Talk:Alain Prost/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 11:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Will fill in my comments later. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Zwerg Nase: Hi, just wondering if you've made any progress with the review? That's more than two months since it was started now. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Stevie fae Scotland: Sorry, real life has interfered massively. Had to start a new job, which took quite a lot of time. I would come back to the review shortly, but I would also understand if you'd open it up to others reviewers again. Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Zwerg Nase: No worries, these things happen. If you can get to it soon then go for it. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Zwerg Nase, in one week this review will have been open for four months. You have been active elsewhere on Wikipedia, but not here. Is there a reasonable chance you can start work within the week? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: Oh dear, I am terribly sorry, completely forgot about this. Thank you for the reminder! Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- Zwerg Nase, in one week this review will have been open for four months. You have been active elsewhere on Wikipedia, but not here. Is there a reasonable chance you can start work within the week? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Zwerg Nase: No worries, these things happen. If you can get to it soon then go for it. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Stevie fae Scotland: Sorry, real life has interfered massively. Had to start a new job, which took quite a lot of time. I would come back to the review shortly, but I would also understand if you'd open it up to others reviewers again. Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Review
[edit]Sources
[edit]- Right off the bat, I am having numerous problems with the sources:
- Several do not meet the requirements of WP:RS, such as "prostfan.com", "GPRacing.net192.com", "talkingaboutf1.com" (which is not even given in the citation) and "ecelebritymirror". These need to be replaced.
- The few books that are used should be grouped in a bibliography and the inline citations done with short footnotes such as Template:Sfn.
- A Youtube video is not a proper source either, neither are Instagram posts usually.
- ALL CAPITAL headers need to be resolved.
If the sourcing issues are addressed, I will do a more thorough review of the rest of the article, but if they are not, I will sadly have to fail this on ground of poor sourcing alone. Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:53, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
There has been some movement on the sources front, but still a lot of inproper sources present. Orignal nominator has also been inactive on Wikipedia for more than a month. I will therefore close the review for now. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)