Talk:1907 Tour de France/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 11:28, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   ...fell and had his steer penetrating his knee... What is this supposed to mean?

   During stage 9 After the tenth stage, Consistency. "Render numbers greater than nine as figures or, with consistency within each article, render numbers over nine that take two words or fewer to say as words" WP:MOS

   The Alcyon team, with Trousselier as best placed cyclist, was not satisfied with the fine given to Georget, and left the Tour in protest Rephrase for better grammar and style.

   the organisers decided to Georget back from the fourth place of the ninth stage to the 48th and last place, This is almost gibberish!

   The lead so transferred to Lucien Petit-Breton Very poor prose.

   Petit-Breton finished the next stages all in the top three, so his lead never became in danger any more.

   OK, enough. As stated in a previous review, GA review is not a substitute for peer review. Please copy-edit, get it peer reviewed and make sure that the article meets the GA criteria before nominating.

   I did make some minor copy-edits.[1]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   As in the previous years, there were two classes of cyclists, the coureurs de vitesse' "poinçonnée category" is explained, but we need an explanation for "coureurs de vitesse".

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This article clearly fails to meet the GA criterion of reasonably well written. Not listed. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)