Talk:2015 Gent–Wevelgem/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 12:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to do it! Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:59, 27 October 2015 (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:

Made some minor changes. Other than that:

The source for the result is formatted differently than with other races, so you should change it do create consistency.
Also, it would be nice to read some reactions from riders about the result and the conditions.

That's about all that I can think of. Good job once more! :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 20:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits. I've made Ypres/Ieper consistent: I don't much care which we use as long as it's consistent. I've added a rider reaction section. I haven't changed the citations style: per comments at WT:CYCLING I've changed to putting the citations with a <ref>...</ref> and I'm going to make the other ones consistent at some point in the near future. I hope that's OK for now! Many thanks again, ZN. Relentlessly (talk) 22:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, a very good post-race section! :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]