Talk:2001 Australian Grand Prix/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: HawkAussie (talk · contribs) 01:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
So I will be happy to review this article about the 2001 Australian Grand Prix. HawkAussie (talk) 01:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Lead
[edit]- ...the 16th edition of the event as part of the series. - This isn't entirely clear on what series we are talking about here.
- ...Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher from a pole position start. - Maybe you could change this to, Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher from pole position.
- ...second, and the - We don't really need the comma here.
- ...his fifth in row in Formula One - Forget the a between in and row
- He maintained the lead at the start of the race and for the next four laps. - You could probably change this too: "He maintained the lead until lap five...
- Following this, the first race of the season, Michael Schumacher... - You probably don't need "the first race of the season" as it was already mentioned in the first paragraph that it was the first race.
Background
[edit]- ...round as part of the series. - Again I assume this is a part of the F1 World Championship.
- Of the 11 teams and 22 drivers on the starting grid,... - You could actually drop the 11 teams part so it might go: From the 22 drivers on the starting grid,...
- The third rookie driver in the 2001 driver line-up was... - This part of the sentence feels like it might not be needed, especially when you didn't mentioned the second driver in the previous sentence.
- Many observers, including Jaguar's Eddie Irvine, Button and the president of the sport's... - I feel like this sentence might need a reference instead of being bare.
- ...becoming illegal slick tyres albeit the FIA declined to enforce a regulation... - I feel like this section might be worth a comma just to take a breather before carrying on.
Practice
[edit]- Barrichello was the fastest driver with a lap of 1 minute 29.056 seconds... - Change this to Rubens Barrichello and link it as it's the first one in the main section of the page.
- Seven minutes into the session, Tarso Marques' engine failed and laid oil on the track. - Did this bring out any flags because I assume it would with laying oil out on the track.
- Red flags were unfurled after 35 minutes when... - Maybe change this word to something that wouldn't need to check what it means.
- I feel like the final paragraph is a bit too brief for the two practice sessions which was held on the Saturday.
Qualifying
[edit]- Häkkinen had pole position early on albeit balance problems put him off the track at the bumpy turn one and he qualified third. - This section properly needs to be a bit clearer.
- ...as his best lap was 1.846 seconds off Michael Schumacher's pace; - What about changing into with his best lap being 1.846 seconds off Michael Schumacher's pace;
Warm-up
[edit]- Seems fine here
Race
[edit]- ...128,500 spectators from 14:00 local time - Shouldn't be this "at 14:00 local time."
- In the following sentence you could remove reference 43 from that sentence as it was already covered with reference 44.
- ...predicted to affect the race. Analysis suggested a solitary pit stop... - In theory, you could combine these two sentences into one.
- Button used the spare Benetton. His mechanics... - The Button sentence I feel seems a bit too short to have on it's own as it could be merged with the following sentence.
- He lost several positions and almost made contact... - You have two sentences in a row which starts with "he". Just putting it out there.
- ...turn two and pirouetted into a barrier to the... - You have pirouetted in this sentence which is fine until you realize that you had change that word to spin further up in the section. Consistency is all I can say here.
- ...in his slipstream, and - You have a comma following the "and" in this part of the sentence so I assume you wanted to go ...in his slipstream and Ralf Schumacher...
- ...detached from the car, and - Remove the comma here
- ...and lung and liver lacerations - This is just a personal thought but two and's within three words of each other doesn't look right.
- ...to move to 10th place on lap 17 - to move to tenth place on lap 17.
- ...under braking for the end of the back... - under braking at the end of the back
- ...now had a ten-second advantage... - now held a ten-second advantage instead of what it currently is.
- ...increase his pace and became the fastest driver. - This bit is unclear.
Post-race
[edit]- Out of respect Beveridge's death,... - It should be Out of respect for Beveridge's death
Death of Graham Beveridge and inquiries
[edit]- Beveridge was survived by his wife and three adult children. - This sentence needs to be worded better as "survived" is the right word in this sentence.
Coronial inquest
[edit]- Looks fine here
Doctor's inquest
[edit]- Looks fine here
References
[edit]- Just to make sure that all of the Gale group references are the right pages as all of them are currently classified as uncategorised redirects.
Final comments
[edit]- So just do those final edits and this article will be good to go as an Good Article. HawkAussie (talk) 06:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- @HawkAussie: Thanks for taking the time to review the article. All of the necessary changes have been made. MWright96 (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- @MWright96: Checked through the edits and the edits are good enough. Well done on getting another GA. HawkAussie (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- @HawkAussie: Thanks for taking the time to review the article. All of the necessary changes have been made. MWright96 (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)