Talk:2010 Air Guard 400

2010 Air Guard 400 has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 26, 2017. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2010 Air Guard 400 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

NASCAR Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject NASCAR, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to NASCAR. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, you can visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.NASCARWikipedia:WikiProject NASCARTemplate:WikiProject NASCARNASCAR articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contribute to the project:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Virginia Low‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2010 Air Guard 400/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Good888 (talk · contribs) 17:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am going to try and fully review this article. Hopefully, it will be complete by this Sunday at the very latest. Good888 (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Good888: Thank you. Nice to see you again after some time off. I'm in the WikiCup this year and will probably have several more old NASCAR articles coming to GAN soon. Always a pleasure working with you and thanks in advance. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"and leading a race-high 251 laps." Does that mean "the most laps of the race"? If so, I think the writing should reflect that better, since I express a concern that it might prove a little confusing as such as written right now.
"Chevrolet maintained its lead in the Manufacturers' Championship, twenty-nine ahead of Toyota" Notably, Toyota cut Chevrolet's lead by three points after this race. Perhaps this fact should be mentioned here, or at the very least on the "post-race" section.
"while 5.288 million watched it on television." I believe that the rating is defined as in people watching live. That said, perhaps the writing should reflect this?

Done --Bcschneider53 (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

I think the main infobox needs a couple of changes: first, the claim of the weather during the race needs a source. And secondly, I do believe that adding the Nielsen ratings with a source under the "Televsion in the United States" section would be beneficial to the article. Lastly, try to add the attendance here as well, since I am fairly certain such racing events usually detail the attendance within their infoboxes rather than just in the article itself.
"Mostly sunny with a high around 82" I think this needs to be re-written somewhat to: Mostly sunny with temperatures up to 82 °F (28 °C)"

Done all but the attendance to the infobox; none of the NASCAR articles I've ever worked on include it there... --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Report

Background

"The racetrack has seats for 94,063 spectators." The source indeed confirms this fact. However, is it possible to find a source which states the maximum capacity of the track, rather than just those that are seated? After all, around 937 people attended without being seated, so I am wondering whether this venue actually sold out as well.
and Jeff Gordon stood in second with 3,366 points.
"Greg Biffle, who was 11th in the standings, needed only a finish of 42nd place in the race to secure his spot in the Chase." How many points did he have prior to the race?
"Clint Bowyer, in the final Chase spot of 12th in the standings, clinched his spot with a race finish of 28th or better." Same for Bowyer?
Should NFL be linked?

Done --Bcschneider53 (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pratice and qualifying

"Ryan Newman followed ahead" I think this should be re-written as: "Ryan Newman placed second, ahead of"
"in the third, fourth and fifth positions." I think "respectively" should be added at the end of this sentence.
"During qualifying, forty-seven cars were entered" Forty eight, according to the table below.
"Labonte, however, replaced Mike Bliss during the race." I know that the source does not explain why, but it would help finding another if possible that details why this driver change occurred.

Done, Labonte probably just bought the ride from Bliss but no source I can find explains that. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Race

"Chaplain Rick Jenkins, began pre-race ceremonies, by giving the invocation. Next, Synthia Seymour performed the national anthem, and Harry Wyatt III gave the command for drivers to start their engines." Perhaps a brief background into each of these notable people would prove helpful to casual readers who may not be clued in about said people.
Terry Labonte also had to fall from his original starting position to the rear, after he replaced Mike Bliss for the race. Both drivers should be unlinked and mentioned only by surnames. Also, perhaps you could make this a bit more brief, since you already explained the latter part of this sentence in the above section.
Again, unless the drivers' names have not been mentioned yet (or have only been detailed in the lead), they should be unlinked, and known only by their surnames in this section.
"Two laps later, A. J. Allmendinger passed Montoya to claim the second position, but on lap seven, Montoya reclaimed the second position from Allmendinger." Since the first part of this sentence explained who passed who for what position, the latter part of the sentence needs to be more brief, to prevent repetitiveness. Perhaps "but on lap seven, Montoya regained the position"?
"Bowyer passed Edwards to become the leader." Perhaps "new" would be beneficial?
"Three laps later, Hamlin became the new leader." After overtaking Bowyer?
"On lap 226, light rain showers arrived, prompting NASCAR to give the third caution." "NASCAR officials" would be better.
"Montoya came to pit road, as green flag pit stops began." May I ask, are green flag pit stops any different to standard pit stops in NASCAR? Perhaps this should be explained to those that are not significant experts of NASCAR.
"Montoya passed Hamlin for the first position, as Hamlin came to pit road." Perhaps "the latter" would prevent reptitiveness.
"On lap 336, Montoya fell to the third position, as Kyle Busch moved into second." This should be rewritten similar to: On lap 336, Kyle Busch overtook Montoya for second"
"By lap 350, Montoya had fallen to the fourth position." Perhaps: "By lap 350, Bowyer overtook Montoya for third"?
"Logano had caught Montoya in the sixth position, but he would pass him until four laps later." Two issues here: firstly, the previous sentence stated that Montoya was fourth. Also, should it state "but he would not pass him until four laps later"?
"On lap 380, Johnson was 2.5 seconds behind Hamlin, in third. With twenty laps remaining, Hamlin had a lead of 1.2 seconds over Kyle Busch." These two sentences are confusing, as the first states Hamlin was second or third, yet the latter states he was first. I am guessing you meant a different driver for the first part?
"Denny Hamlin crossed the line to win the race" Should just state the driver's surname.

Done everything except the first one. The lap-by-lap source doesn't explain too much so it may be a bit difficult to do. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tried my best but could find much on Jenkins or Seymour. Watts is a Lieutenant General, so I added that bit in. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Post race comments

Since this section also details the new standings, this section should be known simply as "post-race".
Should Hamlin's statement be detailed ahead of Kyle Busch's, especially since the section first details him celebrating in victory lane. This change in my opinion would make the flow of the article better.
"In the Manufacturers' Championship, Chevrolet maintained their lead with 188 points. Toyota remained second with 159 points. I would mention the fact that Toyota cut the lead by three points.

Done --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Results

I suggest making the Qualifying and Manufacturers' Championship standings sortable tables, like the other two.
Perhaps a footnote stating that Terry Labonte replaced Mike Bliss would be useful.

Done --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Used Checklinks, which stated that there was no problem with any of the references listed. I will provide a more in-depth analysis later.
In reference four, Fox Sports should be linked, as well as Turner Sports Interactive for reference five.

Done --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A decent article overall. On hold for seven days. Good888 (talk) 15:34, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Good888: Thank you. Just got back from a long weekend. Will take a look as soon as I can, but my real-life work comes first. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Good888: Done everything to the best of my ability. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely work. Passing. Good888 (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]