Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1995 European Grand Prix/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 00:28, 14 June 2009 [1].

1995 European Grand Prix[edit]

Nominator(s): D.M.N. (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article as I feel the article matches the current FA-criterion. Although the article recently failed a GA-nomination (due to misunderstandings between me and the reviewer), I have improved the article further based on peer review comments by Apterygial (talk · contribs). I believe the article meets the sources and images criterion within the FA-criteria. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. (Bet you never thought you'd see THAT right off the bat for a autoracing FAC!) Ealdgyth - Talk 12:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's the hard bit out of the way! ;) D.M.N. (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments – First off, I'm surprised to see an article that recently failed GAN make such a quick appearance at FAC. I don't see what's wrong with the photos (free images from a 1995 race are unlikely at best now), but I do think the lead should be beefed up as the reviewer suggested to ensure that it covers the entire article. The issue concerning coverage of the track selection seems to have been mostly addressed, although I'm interested to know where the event was held in 1994. Please check that the references use things such as en dashes for page ranges (ref 44) and italics for printed publications (Autosport; with the work parameter in use, they need to be forced). Will try to do a prose/MoS review later, but it looks like I'm about to be swamped for a while. Giants2008 (17-14) 01:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your comment Giants. I personally think that the lead is an OK size, it gives a brief summary of the article without going into excessive detail - if you go into excessive detail you may go into detail that is not really relevant to the lead as a whole. One of the comments in the GAN stated that bits in the Background/P&Q section should be in the lead, but I'm not sure what without repeating myself.
  • I'll try and put a bit about where the event was using reliable sources. Done the bit about ref 44, but "italics for printer publications" - the Autosport ones are from their website, so I don't understand what you're saying? D.M.N. (talk) 11:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Even if the articles come from a printed publication's website, the publishers should still be given in italics; at least that's how I've always seen it here. Giants2008 (17-14) 15:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • In which case there's a problem with the {{Cite web}} template which should automatically put the publishers in italics? See: Template:Cite_web#Examples. D.M.N. (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Normally the publication name would be put in the work parameter of the template, but here there's already something in it. Just leave the magazine name in the publisher parameter and add italics like you would anywhere else on the site. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Prose review:

  • "but was held up in lapped traffic with Schumacher overtaking him two laps before the end of the race." → "but was held up in lapped traffic and overtaken by Schumacher two laps before the end of the race." Better structure this way.
  • "Schumacher's win kept him at the top of the Drivers' Championship, 27 points ahead of Hill, the German only needing a further three points to secure the title." Awkward sentence to read. Consider splitting it.
  • Report: Schumacher is linked twice in three sentences here.
  • "However Meanwhile, Coulthard's prospective replacement".
  • Practice and qualifying: "of whom only Berger and Brundle had raced at Nurburgring in an Formula One car before". Should be "a Formula One car before".
  • "Both sessions on Friday and Saturday were rain interrupted, leading to not much action on the track." → "Both sessions on Friday and Saturday were interrupted by rain, which led to little action on the track."
  • "The former driver's crash was caused by a stuck throttle; the resulting damage to the car forcing him to switch to the team's spare monocoque." Either change the semi-colon to a comma or switch "forcing" to "forced".

I'll look at the race summary later. Giants2008 (17-14) 14:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) D.M.N. (talk) 15:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Before the race began, Coulthard on his reconnaissance lap out of the pit lane, spun off the track." Awkward sentence from start to finish.
  • I've removed "but of the pitlane" as the link explains that bit. D.M.N. (talk) 13:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "whilst" → "while" in second paragraph of Race. Look around for these elsewhere too.
  • "an incorrectly-pressured set of tyres...". No hyphen after -ly words.
  • I see both "repassed" and "re-passed" in this section. Pick one and stick to it.
  • Comma needed in the middle of "dropping to fourth behind Schumacher and Hill who passed him on laps 21 and 23 respectively." Giants2008 (17-14) 19:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As a result, he had had to pit to replace the damaged wing".
  • I don't really know what you're asking me to do here? =O D.M.N. (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "while driving round the track with his damaged car...". Is it all right to have "round" instead of "around"?
  • Around seems better - changed. D.M.N. (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with pundits feeling that he had not been 'forceful' enough in his battle with Schumacher." Another of these with + -ings that are in every FAC I look at. The real prose gurus here don't like these (no, I'm not one of them). Giants2008 (17-14) 21:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The GA fail should not be held against the article. Grand Prix articles make decent articles as they have a discrete and defined place and time, and a workable structure. This was another decent Grand Prix article, apart from the issues with the lead and coverage of the track selection. The fail was simply down to the issues not being dealt with. I see the issues are now being addressed, so the reasons for the GA fail are being dealt with. SilkTork *YES! 12:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, 1a. It is pretty good, but there are lots of oddities around that could easily be smoothed out by an uninvolved copyeditor. Strange preposition use, vague connectors, and so on. Suggest getting someone new to go through it looking for items such as these:
    • "Coulthard was fastest on a time of 1:38.378" I don't get the "on a time" construction.. how is someone on a time? Wouldn't it be more elegant to say "Coulthard had the fastest time of 1:38.378" or similar?
      • Changed. That's the only place with that phrase in the article. D.M.N. (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "A total of approximately 90,000 spectators attended the circuit on race day." What is "a total of" doing?
    • "Before the race began, Coulthard on his reconnaissance lap, spun off the track." This is quite ungainly and requires rewriting.
      • I've reworded it and merged it into the next sentence: "Coulthard was forced to use his spare car, a standard FW17 chassis, for the race itself after he spun off the track during his reconnaissance lap." - hope this is OK. D.M.N. (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "resulting in the start being aborted with a new start time of 14:05 CEST." Aborted with... no. Aborted in favor of, maybe. But simpler: "... resulting in the start being aborted. A new start time of 14:05 CEST was planned."
    • "Irvine also got past Hill, but was repassed by the Williams driver during the course of the first lap." Not sure "by the Williams driver" or even "the course of" are needed.
      • I've remove "the course of" but kept in "by the Williams driver" to make sure it is explicity clear. D.M.N. (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "due to an electronic failure on his Footwork car" Why on his car? Surely, in?
    • "The McLaren cars and the Ferrari of Berger slipped back in the early laps of the race, with both McLaren cars overtaken by the Pacific and Forti cars as they dropped down the order." The "with" connector is so clumsy and imprecise. Better: "while both McLaren cars were overtaken by the Pacific and Forti cars as they dropped down the order."
      • Not sure about that. "while" suggests to me that event A was happening at the same time as event B, whereas "with" is an extension of the opening point. D.M.N. (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These are just samples of article-wide problems at this time. --Laser brain (talk) 14:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments - I've fixed what you've noted above which hopefully is OK. I don't think there are too many problems with the article... D.M.N. (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/1995_European_Grand_Prix/archive1&oldid=1091467861"