Talk:2016 Tour de France

Layout Final standings

Hi, I propose the following layout →my edit. For the Discussion see → Talk:2015 Tour de France#Layout Final standings. --W like wiki (talk) 19:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2016 Tour de France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Yellow Dingo (talk · contribs) 05:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll review this in the next day couple of days. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 05:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Review

Overview

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Detailed

1a

Lead & Infobox

• There is a bit of overlinking in the infobox with Tinkoff linked three times in close proximity to each other

This is fine for infoboxes and tables, see FAs 2015 Vuelta a España and 1987 Giro d'Italia. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Agreed — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:38, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• "in the stage 18's mountain time trial." → *"in stage 18's mountain time trial."
• "; despite crashing in the rain," → be consistent with the grammar in this phrase either use semi-colans or commas
• "second place overall; despite crashing in the rain, Froome was able" → "second place overall and; despite crashing in the rain, Froome was able"

Teams

"33 riders were competing in their first Tour de France." - Per WP:NUMNOTES (Avoid beginning a sentence with figures) you should reword this sentence so it doesn't start with "33" "2010 → the 2010 race (per WP:EASTEREGG (Keep piped links as transparent as possible. Do not use piped links to create "Easter egg" links, that require the reader to open them before understanding what's going on.))

I thinks it's fine if the year is explained in the sentence. Also done in those two FAs. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok fair enough. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

"the youngest rider was" → "the youngest rider in the race was" "Lampre–Merida was the youngest team and Lotto–Soudal the oldest" → this sentence could be misinterpreted. I assume your saying that Lampre–Merida had the youngest average age and Lotto–Soudal had the oldest average age. However, it could be interpreted that Lampre–Merida is the youngest team by the age the team has existed (lets say every other team was formed in the 1990s but LM was formed in 2004 so, therefore, was the youngest)

Pre-race favourites

• "one Grand Tour, amassing" → "one Grand Tour previously, amassing"
• "amassing a total of twenty podiums" → "amassing a total of twenty podiums between them"
• "2013 and 2015 winner Froome had shown his form during the season with overall victories" - This sentence fails both WP:NUMNOTES (Avoid beginning a sentence with figures) and WP:EASTEREGG (Keep piped links as transparent as possible. Do not use piped links to create "Easter egg" links, that require the reader to open them before understanding what's going on.) I would reword to something along the lines of: "Froome, who won both the 2013 race and the 2015 race, had shown his form during the season with overall victories"

See #Teams BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Fine. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• "had won the Volta a Catalunya, Tour de Romandie, and the Route du Sud" → "had won the Volta a Catalunya, Tour de Romandie, and the Route du Sud in the lead up to the Tour de France" (or something similar)
• Note: if your wondering why I haven't pulled you up on WP:EASTEREGG for ",winner in 2007 and 2009,"; it is because I don't think there is any way to reword it without making it clunky (although feel free to make some changes if you can think of a solution)

See #Teams

Fine. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Route and stages

• "On 24 November 2014, ASO announced that for time the first time in Tour history the department of Manche would host the 2015 edition's Grand Départ (the Tour's opening stages)" - Why should it matter where the depart was in 2015?
• "Grand Départ (the Tour's opening stages)" → "Grand Départ (each Tour's opening stage)"

It can be the opening stage or stages so I've rephrased it. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok good. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• Link monastery

I left this unlinked on purpose because in a already heavily link section I didn't think someone reading a cycling article needs to have a link to a pretty common word. Also, the island is linked so that'd be their first choice and then they can get monastery from there. BaldBoris 16:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah fair enough. The reason I mentioned it was because when I read it I had to check what it meant. I take your point on the link density in the section and I agree. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• "and, after a series of small climbs reached" → "and, after a series of small climbs, reached"
• "reached the finish in" → "finished in"
• Note: "after the 1964, 1993, 1997 and 2009 editions" is similar to by above note
• "and stage start" → it would be good to mention which stage
• "than last year's" → "than the previous year's*
• "three stages, 11 to 15" - maths doesn't add up
• "The second rest day after stage 15 took place in Bern" → "The second rest day took place in Bern after stage 15"

Race overview

• "came fifth to further his lead" → "came fifth and extended his lead"
• "the one kilometer to go arch it collapsed on top him injuring him" → "the one kilometer to go arch it collapsed on top of, and injured, him"
• "the Andorra Arcalis ski station" - link to Vallnord
• "On stage eleven Sagan" → "On stage eleven, Sagan"
• "and held it to six at the finish" - what does this sentence mean; please clarify in article
• "lead of mountains" → "lead of the mountains"
• "classification[34][35]" → "classification.[34][35]"
• "stage stage fifteen" → "stage fifteen"
• "from a sprint" → "after a sprint"
• "In next next" → "In the next"
• "3' 52"" - probably should be changed to "three minutes and 52 seconds"
• "climb of at the head" - doesn't make sense
• "Romain Bardet attacked and after a series of crashes that included Froome and Mollema" - sentence is unfinished, or at least reads like it is.
• Note: Similar again with "Miguel Indurain in 1995"

Classification leadership

• "The climbs were categorised as either hors catégorie (English: beyond category), first, second, third, or fourth-category, with more points available for the harder-categorised climbs." - mention that difficulty goes up in reverse numerical order (i.e. cat 1s are harder than cat 2s)
• "At the conclusion of the Tour, Peter Sagan won the overall super-combativity award" - awarded for what (the most combative overall - decided by jury))
• "given to the rider that ascended the Côte de Domancy on stage eighteen" - surely all riders would of descended CdD? Clarify.)

It's defiantly going up, see last sentence here. I've rephrased it. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah yes sorry that was a typo. My point was that "the rider that ascended" must be wrong as all riders would of ascended it. I assumed you meant the first rider to. But I see you've written that is awarded to the fasters rider to climb the mountain. I now realise that is because the stage was a ITT. Its good now. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

• "Henri Desgrange, and Richie Porte" - earlier on you didn't use the serial comma; please keep it consistent))

UCI rankings

• "from the both" → "from both the"

2a

All ref numbers are taken from this revision

*FNs 5, 9, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, and 54: De-link Cyclingnews.com and Immediate Media Company, as both are already linked in FN 3, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article). There is no need to link the links 22 times in one reference section.

• FNs 6, 8, 11, 28, 35, 38 and 58: De-link Cycling Weekly and Time Inc. UK, as both are already linked in FN 4, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article). There is no need to link the links eight times in one reference section.
• FN 13, 16, 18 and 23 as well as S 1: De-link Tour de France and Amaury Sport Organisation, as both are already linked in FN 1, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article). There is no need to link the links six times in one reference section.
• FN 17, 19 and 37: De-link BBC Sport and BBC, as both are already linked in FN 15, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article). There is no need to link the links four times in one reference section.
• FN 55: De-link Eurosport and Discovery Communications, as both are already linked in FN 44, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article).
• FN 60, 61, 62, 63 and 64: De-link Union Cycliste Internationale, as it is already linked in FN 2, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article). There is no need to link the link six times in one reference section.
• S 1: De-link Tour de France, as it is already linked in FN 1, per WP:OVERLINK (Generally, a link should appear only once in an article).

As I explained quite thoroughly in the teams FAC, the OLINK is for prose (.."but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead."). The comment by Cheetah actually referred to the consistency of either linking all or only linking the first. Sorry if this confused you and had to do all this. If this is just what you prefer, then you shouldn't bring it up in a review. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

No it wasn't due to Cheetah's comments at the FLC. Only linking once per reference section is what I've been told at basically every peer review process I have been through (FLC, GAN, DYK) and I have never had a user not remove the links if asked by me in a review. I don't preference either and am happy with your explanation, although if you were to take this to FAC I wouldn't be surprised if it got pulled up. But this is GAN, so I'm Ok with the current status of the links. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:57, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

2015 Vuelta a España is a recent FA that has all linked. As there's no rule saying you should do either you shouldn't tell people to do it. BaldBoris 23:54, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

6a

• I have a few questions about the infobox image. It has text in the corners which is distorted and the whole image looks slightly blurry. Compare it to the image in 2015 Tour de France. The 2015 is a lot more clear and informative. Are there any images for 2016 that are similar to 2015 out there? If so you should replace the current image.

I made the 2015 one, but didn't for this as Andrei loas made his first. BaldBoris 17:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

You could always make a different map and upload it as well. If it was the same quality as your 2015 then we would use yours and delete the other. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:58, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

I plan to make one in the near future. This should have no bearing on GA status? BaldBoris 00:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Overall comments

Ok, nice article overall but it just has a few issues that shouldn't be to hard to fix. I'm putting this on hold. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 09:22, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Very thorough review there. I've done all copy-editing and replied to the others. BaldBoris 16:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@BaldBoris: I have struck all my points, leaving a few replies along the way, except the image one which I replied to at #6a. — Yellow Dingo (talk) 04:59, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@BaldBoris: Thanks for the explanations. I am satisfied this article meets the criteria and so I am passing this GAN. Congratulations. And it is good to see TDF articles becoming good/featured. Again congrats, — Yellow Dingo (talk) 05:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)