So far we only have championship-based lists. Pelmeen10 ( talk) 21:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  To me these sources sound like justification through keywords but not meaning. For example, the sponsored Karlsson presser is just matter-of-factism that the crew are female, the text makes no relevant point. It's a good source for her specific inclusion but doesn't make the list topic notable. For it and the other sources, the topic inferred is always and every time, WIM - the phenomenon of gender in society, where motorsport is the arena in society. Even the Ladies of Monte piece is an excerpt from a motorsport book galled Girl Racers. WIM, IMO, is what the authors of the articles are eluding to when they decide to type something. "she became to be one of Britain's top female rally drivers being able to compete with the men on equal terms" - mentions the discipline of rally but is still WIM. Even "Wahome makes history as first female WRC3 winner at Safari Rally" is WIM, because Wahome cannot be a winner of afemale WRC3.

  WRC is just a competition with specific rules which enables that level of motorsport. Like I said further up, one can't give any text for what's notable about any gender division in specifically the WRC championship, never is it that women do different stages or have to drive slower cars etc, or women's cups and classes now.

  I'm not telling you your view is wrong, I just don't follow that because we can prove entries can be in a cross-category list we need to have the list, especially when it could be a sub-category of another list that doesn't exist!

  Post script: all of the co-drivers and pre-73 Ladies of Monte wouldn't even make this list, and the Munnings article came out before she started her one rally WRC career. Rally Wonk ( talk) 20:30, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Don't confuse GNG for articles and LISTN. All the coverage including "she achieved this" or "was first to achieve that", "is exceptional because she is a woman" is way pass LISTN. But as most of the participants here rather want to see an actual article, I remind that a good list is supported by prose, not just bunch of names - take a look at other female racing drivers lists: 24hLeMans, F1, Indy500, NASCAR. In recent years there have been lots of female WRC co-drivers, with good coverage about it in media. Thats where I'd draw the line, "female drivers and co-drivers in WRC". Women in motorsport is clearly too broad in our discussion context, just as well would you vote "delete and create a new article" (who though?). Pelmeen10 ( talk) 21:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  Thanks for those lists, didn't know they existed - had no reason to. Only Nascar made sense to me because of Drive for Diversity but hey. Ultimately, if other people want to see this and these lists then fair enough, it goes. That I don't understand the appeal is why I'm here. I wish I could ask all for personal opinions away from all the WP content policies, why does it matter? But I won't.

  Individual's careers, results and achievements belong in biographies and season reports to me. I wasn't proposing a Women in Motorsport be about that unless it was relevant to all the organisations, initiatives and programs, the FIA commission etc etc, and any scientific papers on gender studies/sociology/sexism etc etc on the subject that apply, to jobs in the industry, grid girls, promotion and marketing... a conversation for elsewhere. Rally Wonk ( talk) 00:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC) reply

  I was similarly unaware of these very well done articles. That should be the standard to which this article strives to be. Mostly prose, with organized lists if needed at the end. I will strike and adjust my !vote in light of this. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{( work / talk)} 01:48, 15 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:09, 19 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep seems like a good list to have. The article proposed above would also seem useful. DeathStarArchitect ( talk) 19:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller ( talk) 18:00, 26 February 2023 (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.