iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2020_24_Hours_of_Le_Mans
Talk:2020 24 Hours of Le Mans - Wikipedia

Talk:2020 24 Hours of Le Mans

Latest comment: 3 years ago by SSSB in topic GA Review


Female teams

edit

Games of the world: Why have you reverted my modification? The source mentions "mid-1970s", which is not exact and it was in fact 1977 when there was more then one all female team at Le Mans. The source is Wikipedia itself and its sources...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdsotirov (talkcontribs)

Wikipedia cannot source itself. Although I appreciate you tried to be exact, you cannot do this as the references do not support the fact, even if it is logically obvious to you and me. Games of the world (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
The pages I linked have their references Games of the world. I really do not understand why you continue saying that "the references do not support the fact". On both 1977 24 Hours of Le Mans and All women's teams at Le Mans (pages that I linked) the fact could be checked - the last year when there was more than one all females team was 1977. Sorry, but mid-1970 from the cited article speaks nothing to me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdsotirov (talkcontribs)
The 1977 article only demonstrates that there was more than one team in 1977. It does not prove anything about the period from then until now. The women's teams' article does show these teams, but most of it is unsourced. We cannot use Wikipedia itself as a source. Also given the fact that there have been quite a few all-women teams in the history of the event, I even wonder whether this "first time since" is even worth mentioning. Did this aspect receive significant coverage? It was hardly unique. On a side note, can you please sign your posts?Tvx1 13:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Here's my signed (and last) post... I really did not expect clarifying a fact to become such a problem. If an external source with "significant coverage" is necessary eventually it could be found if searched for. Anyway, I'm bailing out from this talk, because I see no point anymore in trying to improve the article. Georgi D. Sotirov (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Well we have autosport and Yahoo, both proper outside sources so we can now revert my revert and include the fact using those sources. Games of the world (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2020 24 Hours of Le Mans/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SSSB (talk · contribs) 09:50, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply


GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  } b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

General comments (for benefit of reviewer)

edit
Extended content

Criteria 6

edit

Criteria 2

edit
  • Earwig's copyvio gives a couple of false positives, (~70% similarity) but this is simply due to the listing of names. A few other sources had high %s, but this is due to direct quotes, so neither of these are points of concern.
    SSSB (talk) 10:36, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Criteria 5

edit

Criteria 1

edit

Criteria 3

edit

Criteria 4

edit

Bold changes made by reviewer

edit

Feel free to revert and then discuss if you disagree.

Questions/points to be adressed by nominator

edit

Necessary for promotion

edit
Lead
edit
Background
edit
  • from 13 to 14 June, but because of the COVID-19 pandemic leading France - but is WP:EDITORIAL word. You can probably just remove this.
  • The ACO wanted to establish new dates for the race as soon as French officials imposed the lockdown; it did not want to hold it late in the year because of daylight and weather conditions and had to take global travel limitations into account. - The ACO are an organisation, shouldn't they be refered to as "they", not "it"? Also missing a "they" after "weather conditions and". (Unnecessary for pass) but I would re-word that sentece to "The ACO wanted to establish new dates for the race as soon as French officials imposed the lockdown; they wanted to avoid the shorter daylight hours and poor weather that occured later in the year, and had to take global travel limitations into account." to avoid repeating "they".
  • The paddock was limited to a maximum of 5,000 individual - "paddock" is a WP:JARGON term.
Testing
edit
Warm up
edit
Start and opening hours
edit
Sunset to night
edit
Post-race
edit

Other sugestions to improve article

edit

I'm probably being excessivly picking (so feel free to ignore), but:

Lead
edit
Qualifying
edit
Garage 56
edit

The text here says that Garage 56 allows for a 56th entry, but there are 62 in total, so this is a little confusing as they are actually the 62nd entry. I suggest something like:"The ACO intended to continue the Garage 56 concept, started in 2012. Garage 56 allows an additional to test new technologies at the race." With the possibility of a note explaining that the origin of the name is that, in 2012, this additional team would have been the 56th.
SSSB (talk) 13:45, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Reference check

edit

No other problems detected, passing. Congrats
SSSB (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply