Talk:2011 Subway Fresh Fit 500/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 12:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Hi,[reply]

I will start this review shortly. Looks good! MathewTownsend (talk) 12:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Just a few questions about the prose.

  • Race
  • "Three laps later, Newman overtook the lead after passing Newman," - must be a typo
  • "and Kenseth became the leader. After the green flag pit stops concluded, Johnson continued to be the leader," - is something left out here?
    • Are you thinking of the pit stops are left out? -- Nascar1996(TalkContribs) 02:20, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • But when did Johnson become the leader, if after the pit stops concluded, Johnson continued to be the leader? What am I missing. MathewTownsend (talk) 02:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • He was the leader, then while making his pit stop he lost the lead to Kenseth, then when everyone else pitted he got the lead back. -- Nascar1996(TalkContribs) 03:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-race
  • Although Kyle Busch was leading the race near the end, Gordon passed him with nine laps left - why is this in the "Post-race" as it sounds like it happened during the race?
    • I placed this here because it gives the reader some knowledge of how the race finished without reading the race summary section. -- Nascar1996(TalkContribs) 02:20, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everything else looks good. I did a little copy editing and disambiged a couple of links.[1] Please feel free to change any mistakes.

MathewTownsend (talk) 01:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 13:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]