Talk:2011 Japanese Grand Prix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee 2011 Japanese Grand Prix was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
December 30, 2011 Good article nominee Not listed
WikiProject Formula One (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Japan / Sport (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 05:10, May 25, 2015 (JST, Heisei 27) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Sport task force.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2011 Japanese Grand Prix/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) 00:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  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. Is it neutral?
    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:

There are some significant sourcing questions I have to point out here. Most of the race & qualifying, along with the last part of practice is unsourced. Now considering I don't know F1 standards for citations that well, I'd still highly suggest replying to this, because this questionable in my book. Next, that block quote is toooooooooooooooooooooooo looooooooooooooooooooooong. Way too much of a quote I mean Vettel's thoughts are important, but there has to be 20 sentences there. Technically Post Race in that context needs to be Post-race. Next: the citations: You've overlinked BBC Sport and BBC way too much. Usually one link is good enough in that situation. (Continue a check for all of these at that point). Plus you might want to add locations (optional) for the citations. I'd pass this article, but the citations and the mega block quote needed to be worked on first. Mitch32(Never support those who think in the box) 00:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to be fair and let the nominator have until December 27 in case he/she is busy for Christmas/Chanukkah/Kwanzaa/Festivus celebrations. However the article is not up to standards at the moment. Consider it a gift.Mitch32(Never support those who think in the box) 05:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
The grace period has come and gone, and not much improvement has been seen in citation usage. Therefore, I unfortunately have to fail the article. Mitch32(Never support those who think in the box) 00:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)