Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lewis Hamilton/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2019 [1].

Lewis Hamilton

Nominator(s): Formulaonewiki (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Formula One driver Lewis Hamilton, and I believe it meets the Featured article criteria and is a example of wikipedia's best work. Formulaonewiki (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brief comment

Although generally well-cited (500+) there are several paragraphs which end with uncited statements. See "2001–2005: Formula Renault and Formula Three"; "2006 season: GP2"; "2010 season: Another title challenge". Check for others. Brianboulton (talk) 16:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added all necessary citations for the uncited statements you highlighted (and removed one I could not find a source for). Let me know if there's any other you spotted. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External link checks:

Ref 177: is this the intended source page (title is different)?
Refs 268, 419 and 436 are dead links
Check 478: the details in the sources relate to the 2018 season, yet you are showing a retrieval date November 2014> Brianboulton (talk) 21:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced Ref 177, 268 and 419. I assume you meant 437 as 436 seemed fine to me, have removed that as was dead and not necessary. I'm not sure which ref you're referring to with 478, can you clarify and I'll fix it asap? Thanks. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reinstated two of the sources you replaced. Replacement wasn't in fact necessary as they were easily salvageable through the Web archive. I'm still working on the last one.T v x1 17:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up Tvx1, I hadn't considered that. Will do when fixing dead links in future. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I believe that we should not nominate articles on active drivers, especially ones battling for the title each season, as Featured Article candidates. This is because it creates problems with the stability criteria. An and article like this one still changes significantly over the months. We currently do not have any Featured Articles on active drivers and there is good reason for that.T v x1 17:15, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you, although I would say that the changes would not be significant. The main changes will only be to the results summaries at the bottom (which aren't contentious) and to the season summaries which - if updated like they were this season - are generally maintained well by a few regular editors (including myself), and the article is semi-protected which should hopefully reduce poorly sourced, though good faith, edits. The majority of the article will stay the same. Interested to see some more opinions though. --Formulaonewiki (talk) 17:57, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, suggest withdrawal: I think this article needs a lot of work, away from FAC, to meet the FA criteria. From a quick look, there are quite severe problems. These are samples only. Sarastro (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Length: The article is 12,922 words in [this] version. That is far, far too long for a driver who has only been around for 11 years. This needs to be cut back drastically, and a lot of the detail needs to be removed and summarised.
Part of this problem is to do with structure: we don't need a (long) section on every season, and we don't need to refer to so many individual race reports. It is better to summarise the season much more concisely, and this could be done by finding better sources: don't use race reports but use books/articles that give more of a summary of his career.
We have a list of print sources which are not used at all in the article. I think they need to be used, to be blunt.
The Sun is used as a source. I'm not sure this should be used as a source anywhere at all, but it is not a source of sufficiently high quality for a FA.
What makes driverdb.com a reliable source? It seems to be user generated.
"Hamilton is regarded as one of the most complete drivers on the grid. The all-time record holder for most pole positions, Hamilton is considered one of the fastest qualifiers in the history of the sport, and has received praise for his ability to produce fast laps at crucial moments" is sourced to qualifying report which only verifies that he has more poles than anyone.
The section on the Rosberg rivalry is too long. What about the Alonso rivalry? What about something on his relationship with teammates in general? I seem to remember he didn't get along with Jenson Button, but did with Kovalainen.
There don't appear to be any sources giving an overview of his career. For example, most sources I've seen suggest he is a better driver now than he was, that he was hot-headed when he was younger, that he thrived with the greater freedom given to him at Mercedes. None of this is even hinted in the article which focuses too much on individual seasons and races. There is a lot missing, for example the content of this article.
The Personal life section is too long and list-y and does not seem to have a coherent structure. And it's too much like trivia. No one is going to read this article to find out about his music or clothing line.
I'm something of a Hamilton fan myself, but he is incredibly unpopular with many F1 people. We don't, from a quick glance, seem to address this at all. We should mention how divisive he is and why.
And the elephant in the room is racism. His race is a big deal and we skirt over it slightly. We don't mention the racism he has encountered and which he has talked about a lot, for example when he first got into racing. And we can't just limit his experiences of racial abuse to 2008 in Spain. There have been other instances. How much of his unpopularity is because of his racism? That has been suggested before, in numerous places. It needs to be covered, we can't just ignore this if it's covered in sources. And I find it hard to believe that, for example, his autobiography doesn't cover it.

I could go on, but these are samples only and I think there is more work to do than can be done in this FAC. Therefore, I'm afraid I am opposing. Sarastro (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- Based on the comments above, there does appear to be plenty of scope for improvement to the article, which should take outside the FAC process, so I'll be archiving this shortly. Per FAC instructions, pls allow at least two weeks before re-nominating. After actioning outstanding comments, I'd recommend that we get some eyes on the article before bringing it back, either a formal Peer Review or by inviting the reviewers above to give it the once-over and discuss any concerns on the talk page. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.