This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Motorsport Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MotorsportWikipedia:WikiProject MotorsportTemplate:WikiProject Motorsportmotorsport articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. World Rally Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject World Rally, an effort to create and improve rallying related articles on Wikipedia, including the FIA World Rally Championship. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information.World RallyWikipedia:WikiProject World RallyTemplate:WikiProject World RallyWorld Rally articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

As the FIA publishes the new points rules for 2024, we need to have a discussion regarding the championship table. How to orgainze? Three cells (one for Sat., one for Sun. and the other one for PS) for one event? Two cells plus a superscript? One cell plus two superscripts? Inputs are welcome. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ping Rally Wonk, Pelmeen10, Tvx1, HumanBodyPiloter5 for notice. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:17, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My preference: 2 cells (one for Sat. and the other for Sun.) + 1 superscript (for the PS). Unnamelessness (talk) 06:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, final rally classifications no longer count towards championship points, one can win a rally but not be first for each handout of points. Four pieces of information is too much for one table IMO.

For me:

Table 1: Final classification only, this classic information looks like any season table prior to introduction of the power stage, with gold, silver, bronze etc cells. However, technically, this does not affect the championship, but many will want to know final results across the season.

Table 2: Points awarded, not classifications. Will people care if xdriver was 6th by Saturday, 2nd on Sunday, 4th on the power stage? Possibly, but if mouseovers are accessible I would show total points per rally hiding the detail eg: 30.

Three superscripts? 4¹⁸²?!

Good question and good luck to those updating it regularly. Rally Wonk (talk) 10:27, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts there would be no way to classify the standings of the rally results table alone. Perhaps rally classification hiding the points: 1, or qualifying positions: 1

If mouseover/tooltip isn't suitable (mobile) perhaps next line and smaller font.

1 3,1,2

Or using points:

1 13+7+4

Ignore my markup choice, just visual example. Rally Wonk (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I think the version that displays the final positions as the main script and the points awarded below is probably the most transparent way of getting this information across given the somewhat contrived nature of the new system.

  1 13+7+4

  HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that final positions as the main script, but I believe consistent-wise, it should be position for all four piece of results. Also tweaked with the layout to give every orientation their own stand to avoid confusion. Example:

412 3

Sat. fourth, Sun. third, PS second, final first.

This would tell the difference between something like Sat. Sun. no.1 and Sun. PS no.1.

Sat. and Sun. no.1:

11 1

Sun. and PS no.1:

11 1

Unnamelessness (talk) 12:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a puzzle to be solved, too much information in my opinion. Only the final classification matters to the rally, only the points matter to the championship. Rally Wonk (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then a stright option could be something like this:

130

Final position as the main font + total points scored as superscript. Unnamelessness (talk) 11:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That just obfuscates information that readers are likely to be coming to the page to try and find. I think just showing the points added up is the simplest option here that simultaneously gives the most information with the least ambiguity. If necessary the points can be listed as "13+0+2" or "0+0+4" if we don't want any confusion about how the points were awarded. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 12:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly the thing I am concerned. For those crews who stand at the bottom of the standings (likely WRC2 runners), they usually finished outside of the points zone. That means a lot of "0+0+0", which adds nothing but have to keep it for the sake of consistency. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And if we opte for position, I see no points to add those places which are out of the points zone, i.e. should be "2" only, rather than "13+8+2". This is consistent with the PS in the previous seasons. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the information obfuscation, I believe the rally report pages are the place for the readers to reach out. A little bit of tweaking to this table could easily solve the problem. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A variation to this could be something like this:

12 4 3

It could be compensated with the following notes:

1. _{1 2 3 4 5} – Overall position by Saturday
2. _{1 2 3 4 5} – Accumulated position of Sunday
3. ^{1 2 3 4 5} – Power Stage position

Standing demo below:

Proposed layout

Pos. Driver MON SWE MEX CRO POR ITA KEN EST FIN GRE CHL EUR JPN Points 1 Kalle Rovanperä 21 3 2 43 5 3 44 5 5 42 2 11 1 1 31 4 3 21 2 2 11 1 1 Ret 11 1 41 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 5 250 Key Colour Result Gold Winner Silver 2nd place Bronze 3rd place Green Points finish Blue Non-points finish Non-classified finish (NC) Purple Did not finish (Ret) Black Excluded (EX) Disqualified (DSQ) White Did not start (DNS) Cancelled (C) Blank Withdrew entry from the event (WD) Notes: 1 2 3 4 5 – Overall position by Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 – Accumulated position of Sunday 1 2 3 4 5 – Power Stage position

Unnamelessness (talk) 04:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Another suggestion is 2 rows per name. See here for example. Rally Wonk (talk) 18:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion is good, but I think we should empasize the rally winner more. It looks like there are 3 rounds per rally. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:33, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I prefer the points option:

  1 18+7+4

  Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again, a drawback of this layout is for those crews who stand at the bottom part of the championship, which usually finish outside of points zone. This means a lot of "0+0+0" to add. Pretty redundant. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Example below:

22	Grégoire Munster	17 0+0+0	26 0+0+0		26 0+0+0	42 0+0+0	11 0+0+0	Ret 0+0+0	18 0+0+0	15 0+0+0	12 0+0+0	Ret 0+0+0	7 4+2+0	Ret 0+0+0	6

Unnamelessness (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cut off the "0" would bring another issue. Who knows a simple "2" stands for what? 9th on Sat., 6th on Sunday or 2nd at the PS? Unnamelessness (talk) 12:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it the same point argument about redundancy if you add positions instead (25th+48th+32nd) to the crews at the foot of the table? I think 0 would suffice in place of 0+0+0.

Really though I think it's best to wait and see how they promote this. I wouldn't be too surprised if the whole idea was scrapped before Monte. Rally Wonk (talk) 14:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I rather prefer the layout of annotations based on orientation, but you said that is "a puzzle to be solved". :( Unnamelessness (talk) 02:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And if a single "0" substitutes "0+0+0", that looks like the driver is only eligible for one part of the distribution. Unnamelessness (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You say that that's a drawback, but I think it just maintains clarity and consistency. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I think is this standing, as a table, should be as simple as possible, because Rally Wonk reminds me the simplicity is of vital for those general readers. The clarity and consistency could be somewhere to compensate, and should be good for those readers who want to a deep dive. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You know, a table like below in the rally report article could be a perfect material to add things up:

Position		No.	Driver	Co-driver	Entrant	Car	Time	Difference	Points
Event	Class								Sat.	Sun.	Stage
1	1	33	Elfyn Evans	Scott Martin	Toyota Gazoo Racing WRT	Toyota GR Yaris Rally1	3:32:08.8	0.0	18	7	5

Unnamelessness (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that it's a table of the points standings, not a results table, so the priority has to go towards showing who scored what points how. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 13:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to dispute on this, because on Wikipedia, major motorsport events, like F1, motoGP, Nascar, all feature with position, rather than points. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that, the site wide consensus is to include race positions in overall standings and I think that breaking away from that for a season that will feature a very confusing points system will just bring more confusion. I also believe that staying within that consensus is especially important for WRC season pages, as event pages in past years have only listed group rather than overall result tables (this can lead to very odd situations like for 2023 Rally Japan a few weeks ago where Hiroki Arai in a Rally4 finished in the overall points, yet isn't mentioned anywhere on the event page). Overall I think the "18+7+4" style proposal is the best one, it is the least confusing in my opinion. Having a bunch of "0+0+0" is not a bad thing in my opinion because this is a disruptive and confusing points system and consistency will be important for understanding, especially for casual fans. SunflowerYuri (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nascar fetures a system that is far more complicated than this, and they still stick with positions, just adding with a bunch of superscripts. Based on this, I propose a layout in the above. Unnamelessness (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the odd situation of 2023 Rally Japan, I am thinking of adding a section that is specifically for points distribution. Something like this:

No.	Driver	Co-driver	Entrant	Car	Overall			WRC-2		WRC-3	J-WRC
					Sat.	Sun.	PS	Class	Challenger	Class	Class	Stage
33	Elfyn Evans	Scott Martin	Toyota Gazoo Racing WRT	Toyota GR Yaris Rally1	18	7	0	—
20	Andreas Mikkelsen	Torstein Eriksen	Toksport WRT 3	Škoda Fabia RS Rally2	4	1	0	25	—
35	Hiroki Arai	Hiroki Tachikui	Ahead Japan Racing Team	Peugeot 208 Rally4	0	1	0	—
55	Jason Bailey	Shayne Peterson	Jason Bailey	Ford Fiesta Rally3	0	0	0	—		25	—

Unnamelessness (talk) 02:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Did a bit of experiment with the markup, and come up with something like this as yet another alternative solution:

  12 3 4

  Unnamelessness (talk) 12:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That still looks like a puzzle to be solved. This particular points system is convoluted and creates an issue where the points awarded don't directly correlate to finishing position, with three different ways in which points can be given. Any means of displaying how the points were awarded that uses a ranking just adds a layer of obfuscation (does this small "1" signify that the competitor was awarded eighteen points, seven points, or five points?) when compared to simply showing how many points a competitor received. What Nascar articles do is a case of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and it's possible they need to improve their articles to show information more clearly, but that is a completely separate system that isn't particularly comparable to this one anyway. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 07:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a policy that works for AFD, and may not be applied here as this is just a general discussion. Anyway, I have no problem with what the final layout is, but I do have a problem with using points, rather than position. Like I said, all four pieces of results should all positions for the sake of consistency, and the consist of points can be compensated in rally articles, like I demonstrated above. Unnamelessness (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Why does this need to be consistent? All that consistency does in this case is increase the level of ambiguity. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 03:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Then why has the ambiguity to be eliminated in this one single standings table? There are lots of ways to erase the ambiguity, and a points scoring table in the individual rally article is the perfect place to do it. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This radical new format means the opposite: rally positions mean nothing to this WRC championship, points mean little to the rallies. WRC2/3/Junior crews and those in national championships will still be scoring via the start-to-finish rally only, they won't care for this new format. So, personally I wouldn't mention these points on rally articles (unless pertinently/incidentally in text) and if anything should go from this page in the name of clarity and erasing ambiguity, it should be the final positions. It is these, that should be on the rally articles. I understand that is not consistent with the history of motorsport or how it is widely covered on Wikipedia, but that is how radical situation this is. Rally Wonk (talk) 13:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  And this "consistency" not only works for the four pieces of results, but also works along with the entire motorsport community, where the wide practice is filling in with position. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  And the simple reason is that the overall race/rally positions are used as tiebreakers for competitors tied on points. Tvx1 09:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

convenience break 1

• I am coming here as someone who does not follow rally (but will watch it if it is on TV), did not know about the new rally points system until 5 minutes ago. There are several points I would like to make as a complete outsider. Firstly, on the side note of NASCAR, the championship table for the 2022 NASCAR Cup Series is very confusing, I don't know if they could have made it simplier, but it is a perfect example of why chucking everything as a note is not a good idea. Secondly, the notes system proposed by unnameless is exteremely confusing, because it is not easy to tell if it is superscript or subscript when you only have the hypen next to it (i.e. you would ideally change "³" to "X³" and "₃" to "X₃" to make this clearer?) This is absolutly necessary for the proposal where there is a subscript before and after the letter, or 2 numbers as sub/super script. Because you end up having to guess which is which.

  Having two peices of info as sub/super script is also not great because it is not immediatly clear what order it goes in. (2¹
  _{3 2}) What you end up having to do is guess that it goes in the order of Saturday, Sunday. This is one of those things that is obvious when you say it out loud, but not obvious when you are looking at the table. It also raises the issue of what do you do if they score points for the Sunday, but not the Saturday? Therefore, with respect to the super/sub script options I think that

  12 3 4

  is probably the easiest for viewers to interpret, so long as the key is sufficently clear. Even if only one or two of those numbers are present it will still be clear what each one refers to (again given the key is sufficntly clear, I again suggest my "X³" option. A concern I do have with this though, is it is not very accessiable to editors. Maybe this is something that can be templated? After that, I think that

  412 3

  would work for the same reason, again given a sufficently clear key. However, this option would be second to stacking the three because it looks strange visually to have one to the left and the other two to the right.

  However, my prefered option by far, is:

  1 13+7+4

  This option is cleanest and easist to intepret. Yes, it is not ideal that we will have "0+0+2", but with any of these proposals some form of compromise is necessary, and I don't see any major problems with it. Again, a suffiently clear key is what is necessary, but given that I don't see any issues with this option.(I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) SSSB (talk) 10:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I fully agree with SSSB lastest post. Having final position and "Saturday+Sunday+PS" below (sorry editing on mobile) looks the best solution. We must take in mind this is an encyclopedia for everyone not a rally database, so someone not related with this should be able to understand this.

  The other solutions looks too complex to me, a WRC fan, so how will they look to an "outsider"?

  Lets try to keep it simple as possible with this complex point system created by FIA (that will probably change soon again). Rpo.castro (talk) 13:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Another outsider here. I generally agree with SSSB on this. If the points need to be shown, than the 1+2+3 version makes the most sense to me as an outsider visiting to learn more.

  RegalZ8790 (talk) 21:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comeback after round 2

Jesus Christ. This is really painful to update and a bit too much information to follow IMO. We really need to reconsider the formatting. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Unnamelessness: I do not know what 'content' you are referring to in your revert notice, as you did not include any references when you updated the results table. However, it is a matter of fact that 'To secure these points, drivers must finish the rally on Sunday. In case of a non-finish, the points pass to the next eligible competitor.'

Hence I do not see how you can argue that updating the results table on Saturday afternoon makes any sense. Going forward, we should hold off on updating the results until the rally has finished, unless you can and do provide official sources from the WRC/FIA beforehand.

Provisional standings should not be used to update Wikipedia; we are WP:NOTNEWS.  Ved havet 🌊 (talk)  14:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Provisional standings could be carefully used as long as they are covered by WP:RS, such as this. The policy that could've applied here is WP:CRYSTALBALL. That being said if a driver ends in top ten at Saturday evening, but retired on Sunday, he would lose his points, which is why short footnotes were added to complete WP:V. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drivers don't 'lose their points' by not finishing; they were never awarded those points in the first place.

Provisional standings are updated in WP:RS after each stage, not just on Saturday afternoon; unless we are to allow updates of provisional standings after each and every stage, I see no argument that they should be included at all before the end of the rally?

As far as I can tell, there was nothing to indicate that the results you added were in fact provisional standings, leading to WP:Inaccuracy.  Ved havet 🌊 (talk)  18:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RS was added down from the table, and it should be the marker to tell us whether a Saturaday update should be implemented. We will find out in Sweden. Unnamelessness (talk) 11:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no standard to rule out the use of misery image. What the image matters is to provide visual information for readers, not suggest how the mood of the people in image. Let alone that is purely POV. Anyway, I swapped with a happier image as the request. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

! Rally Wonk (talk) 23:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this correct? The source has disappeared. There is an ARA rally happening in June in Chattanooga, going to be the Rally USA, is that supposed to be the demo? Rally Wonk (talk) 23:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the Nashville IndyCar part. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why didnt L.Joona get 10th place 1 point, but Y.Rosssel got a point as 12th? Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake by the officials followed by nobody appealed. Maybe down to the deposit needed, maybe because nobody cares. Therefore nothing will be done. This is Wikipedia, it repeats sources not logic or sense. Rally Wonk (talk) 17:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]