Talk:2015 Critérium du Dauphiné/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 13:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On it! Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BaldBoris Sorry that this is taking so long. You should have my review by wednesday! Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Once again, I am very sorry for the delay. Real life can be a bitch. I reviewed the printed version days ago but I just did not find the time to type down the review. Again, I have made several minor changes myself, so that you don't need to worry about them, which leaves very little left to do.

Stage 6: In the second paragraph, there is a statement that seems to make a causal implication that I would doubt. That is that Nibali's attack is a result of Martin's before. A more neutral way of putting it would be to say that he followed up on that attack. The second thing is the last sentence you write with Nibali briefly escaping on the subsequent. On the subsequent descend? Or climb? Please specify.

Done

Stage 7: You write of a breakaway of thirteen-five riders. I would guess you mean thirty-five, but then the increase to twenty-five makes no sense.

Done I had put increase instead of decreased.

Stage 8: You should rephrase the part Only race leader Tejay van Garderen could follow this move, but he could not match Froome because it seems to contradict itself.

Done I removed race leader to avoid confusion.

That was actually not what I meant :D I made a slight change myself.

Classifications: I added a ^{[citation needed]} template to the first paragraph. It will probably be as simple as pasting the same reference here as with the other paragraphs in the section.

Done

Team classification: Was the leading team marked in any way, like yellow bib numbers?

There's nothing in the regulations or here and can't see anything from photos or the videos.

References: I am a little concerned over possible future link rot for the pages coming from the race's official website. Knowing these types of sites, they might just overwrite them once the route for the next race is presented, so I would recommend to at least archive all of those references in order to prevent that from happening.

They are already future-proofed as URLs use /2015/us/.., so this won't happen. I'm a stickler for this.

That is all from me. As usual, very good job! :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 22:17, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries about taking your time Zwerg Nase. Thanks for doing the minor fixings and a another great review. Bald Boris 14:14, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! Another worthy GA :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]