Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 12 to Stage 21
|2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 12 to Stage 21 has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.|
|2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 12 to Stage 21 is part of the 2009 Giro d'Italia series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Leaders sharing "unheard of" in Stage 16
The claim came from the Universal Sports broadcast of the stage. I don't really care too much about the claim in the article, but I'm mostly just curious - does it actually happen with any frequency? I wouldn't have thought so. Nosleep break my slumber 00:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- It's already an old question, but when you asked it I didn't know what you were talking about, and I still don't know. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 08:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- As I wrote up the recap for Stage 16, I mentioned that the heat made it so riders all over the race shared drinks with one another, including in the lead, which was "unheard of" (the exact words of Universal Sports' Todd Gogolski, who is probably notable for an article if I ever get around to it). Severo removed the claim saying that it was unsourced and that it wasn't that unheard of. Nosleep break my slumber 05:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Failed GA comments
Below are the suggestions to improve the article submitted on September 7, 2009.
- For all prose in article, please list nationalities of all riders the first time they are mentioned.
- In first sentence of second paragraph of lead section, please define queen stage for the average reader.
- For all lengths, please include conversion of kilometer to mile, meter to foot, and kph to mph to non-metric users in the English Wikipeda.
- For Stage 12, please spell out ITT.
- For Stage 13, please spell out GC.
- For Stage 16, please create article to Monte Petrano. On the first sentence of the first paragraph starting with "This stage has all kinds of climbing,...". Would "This stage had a variety of climbing,..." be better? On the second sentence of the second paragraph, who were the other cyclists besides Menchov that were "called back", why were they called back, and who called them back? On the last paragraph, convert 35oC to oF for non-metric readers of the English Wikipedia.
- For Stage 17, on the second sentence of the first paragraph, define the "road conditions" that affected the route change.
- For See also, please move the template after the references and remove the section completely.
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?
- Pass - no issues.
3. Broad in coverage?
- Pass - no issues.
- Pass - no issues.
- Pass - no issues.
- The tour map image at the start of the article looks fuzzy. Also, what do the red and green line signify on the map?
- On the image in Stage 12, can you please spell out Armstrong's name and nationality in the image.
- On Stage 19's image, can you please spell out the full names of Facci and Krivstov, their nationalities, and the location of the image during the breakaway.
- Good article. Needs work, but the article is there once it is fixed.
- This review is transcluded from Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 12 to Stage 21/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
- GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- See notes below
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- 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.
General The structure could be changed a little. There is only content section: Stages. What is it distinguishing itself from? Why not just list each stage as their own section?
"Stage 12" "It was believed..." - switch this to an active voice
"...were all briefly the stage leader after they crossed the finish line." - I don't understand what that last phrase "after they crossed the finish line" means wrt the sentence. How could they become a stage leader after they finished? As the stage was an individual time trial, with each rider in the Giro racing the clock alone, different riders held the best time at different points in the day. After Bertolini's time, which had stood for a few hours, was beaten, several consecutive riders posted successively (but marginally) better times than the best time that had come before them. Boasson Hagen in particular was stage leader for about three minutes, as Visconti started just behind him and barely beat his time.
In the "Stage 12 Result" table, Di Luca has the pink jersey icon but in the other table Menchov has it. Is this correct? Yes. The stage results table shows who wore what jersey during the actual stage, but the intermediate GC table shows who was awarded what jersey during the podiums after that stage was run. Alt text on the jersey images explains this.
"Stage 14" "after 12 km (7.5 mi) in the saddle." - does "in the saddle" actually mean anything or can it be removed? are there riders not in the saddle? Common cycling parlance for distance spent racing. I'm not married to it, though.
"Stage 15" 1st paragraph - "This was...There were...there were...There was...This was...that was" - while the prose is clear (GA criteria 1a) here, can this repetition be broken up a little? I'll give it a shot.
"Pauwels wound up sitting up and leaving Bertagnolli" - can this be made more clear? is the 'wound up' necessary? No, it's not, and I'm a little embarrassed looking at the edit history and the multitude of times you (rightly) removed that phrase already. To sit up means to abandon a breakaway attempt and join the chasing group behind you. I'll edit to reflect that.
"Rest day" is empty. If there is nothing to say, then skip the sub-section. The article can be structured by stages, rather than days. To acknowledge a day when there was no stage, the first paragraph of Stage 17 can start "After a rest day on May 26, xxx....." Sounds good.
- "Stage 17"
"this stage was incredibly short." - these exaggerating adjectives are not necessary (same with "perfectly flat" and "tiny climb"). If it was the shortest, then just say that.
- "in the saddle" - again.
Can a more formal word (or more descriptive phrase) than "bonking" be used? I'll see. Bonking is similar to hitting the wall in running, if that helps.
"Stage 18" "It was thought..." - switch this to the active voice.
"Stage 19" "It was thought..." - switch this to the active voice. I feel very uncomfortable saying "Cyclingnews.com writer Anthony Tan thought" or whoever it was. I don't see that as an improvement. If there's some other way to do it, do tell, because I find explicitly naming a source in article prose very, very awkward. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 10:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC) An alternative to lose the passive voice could be "Di Luca managed to outsprint Menchov to the line and claim 8 bonus seconds to narrow his deficit to 18 but with only a flat stage and an individual time trial remaining the superior time trialist Menchov had the advantage." — this replaces the passive "It was thought..." with the active "he had...". --maclean (talk) 03:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
"Stage 21" "The man in pink had one last race against the clock to keep that coveted jersey on his shoulders." - try to keep a more formal tone (see WP:TONE). This sentence can be made much more useful by providing details (who had the pink jersey and how much of a lead did he have [or what did he have to do to secure the jersey for the ultimate win]?)
The article is well done. It is referenced and broad in scope. The writing could be improved; it consistently uses shorts phrases strung together. While this writing style will work much of the time, it sometimes becomes difficult to follow along. There is some informal language (see WP:TONE for an explanation on how/why to correct this). An over-use of the "was/were" verb leaves the text susceptible to a passive voice slipping in This is an example of how to switch from passive to active). maclean (talk) 00:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)