Jump to content

Talk:2012 Bojangles' Southern 500

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article2012 Bojangles' Southern 500 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 22, 2020Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 15, 2020.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that after logging their 199th win, Hendrick Motorsports had to wait for seven months and sixteen races before they won their 200th NASCAR Cup Series, with Jimmie Johnson at the wheel?
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2012 Bojangles' Southern 500. 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: 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) 18:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2012 Bojangles' Southern 500/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: HawkAussie (talk · contribs) 03:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Will be picking this one up and hopefully I can able to review this.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. 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:
  2. 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:
  3. 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):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. 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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Lead

[edit]

Background

[edit]

Practice and qualifying

[edit]

Race

[edit]

Post-race

[edit]

References

[edit]

Final comments

[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk05:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

A more complete review is needed as not all of the DYK criteria have been checked. Simply saying "good to go" without additional context is insufficient for reviewing purposes. Courtesy ping @Miller17CU94:. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • - Per request and review. The article was created less than a week ago, contains 51k characters. The sourcing is adequate, neutral, and avoids plagarism. The hook is cited, interesting, and short enough to meet the required criteria. Chris (talk) 22:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]