Talk:Holden Commodore (VE)/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: 750h+ (talk · contribs) 13:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Averageuntitleduser (talk · contribs) 04:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Howdy! I hope to have comments out in a few days. Averageuntitleduser (talk) 04:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Averageuntitleduser: ? 750h+ 15:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

@750h+: Apologies, been having a busy week. I've made some progress on the review though, and I have all of today and this weekend to prioritize it! It is on track to be done today or tomorrow. Thanks for sticking with me! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Well-written

• In the seven years of development — suggest "During its seven years of development" or "Across its seven..."
• Link "chassis" and "Opel".
• which would also serve as the basis for several upcoming GM vehicles. — perhaps: "which also served as the basis for several later GM vehicles".
• Mooney advocated for a reduction of panel gaps by an 0.5 millimetres (0.020 in) over previous targets. — remove "an".
• comprising its headlights, bumpers, airbag sensors and other accessory components. — perhaps: "comprising its accessory components such as headlights, bumpers and airbag sensors".
• "This production method", "This process", "This modular construction", and "This production technique" all seem to refer to the same idea. Of course, you don't have to use one phrase exclusively, but I suggest consolidating how you refer to the production method. Also, would it be possible to vary the starts of one or two of these sentences?
• applied to the interior where fundamentally — add comma after "interior".
• creating radically varied interior look and feel without much higher costs. — "look and feel" seems slightly redundant. Suggest: "creating radically varied interiors without much higher costs."
• Up to 90 per cent of VZ wagons were bought by fleet companies and Holden desired to attract more retail customers and the decision was made to develop a lower, sportier wagon as an alternative to SUVs. — add comma after "companies". Also suggest: "...customers; they decided to develop a lower, sportier wagon".
• the coupe utility version version — you know what to do.
• In July 2006, Holden claimed that the VE featured one of the best body structures globally. An extensive series of assessments, comprising over 5,000 simulated tests and 79 live barrier tests, led to Holden announcing that the Commodore had one of the best body structures globally. — these two sentences state some of the same information. Suggest for the second sentence: "They cited an extensive series of assessments..."
• any issues or faults — one of these can be removed.

Round 2:

• first introduced on the VL — Suggest: "in the VL"
• due to the possibility that the bi-fuel Commodores may have been fitted with undersized O-rings in the service valve hand tap — surround with commas.
• It would be worth listing the recalls in chronological order.
• Nevertheless, the reduced fuel consumption does however, signify a trade-off — Suggest: "Nevertheless, the reduced fuel consumption signifies..."
• "Launched in", "Debuting in", "Released on", "Available from", "Unveiled on". Revise for WP:ELEVAR.
• A broad complaint, but I feel the article could be clearer on what the sedan, Sportwagon, and Ute are, as well as how they relate to the car models. I gather that the sedan, Sportwagon, and Ute are first and foremost car body types. But the article only refers to them as body types once, and sometimes refers to them as "models", "versions", and "variants", which can become confusing when discussing the models (e.g. the Omega, SV6, and VE SS) later on. Would it be possible to adjust some terminology in this way? I think it might also help to state early in each of the models's subsections which body types they were available as, if the sourcing is available; e.g. the Omega, SV6, and VE SS were available as all three, and the Berlina and Calais were available as all but the Ute. Admittedly, I know very little about car manufacturing and am interested to hear your thoughts on this.
• Remove the extra equal sign in the references section header.
• I note that, if you want to improve the article further, there is a lot of overlap between the "Model year changes" and "Powertrains" sections, and that the "(see above)" links are a bit unconventional. My first instinct is to reorder the two sections somehow to let the "Powertrains" section go into further detail, but I am not sure. And I will not hold up the review for this; there isn't much precedent for how to layout this information, and the article already does well enough.

Verifiable with no original research

Sources are consistently of high quality. Many regional and local newspapers or automotive magazines. GoAuto is used often, and its articles and authors give a good impression.

Spot-check

• Fallah, Alborz (3 August 2006). "Holden VE Ute and Wagon". Drive. Fairfax Media. Retrieved 29 August 2024.
  • Looks good. Y
• Hagon, Toby (17 July 2006). "Inside the VE Commodore". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 30 August 2024.
  • Looks good. Y
• Hinchliffe, Mark (1 September 2007). "Ute earned a place in our history". The Courier-Mail.
  • Looks good. Y
• Newton, Bruce (20 September 2006). "Holden Calais V V8". Drive. Fairfax Media. Archived from the original on 22 July 2011. Retrieved 12 January 2007.
  • AFM looks good, but where's the 10 kW coming from?
• Fallah, Alborz (19 October 2006). "Holden Dual Fuel now in VE range LPG". Drive. Fairfax Media. Retrieved 1 September 2024.
  • Looks good, but where's the valve seat bit?
• Dowling, Joshua (11 September 2010). "Pontiac GXP lives on as Holden Redline". Carsales. Retrieved 28 October 2024.
  • Looks good alongside the other reference. Y
• "Holden reinvents the (spare) wheel". Carsales. 20 January 2009. Retrieved 21 January 2009.
  • Looks good. Y
• "Smaller cars power ahead". CarsGuide. 9 February 2007. Archived from the original on 21 July 2011. Retrieved 22 January 2008.
  • Looks good alongside the other references. Y

Broad in its coverage

No issues here.

Neutral

After reading through the article, I find no major issues. Particularly, criticism of certain design decisions seem to be given due weight.

Stable

No recent edit wars or content disputes.

Illustrated

Illustrated plentifully. All images are public domain or Creative Commons and add to the reader's understanding.

Summary

@750h+: Impressive work on the article. There is a lot of content to manage, and it reads quite smoothly. I've listed prose suggestions for the first few sections. I now only need to read "Powertrains", "Models", and "Model year changes" (the last two sections read well). Many suggestions are copyedits so far, but I am still gathering thoughts on the overall layout. Very sorry that comments are taking this long; it is on me. Averageuntitleduser (talk) 05:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! Will address soon. I do give full credit for the article to OSX, who brought this article to FA status in 2007 and had it there for 13 years until its delisting in 2020. (OSX left Wikipedia in 2016 following a dispute on Commons.) 750h+ 10:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

@Averageuntitleduser: i've addressed your first few concerns! 750h+ 08:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@750h+: Sounds good. I'm making progress and have time today to finish my comments! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 12:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@Averageuntitleduser: ? 750h+ 13:22, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@750h+: Alright, I've finished my last comments! I apologize being so untimely throughout this review, and for leaving you on edge for so long. You are right to call me out. Still, I really enjoyed reading this article, and your commitment to sourcing and technical detail is very evident. Lovely work renewing what OSX started! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 04:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Averageuntitleduser: all done. 750h+ 06:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)