Talk:2019 London Marathon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Joseph2302 (talk · contribs) 19:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be doing the review- makes sense since I got the 2020 London Marathon to GA. Will prepare some initial comments in the next couple of days. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): 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): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
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:

Lead

Looks fine to me

Course

Sources [1] & [2] are from 2017, is there a source to say that 2019 course was the same as 2017?
"The course begins at three separate points: the 'red start' in southern Greenwich Park on Charlton Way, the 'green start' in St John's Park, and the 'blue start' on Shooter's Hill Road." This contradicts [3], which says there are 4 starts: Red, Yellow, Green or Blue start. Also, can you add in what the significance of the different starts is?
"As the runners reach the 10 km mark (6.2-mile), they pass by the Old Royal Naval College"- this isn't in either of the sources (it's not marked on the map source)
"In the penultimate mile along The Embankment, the London Eye comes into view"- London Eye isn't mentioned in either of the sources
"before the athletes turn right onto Birdcage Walk to complete the final 352 m (385 yards)"- 352 m isn't mentioned in the sources
"catching the sights of Big Ben"- Big Ben not mentioned in the sources

I've re written the section. I'm not sure what the significance of the four starts is, but I'm guessing it's so that they can spread out 40,000 runners so it isn't so congested, but I can't find that in any sources. The sources I did find had very little information, which meant the section is quite brief, but I hope it suffices. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:04, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Field

The URL for source 8 ([4]) contains an extended URL that Google uses to highlight text in the source, can this be shortened to the normal URL [5]?

Done

Is there a reason that the Flying 400 prize money is in $, but the winner's prize money is in £? [6] has prize money for both in £, so would be more consistent to use one currency

Done

Race summary

"Rozario and McFadden finished over five minutes later in second and third, respecitvely."- should be respectively

Sorry, not quite sure what you're saying? Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 19:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling mistake- respecitvely should be respectively. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:41, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Source 23 ([7]) - title shouldn't be all capital letters in the citation

Done

Results

Sources for the result should be with the results, rather than underneath the references section

Done I'm not sure if I've put them in the right place, but at least they're now in the body not at the bottom.

Why are all competitors listed for the elite events, but only top 10 for the wheelchair events? Seems inconsistent, and [8] has all the finisher for the wheelchair races

Done reduced to ten

Sorting by competitors doesn't work properly, as it's shorting by first name, rather than last name. Needs to use Template:Sortname.

Done

Overall, a few things that need to be worked on, so putting this GA nomination on hold so that they can be fixed or discussed. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302: thanks for these comments. I felt like the 'course' section was sub standard when I copied it from 2017 London Marathon and I considered re writing it, but I wanted to hear what the reviewer would say. Seeing as you agree, I'll make big changes to it and should be finished tomorrow. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302: just to let you know, I've addressed the issues you have raised and I hope the article is up to standard now. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Willbb234 Apologies for the delay, I thought I had responded to this already. Course section looks a lot better, and everything else seems to have been fixed too. Happy to promote this to GA. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302: thanks very much for your review. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 18:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]