Talk:1989 Tour de France

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1989 Tour de France. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130209134934/http://www.roadcycling.co.nz/TourdeFrance/tour-de-france-demystified-part-1.html to http://www.roadcycling.co.nz/TourdeFrance/tour-de-france-demystified-part-1.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 03:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1989 Tour de France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sportsfan77777 (talk · contribs) 22:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this article later this week. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 22:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Here are my comments:

Lead

• Overall, the lead doesn't do a good job of summarizing the article. See 2012 Tour de France and 2017 Tour de France for better examples.
• For instance, this first paragraph should at least have the three podium finishers (and their teams) before discussing the progression of the race in the second paragraph.
• The second paragraph doesn't do a good job of emphasizing the key points of the race. I might consider mentioning the final stage time trial from the onset, as well as the fact that the tour was primarily fought out between LeMond and Fignon. Then, you can describe the setup to that final time trial (e.g. that LeMond had beat or matched Fignon in all four earlier time trials; and that LeMond was not expected to win the Tour with a 50 second gap entering the final stage).
• I think the performance of the PDM is team is over-dramatized in the last paragraph. It is not discussed in great detail in the rest of the article.
• All of the decisive racing took place in the time trials and mountain stages. There was no significant changes among the genuine contenders in the plain stages. <<<=== Get rid of this. (Isn't this true for every Tour de France?)

I have completely rewritten the lead, please let me know what you think of it. Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:21, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Overall, looks much better! I have a few minor comments, but I'll wait until the rest of the review is addressed. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Teams

• The wild card teams were part of the 22, not extra
• How did the other 19 qualify?
• This section should be expanded to discuss e.g. the nationalities of the riders, among other things. See 2012 Tour de France, 2017 Tour de France, and 1986 Giro d'Italia for ideas.

I will have to come back to this. You raise some excellent points. I think the French source in this section might hold the answers, but the link is dead now and the Wayback Machine not working at the moment... Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:00, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, completely rewritten this now that I have the necessary information. I hope you are satisfied with this. Nationalities of riders and so forth I cannot really find a reliable source of. Naturally, I could calculate those things from the start list myself, but I feel that this would constitute original research. Zwerg Nase (talk) 18:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Pre-race favorites

• However, controversy around a failed doping test during the 1988 Tour put a cloud of suspicion over the reigning champion. <<<=== I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Did others expect him to be in poor form because he wasn't doping anymore? Or did people think he was still doping (if so, how did that impact his chances of winning)?

I am not trying to imply a relation between his form and the doping case. Maybe the word "However" is misleading? I just wanted to mention that the doping story of the previous year was still a talking point in 1989. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

• Since the future winners both supported contenders, I think it would be better to just mention them in the same paragraphs as the contenders they were supporting.

 Done

Routes and stages

• It was the shortest edition of the race for in more than eighty years

 Done

• The route then took an anti-clockwise circuit through France visiting the Pyrenees prior to the Alps. ===>>> The route then took an anti-clockwise circuit through France, starting in the northwest in Brittany before visiting the Pyrenees prior to the Alps. (It's easier to visualize if you say where in France they started.)

 Done

• The race consisted of seven mountain stages, two Pyrenean and five Alpine two in the Pyrenees and five in the Alps

 Done

• Can you add which of the mountain stages were expected to have the most impact on the race? (Do you know?)

 Done Though I could only find an opinion from Delgado on this. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:19, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Early stages

• attacked from the main field (peloton) ===>>> attacked from the peloton (the main field)

 Done

• He was now in third place ===> Fignon was now in third place (unclear 'he')

 Done

• He rode away from the peloton shortly before the finish and (add "just barely") held on with three seconds in hand at the line. <<<=== Do you how many km away from the finish he was when he attacked?

 Done

• In the stage 5 time trial, LeMond surprised again by winning it and taking the yellow jersey by five seconds ahead of Fignon ====>>>> In the stage 5 time trial, LeMond surprised again by winning both the trial and the yellow jersey, taking the lead in the tour by five seconds ahead of Fignon. (mainly a small grammar issue)

 Done

• starters had to drive through rain <<<=== replace "drive" with "bike" or change the end to "get through the rain" ("drive" doesn't sound right here)

 Done

• It was the then second-longest breakaway ====> It was then the second-longest breakaway

 Done

Pyrenees

• Next followed two stages set in the Pyrenean mountains. ===>>> In the next two stages, the tour visited the Pyrenees, beginning the mountain stages. (I don't feel like the adjective Pyrenean is in widespread use.)

 Done With some adjustments.

• Delgado had a finishing time of +1:29 and the leaders were +1:58, so I think it should say he regained 29 seconds.

The others were at 1:56, so 27 seconds is correct.

• It was on this stage that Fignon started to complain about LeMond riding too defensively (add "for strategic reasons"), accusing him of not putting any work in to counter attacks. (I feel like this statement is too negative towards LeMond, and doesn't reflect the quotes in the following two sentences. Was it really looked down upon at the time for a Tour leader to play it safe? I don't think that would be true today.)

I have added "for strategic reasons", which is a good addition. Indeed the mentalitly and "honour code" back then was a little different. LeMond changed a lot in cycling. Check out this interview with him and Merckx from the early 90s for reference on criticism targeted at LeMond.

• where Delgado was provoked by an over-enthusiastic spectator and threw a bidon at him. ====>>> where Delgado was provoked by an over-enthusiastic spectator into throwing a bidon at him.

I feel your version would make it sound like Delgado had no other chance than throwing the bidon, so I would rather like to keep it this way.

• Fignon had attacked LeMond ===>>> Fignon then attacked LeMond

 Done Removed "had".

• The order in the overall standings after the first mountain stages ===>>> The order in the overall standings after these two mountain stages

 Done

Transition stages

• Mathieu Hermans won the stage for the Paternina team (add "in a sprint finish")

 Done

• During the course of the stage, pre-race favourite Fabio Parra abandonded abandoned, as did his only remaining teammate, José Roncancio, meaning that the Kelme squad was entirely out of the race <<<=== Do you mean the entire Kelme team was out of the race, or do you mean they were no longer in contention?

The entire team had gone home. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Alps

• The following five stage ===> The following five stages

 Done

• took the riders through the alpine mountains ===> took the riders through the Alps, the primary mountain range of this tour.

I have changed it to Alps, but did not add the second part, since I feel that calling the Alps "primary" is an opinion that is not founded by any source.

• Induráin set (add "the early standard with") a fast time of 1:11:25 hours

 Done

• His advantage on Fignon at this stage ===>>> His advantage over Fignon in this stage

 Done

• The two were now separated by 53 seconds on in the general classification

 Done

• LeMond stuck to his wheel, but Guimard, knowing LeMond well from their days together at the Renault team, saw that he was weak <<<==== replace weak with "struggling with the climb"

 Done Added "struggling"

• Fignon thus moved back into the yellow jersey, with an advantage of 26 seconds to LeMond. ====> Fignon thus regained the yellow jersey, with an advantage of 26 seconds over LeMond.

 Done

• Fignon started the final 3 km (1.9 mi) climb up to the finish with a margin of 45 seconds and took the stage win. His advantage was reduced to 24 seconds by the time LeMond crossed the line, meaning that the difference between the two was now 50 seconds in the overall standings. ====>>>> Fignon started the final 3 km (1.9 mi) climb up to the finish with a margin of 45 seconds. He took the stage win, but his advantage was reduced to 24 seconds by the time LeMond crossed the line, meaning that the difference between the two was now 50 seconds in the overall standings.

 Done

• in the overall standings remained the same (add "at 50 seconds").

Changed to "at 50 seconds".

• Is it possible to add comments on who was expected to win the Tour at various points in the Alps (including after Stage 19 for sure, but also maybe one or two of the earlier stages)?

I could add some information for before the Alpe d'Huez stage, where Channel 4 focussed on LeMond and Delgado, discounting Fignon (who then of course took yellow). But I feel that that would be anecdotal at best.

• This section should also mention that the leaders of the points and mountains classifications did not change through the Alps.

I would prefer to keep the section more focussed, but I can add that if you insist on it.

• This section should briefly discuss the progression of the team classification (where the leaders did change).

I have to take a look at that anyway, since as you can see, the table discussing the leader progression has a gap there. I need to check wether I have a source for that... But even if I do, the team classification is so unimportant, I feel it would clutter up the section to add this information. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Finale

• Move "Further down..." and anything after that to the right before "As of 2018"

 Done

• In the "As of 2018" sentence, clarify "the 8 second margin of victory is still..."

 Done slightly reworded.

• The Stage 21 paragraph should mention "Stage 21", "the final stage", or "the finale" in the very first sentence of the paragraph

 Done

Aftermath

• Still not having been paid by ADR <<<<====== Why did they not pay him?

Will elaborate on that in the Favourites section, where I first mention the financial troubles of ADR.

 Done

• Briefly mention Fignon's later Tour de France appearances.

 Done

Classification leadership

• You should add brief discussions of the progression of the leaders of the points classification, the mountains classification, and the team classification --- as you did with the general classification and the combativity.

Final standings

• Okay.

Doping

• Okay.

Overall

• You don't need to italicize peloton every time.

Following MOS:ITALIC, I have chosen not to italicize it anywhere.

• The first mention of each rider in the race overview section should include their full name and their team (often, but not necessarily in parentheses). But just to clarify, if you use their full name in e.g. the Early Stages, it is okay to just use their last name later on e.g. in the Pyrenees.

Have I not done that? I feel like I did?

• This link is dead: Les Vingtdeux Equipes Du Tour http://www.lesoir.be/lesvingtdeuxequipesdutour_t19890614Z01QKX.html

Fixed.

• This link is dead: Tour '89". Leidsch Dagblad (in Dutch). Regionaal Archief Leiden. 24 July 1989. p. 14. Retrieved 2 April 2012

Fixed.

• No plagiarism detected.

@Zwerg Nase: The biggest changes that need to be made are that the lead should be improved, and the listing of the teams should be expanded. The rest of the article is in pretty good shape! Placing on hold. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 05:43, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: Thank you for the thorough review! I'll try to fix everything over the weekend. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: Sorry, couldn't make it over the weekend, I'll get to it during the week! Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:45, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: I am very sorry, real life is getting in the way. Could you extend the period for adjustments by a week? I should be able to make it then. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:10, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Zwerg Nase: No worries. Take your time! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Zwerg Nase: Any updates? Sportsfan77777 (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: Sorry, I have been quite busy with work the last couple of days. I am hoping to get some things done tonight. Small update on the team section: I cannot retrieve the French source there, so I will have to rephrase that section entirely, which is unfortunate, but I have not been able to find reliable sources about how the teams that were not wildcard entries were selected... Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:55, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: Made some more adjustments, rest will hopefully follow tomorrow! Zwerg Nase (talk) 18:20, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Zwerg Nase: Is the article ready for me to take another look?

@Sportsfan77777: I think so. The only thing left open is Classification leadership and I did not really understand what you wanted me to do there? Let me know what you think! Thank you :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:58, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

@Zwerg Nase: I did some small further copyediting, and will pass the review. Good work! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 17:11, 30 October 2018 (UTC)