Talk:Michael Andretti

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rewrite[edit]

This article needs a rewrite. It simply does not cover enough of his time in IndyCar/ChampCar. There is too much discussion about his ill fated season in F1, and not enough discussion about the rest of his career. I don't understand why Wikipedia highlights a driver's Formula 1 career so much when they were best known for being in another form of racing. It makes sense for drivers like Michael Schumacher or Aryton Senna, but not Andretti. What if Dale Earnhardt drove a season in F1, would that write out all of his NASCAR accomplishments? He has had a great IndyCar and ChampCar career, and there needs to be more emphasis on that. Tkd73

There is a large number of people working on F1 articles, and unfortunately not many on CART/Indycar. CART has lost favor, and NASCAR seems to have taken over the void. We occasionally have problems with too much F1 in WikiProject NASCAR drivers too (but there have been very few crossovers - "Marshall Teague"). When I think of Andretti I only thing about his CART career, and his F1 career is an afterthought. Royalbroil 03:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
F1 is considered...and considers itself...the absolute pinnacle of all racing, period. While it would not cancel out a driver's NASCAR perfomances, international motor racing would care vastly more about Earnhardt's theorized single season (or single race) in F1 than all his NASCAR performances combined...and on that vein, most F1 fans consider Montoya's move to NASCAR from F1 idiotic, or worse, throwing in the towel against the absolute best, or worse. Not my opinion, just reporting F1's. --Chr.K. 03:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In other news, we're the ones who have to get cracking at putting up, and putting in, drivers' American open-wheel racing series statistics. --Chr.K. 03:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now doing so, volunteers for the prose on his American Open Wheel career are invited. --Chr.K. (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's also fair to note that his short career in F1 was high profile within the F1 world and amongst its fans for a couple of reasons, firstly his surname and also that the series he came from gained a vastly increased profile amongst the F1 fans due to Nigel Mansell's transfer in th eopposite direction - much was made at the time of the contrast between Andretti's failure and Mansell's success respectively. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.113.170.97 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The series he owns a team in is no longer Indy Racing League, it is Indycar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.54.174.98 (talk) 15:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic[edit]

He is a famous Roman Catholic [1], but I don't know where to put it in the article. Royalbroil 13:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, don't you think there's lots of Roman Catholics in high places? Does it really matter what his religion is? You dont know where to put it in the article? Just leave it out. 74.166.156.250 (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

High school[edit]

I am trying to update high school affiliations for Lehigh Valley people. Does anyone know where he went to high school? PAWiki 18:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Results tables[edit]

I recommend combining the two "Champcar" tables into a single table (labelled "CART" - I think the series was called "CART" the whole time Andretti competed in it). I don't think it matters that he did a year of F1 in the middle. DH85868993 (talk) 06:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrity Apprentice[edit]

There should be a paragraph regarding Michael Andretti's participation in the 2012 season of Celebrity Apprentice. Let me add, when they had the boardroom deliberations on who should be fired, the accusation was that Michael did not contribute enough to the project, which was a presentation to Buick executives, and other studio guests, of a new Buick vehicle, the Verano. The other celebrities said Michael did not make clever use of his status as a famous racecar driver, to promote the vehicle. "I'm not a salesman" was Michael Andretti's defense of himself. However neither Trump nor the contestants articulated a key point which was obvious to me, but apparently not obvious to them. Michael Andretti sat in the driver's seat for the mens team's test-drive of the Buick Verano. Michael Andretti has the professional understanding of why a car performs the way it does; So it begs the question: did Michael Andretti learn something about the Buick Verano during that test drive? And the most important point, which nobody addressed during that episode, was why didnt Michael Andretti transfer what he learned from that test drive into a communicable piece of information during the final presentation? Marc Smilen, Dania Florida, writing as 206.192.35.125 (talk) 21:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the participation on a TV game show that has nothing to do with the subjects core notability even worth mentioning? --Falcadore (talk) 14:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because he was one of the stars of a major network TV series and a Google News Search for "andretti apprentice" comes up with 194 results. Seriously, there's no argument for omitting it from the article completely. I have added a paragraph about his participation (which is already practically the only content in the article referenced to reliable sources). Theoldsparkle (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So a well sourced appearance in a TV game show is more important to the article than the article subjects reason for being a "celebrity" in the first instance? Is cataloging TV show appearances really that important to Wikipedia? --Falcadore (talk) 21:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
194 isn't a lot of hits. If this deserves a mention at all, and I'm not sure it does, it should be a brief mention. We really don't need to give it undue weight by banging on about what he should or shouldn't have done on this pointless show. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indded, to take a previous example, is it importnant now some ten years later to write extensively about Andretti's appearances on Home Improvement? While it was a very popular sitcom for its time, it is not necessary to mention beyond the briefest of single sentence mentions as it does not describe any form of Andrettis primary notability. If you had the describe Andretti now would you describe him as a racing driver and guest actor on sitcoms, or just racing driver? Game show appearances is similar. Celebrity Apprentice does not really need to be described on this article anything other than he appeared on this show. To suggest any significance beyond that is WP:RECENTISM. --Falcadore (talk) 03:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's unclear to me what the objection is. Are you objecting to the information about Celebrity Apprentice currently in the article, which is one 1k paragraph in a 55k article? (And, as I pointed out before, that one paragraph currently provides 1/5 of the references cited throughout the whole article? And I could easily provide a dozen more sources for that one paragraph, because it received widespread media coverage, because a starring role on a major network TV series is notable, regardless of whether you personally have any interest in it.) If, on the other hand, you're objecting to some imaginary version that suggests the TV role is "more important" than his work as a racing driver, I would agree that that imaginary version sounds pretty stupid and shouldn't be implemented. Please clarify what, if any, change from the current version you are advocating. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Falcadore: You completely miss the point. Yes, Andretti has either done many appearances, or had the celebrity credential to do many appearances. But the appearance on Celebrity Apprentice had DIRECT RELEVANCE. Andretti is a RACE CAR driver, and he was fired from Apprentice for his performance on a project which was to promote a BUICK VEHICLE!!!! .....Theoldsparkle: I edited your paragraph again. It is completely incorrect for you to say Andretti's firing from Celebrity Apprentice was due to "reluctance to lead his team." Theo: It was NOT Andretti's job to lead the team. It was Adam Carolla's job to lead the team. Adam Carolla was the mens' team project manager on the Buick Verano presentation. ...And you really should add at least one sentence stating that Andretti was in the driver's seat for the test-drive. Marc Smilen, Dania Florida AKA 206.192.35.125 (talk) 19:46, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Being a racing driver does not give you any insight whatsoever in selling cars. Your analogy is such that you believe the 15-year-old girl running the counter at a 7-Eleven should be able to explain how the milk she sells is produced. There is no connection between racing open-wheelers and selling Buick sedans. I don't think Andretti has even raced a Buick or even a Buick powered open-wheeler. You are assuming "direct" relevance based on an incomplete understanding the subject material. I did not miss your point. Your point just has no foundation in reality. --Falcadore (talk) 22:27, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Falcadore on this one. It's a huge leap from driving a racing car to knowing how to promote or sell a road car. Different world. Plus I don't see any sources backing up 206.192's implication that Andretti was somehow deficient because he didn't seem able to deduce some gem of information from driving the Buick and be able to translate that into promoting the car. Maybe the Buick was a shitbox and he had nothing good to say about it. Who knows, and who cares. These minutiae of his appearance on the show are way above what is required for his article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And even if it was, it is not Wikipedia's role to analyse or criticise people's performance. An encyclopeida records what IS and does so without providing opinions. I refer you to WP:NPOV. --Falcadore (talk) 22:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Andretti understands braking. He understands skidding. He understands how to steer in a skid. He understands vehicle response to acceleration. Andretti understands wheel-base, and suspension, and how a car takes turns. So don't tell me there's no relevance. There are inherent principles in a road vehicle that Michael Andretti understands more than the average driver on the city road. Legal Highway speeds are up to 75, which means some jerks are going to try to do 85 on the highway. Skills like Andretti's are more important on todays highways than they were twenty years ago. Todays four cylinder engine completely blows away any four cylinder engine from twenty five years ago. Theoldsparkle, where are you???? Whats your response? MArc Smilen, Dania Florida 74.166.156.250 (talk) 02:36, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even if he thought the Buick Verano was a shitbox, thats irrelevant. His job was to help his team leader sell the Buick. The consensus of a whole boardroom of Celebrity Apprentices, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump, was that racecar driver Michael Andretti has clout to sell a vehicle, and should have given some sales points to the Buick executives. Marc Smilen, Dania Florida 74.166.156.250 (talk) 02:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An analogy much better than your 7-11 Analogy, which makes no sense, would be a camera. Like a racecar is an expensive souped-up vehicle for professional exhibitions, there are professional cameras which cost upwards of two to three thousand dollars. There are people who make their living as photographers. The average consumer camera, just like the average consumer vehicle, has a range from very cheap to very expensive. If you own a camera company, you want to promote your product. You might hire professional photographers to test your new camera. You might hire them to endorse and promote your new camera. You might argue that the consumer camera is not the same as a professional camera. But there's inherent principles in all cameras that are the same: Aperature; focus; shutter speed; landscape mode; portrait mode; fast-frame mode.... the average photographer can choose to be lazy or disinterested, and continue to be a lousy photographer. And the average road driver can continue to be a lousy, unskilled, unknowledgeable driver. ....milk at 7-11 was a weak example. ...people dont buy tickets to watch professional milk drinkers. ...and the retailing specifically of milk does not involve big promotional effort. ...and a cashier is not considered a sales function. A Car dealership has cashiers; What does a cashier have to do with sales and promotion? Marc Smilen, Dania Florida 206.192.35.125 (talk) 12:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It made sufficient sense that you are able to understand the point I was trying to make and substitute a superior example.
And (getting back on track) what exactly is wrong with "Andretti appeared in the 2012 season of Celebrity Apprentice]]." That's all it needs. The reason Andretti is a celebrity is because he's racing driver and racing team owner. He isn't a Celebrity because he makes appearances on Celebrity TV shows. It is not part of his core notability, so per WP:UNDUE a short mention is more appropriate for this article. Andretti's performance on the show is not particularly important to understanding Michael Andretti, which is the purpose of this article. It might be more appropriate to add this level of detail, without any editorialising, on the article for The Apprentice (U.S. season 12). --Falcadore (talk) 13:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The version that I support (and wrote) includes three sentences, each conveying a piece of information:
  1. He was on the show;
  2. His participation was due to unusual circumstances having to do with his family and his son's career;
  3. He was fired in the fourth episode for reason X.
I don't think we're in disagreement about including #1. I think it's entirely relevant to include #2. As for #3, given that this is not simply a matter of appearing on the show, but competing in a contest, it seems quite reasonable to mention how well he did in that contest. If anything were to be omitted, I could compromise by removing the reason that he was fired, but I would prefer to keep it, because I think it's relevant (especially because it's so directly tied to his career, as opposed to being fired for not selling enough mops or something, do you know what I mean?) and because it's very clear and well-documented (there is a wide array of sources reporting that he was fired for this specific reason). And it's thirteen words.
I'm having trouble understanding the vehemence of the opposition to including this information. Virtually every article on a celebrity includes information that is not explicitly about the reason for the celebrity's fame. This article contains more text about various homes that Andretti has owned (with no working citations about any of them) than I'm proposing to include about his Apprentice role. (And if it helps, I'm not insistent about keeping the separate "The Celebrity Apprentice" heading, if you want to suggest that the information would fit under one of the other headings.) Theoldsparkle (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the section as it stands is more than adequate. I don't accept that his role on the show was directly related to his career, and the IP's claim that because Andretti can drive a racing car, he should automatically know how well a particular road car handles, is rubbish. All road cars handle terribly compared to racing cars, plus he didn't drive the Buick on the limit anyway. He has no experience of developing, testing or reviewing road cars, and if he's like every other racing driver, only average experience of driving them. To take the camera analogy, it's like giving a video camera to a professional stills photographer and saying, "Well you know about cameras, make a brilliant video." The IP's posts are starting to look like a bit of an WP:OR rant against Andretti. Falcadore is right - take the detail to the relevant Apprentice article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, Falcadore is Not right about taking the detail to the Apprentice Article. Im sure the Apprentice Article already mentions every Celebrity Contestant of every season. What do you want to do, Clutter the Celebrity Apprentice article with a cut-n-paste of each Celebrities Wikipedia page? ...The relevance of Celebrity Apprentice in the Michael Andretti article is the fact that he is a racecar driver, and his team was assigned to a presentation for BUICK. That is the key point. Marc Smilen, Dania Florida 206.192.35.125 (talk) 14:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AGAIN, I had to edit Theoldsparkle's Celebrity Apprentice paragraph. Theoldsparkle perhaps did not read what I wrote above. I have to say it again: You CANNOT write "his reluctance to lead the team." It is INCORRECT. It was NOT Andretti's job to lead the team. He was not project manager. ...But I support keeping it as a separate section. Trump and Celebrity Apprentice are high-profile items. If it was an obscure item, then I would support fitting it into another section. Marc Smilen, Dania Florida 206.192.35.125 (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I understand the point of confusion better now. In writing that Andretti was reluctant to lead the team, I'm referring to his reluctance to serve as project manager, which is clearly what was expected of him and what he did not do. Your suggested phrasing, "his reluctance to assist his project leader Adam Carolla in the team's presentation", indicates that the judges were fine with Carolla being the leader, but wanted Andretti to help, which he did not do; I don't think that describes the situation at all. These four sources all say that Andretti was fired because he didn't lead the team: [2] [3] [4] [5] Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As opposed to cluttering up contestant pages with material not related to their reasons for notability, which is apparently preferable. You are aware that the entire concept of celbrity game shows is that the contestants are notable for reasons other than their appearance on the game show, regardless of the notoriety of that game show. Your Key point is part of the operation of the show, not of Andretti himself. The operation of the show belongs in its own article, not the contestants article. If it was specific to Andretti in some fashion (you've not demonstrated he has any connection to Buick or its products) maybe. But as the ability to drive a car is available to more than half of the adult population. If the game show feature a Dallara Indycar rather than a Buick production car, I'd concede you may have a point. --Falcadore (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Falcadore: Am I speaking Chinese? Do you understand the terms Road Handling? taking turns? Over-steering? Anti-Lock Braking? skidding? Defensive driving? ....The adult population that drives does not take the time nor the effort to educate themselves on automotive principles which just might save them in an accident. A racecar driver can communicate these things to the average consumer. A racecar driver can judge the performance of a new car and communicate these abilities of a new vehicle to the consumer. Yeah, if Andretti was on wheel of fortune, or family feud, or Jeopardy, those appearance would not belong in the article. But the Celebrity Apprentice project was a presentation for Buick. This is relevant enough with regard to his profession, to be in the article. Connection to Buick?? Yes, for that episode, he had connection to Buick. For that Episode, he was professionally responsible to the Trump organization and to the Client, which was Buick! Marc Smilen, Dania Florida 74.166.156.250 (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm genuinely confused about whether I should respond to you (Falcadore); it seems like what keeps happening is that I post something, then the IP posts something, and then your response seems to be directed specifically at the IP. For clarity, I'll consider this response, and any other responses where such confusion is reasonable, to be directed at the IP and not at my own comments unless you refer to me by name and address the points I've made. Thanks. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then don't be confused. If I had been talking to you, I would have added an additional indent, like here. --Falcadore (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, my apologies. I understand clearly now that you were choosing to ignore my comments and did not expect a response from me. I didn't want to be rude by appearing to ignore your comments if they were intended to address me. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're not speaking Chinese, you're just assuming incorrectly that race driving open-wheelers and defensive driving road going sedans is similar. Your comparing economic theory analysis to high-school mathematics. They start from the same basic theory, but diverged a veyr long time ago and one is very highly specialised and able to be mastered by few, the other is teachablee to anyone with a couple of days of training. The careers of Christian Fittipaldi and Dario Franchitti, extroadinarily talented open-wheeler drivers who failed completely to make any impression in NASCAR are an indication that these skills are highly specialised and not easily translatable into other fields which might be interpreted that they should be. --Falcadore (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Theoldsparkle: then the sources are WRONG!!!!! Its a black and white issue. Theres no interpretation. Celebrity Apprentice has projects. The Celebrities pick a project manager. The Project manager leads the team. Andretti was not Project manager. Therefore there was no by Andretti reluctance to lead. He was not the chosen leader. Adam Carolla was the chosen leader. Corolla was the project manager. It was NOT Andretti's job to lead the team.74.166.156.250 (talk) 23:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is all about sources... and in this case, they are not wrong: Trump fired Andretti solely because he did not take Trump's suggestion to become project manager (ie to lead the team).66.87.2.96 (talk) 16:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Andretti's reluctance to lead" means "Andretti's reluctance to be the project manager." Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe he was reluctant to be project manager, but that is irrelevant in light of the bigger issue that he was fired from Celebrity Apprentice. His job was to help his project manager. He did not give his project manager the support that was expected of him. Ayways, A couple of weeks ago, I created the separate section for "Other activities," with some minor edits by you guys, and It looks like we all are in final agreement on how it should be. Marc S., Dania Fl 206.192.35.125 (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that we're both okay with the current version. But I admit, I just have to ask: when, in the episode that you watched, did Adam Carolla ask Michael Andretti to do something that Andretti did not do? Or did the judges say something along the lines of, "Michael Andretti, Adam Carolla wanted you to do this and you did not do it"? Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Michael Andretti. 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:

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

checkY 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 13:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michael Andretti. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 20:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archive URL doesn't work, so I have reverted it and tagged it with {{cbignore}}. DH85868993 (talk) 09:05, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Michael Andretti. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 00:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Andretti. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:41, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Andretti&oldid=1216970226"