Talk:2016 Gent–Wevelgem

2016 Gent–Wevelgem 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: May 22, 2016. (Reviewed version).

Cycling Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling 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.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belgium Low‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2016 Gent–Wevelgem/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 10:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:27, 2 May 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:

Also just some minor aspects here:

Pre-race favourites: Just calling Boasson Hagen "champion" is confusing, since it doesn't make it clear champion of what he is or was. I would prefer "Boasson Hagen, who had won the 2009 edition of the race". Thereby, the reader does not need to follow any wikilink to find out what is behind it. Also, I would rather call Paolini "winner", not "champion" of 2015, since the race is not a championship.

Other than that, I have actually nothing that needs changing. Thank you for a very good article! I was especially happy to see that you managed to include Demoitié's death in a very respectful fashion. Very good work! On hold for just those two little things mentioned above. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:53, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both are done. Wizardman 14:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Now GA. Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]