Talk:Gent–Wevelgem

Cycling High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belgium Low‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removed the reference to the Monteberg as it is not a key point in the race and the race actually contains 4 total climbs. Also, KM reference points are misleading as the exact route varies year to year.

spelling

gent should be changed to ghent in the title-want me to move it to the correct page? Teh tennisman 01:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correct spelling

Gent is the correct Flemish spelling. As this is a Flemish race, held entirely in West and East Flanders, the spelling should be "Gent-Wevelgem"

(...and don't get me started on "Mur de Grammont" for the Muur of Geraardsbergen) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.7.33.192 (talk) 04:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Poor grammar and no citations

The "History" section is very poorly written with innumerable grammatical errors. Additionally, there are no citations for any of the content. Where is this information coming from? The "Route History" section is better but is essentially the same as the "History" section in terms of content. This section also contains no citations.

To be honest, I think this whole article is a disaster, both grammatically and in terms of content. The entire article is basically a translation from the official website of Gent-Wevelgem (in Dutch), although I'm guessing it was run through a web translator. Nonetheless, the website is refreshingly elaborate and has accurate information. I will work on it. Dr.robin (talk) 02:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Course changes

I worked hard on the article, fully re-wrote and sourced the History section and created a Route section. However, the section on route history remains bothersome. I renamed it Course changes and deleted some content that was aforementioned, but it is written in very poor grammar and completely unsourced. What's more, I doubt the purpose of such a detailed description of course changes. Classic races like Gent–Wevelgem change practically every year, there is no beginning to mentioning every one of them. Therefore I propose it is deleted altogether. Unless someone is willing to write a coherent and sourced part? Dr.robin (talk) 01:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]