Talk:2000 British Grand Prix

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 05:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Article development

A small project is being undertaken to expand this article into something more suited to the subject. I shall be adding new material and expand or replace some of the existing material. The project may take a few weeks depending on the progress of development and I would like anyone's feedback and those who have useful information of sources that could be used in this article. Z105space (Talk to me!) 21:22, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2000 British Grand Prix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150213161017/http://www.crash.net/f1/2000/championship/content.html to http://www.crash.net/f1/2000/championship/content.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2000 British Grand Prix/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: EnthusiastWorld37 (talk · contribs) 07:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Mertbiol (talk · contribs) 13:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I will take on this review. I have some queries about some of the prose and a few of the sources, but generally the article is in good shape. Mertbiol (talk) 13:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Lead section

• First paragraph, first sentence: The formal name (LIII Foster's British Grand Prix) is not mentioned in the main body of the article.
• First paragraph, first sentence: Since the number of spectators is so imprecise, I suggest deleting "before between 60,000 and 140,000 spectators".
• Second paragraph, fourth sentence: Should "hydraulic issue" be "hydraulics issue" and can you link to hydraulics?
• Second paragraph, final sentence: This is a long sentence (50 words). I suggest deleting "Michael Schumacher and later Jordan's Heinz-Harald Frentzen led the next five laps before" and starting the sentence with "Five laps later, Coulthard retook the lead..."

Background

• Second paragraph, final sentence: Please move the comma before "respectively" to after it.
• Third paragraph, first sentence: Reference [7] (Formula One Update – 14 April 2000) does not mention the San Marino Grand Prix.
• Third paragraph, first sentence: Reference [7] (Formula One Update – 14 April 2000) does not give the dates for the testing period. I suggest you add reference [8] (Atlas F1 news service), which does mention the start of testing on 11 April and [1] which gives 14 April as the final day of testing.
• Third paragraph, second sentence: Please rephrase to: "There was occasional rain during the period, making the track slippery."
• Third paragraph, second sentence: Reference [7] (Formula One Update – 14 April 2000) does not say that the track was slippery. I suggest you also add reference [8] (Atlas F1 news service), which mentions intermittent rain.
• Third paragraph, seventh sentence: Reference [12] (BAR explain Zonta Crash) is redirecting to the motorport homepage, so please remove |url-status= live.

 Not done

• Third paragraph, eighth sentence: Reference [13] (Autosport) is dated 13 April 2000 and refers to the penultimate day of testing. I suggest you add [2] which gives 14 April as the final day of testing.
• Third paragraph, final sentence: It is not clear what relevance Luca Badoer's work at Fiorano and Vairano has to the British Grand Prix.

 Not done If there is no direct relevance, I suggest deleting these sentences

• Fifth paragraph, third sentence: Reference [24] (The Independent) does not appear to mention the Belgian tobacco advertising laws.
• Fifth paragraph, final sentence: Reference [28] (Bernie don't blame me for the weather) is redirecting to the motorport homepage, so please remove |url-status= live.
• Sixth paragraph, fourth sentence: Should "lower the risk of drivers entering and leaving the pit lane" be "lower the risk of drivers being distracted while entering and leaving the pit lane" per reference [30] (Alan Baldwin)?
• Final paragraph, first sentence: Reference [31] (Bigger tyre-walls) is redirecting to the motorport homepage, so please remove |url-status= live.
• Final paragraph, second sentence: Please change "to try and stop cars from going airborne" to "to prevent cars becoming airborne."

Practice

• Second paragraph, final sentence: Reference [45] (Frentzen fastest) says ""The stewards decided to cut the session short rather than extend it to the full one hour" which has a different meaning to "The stewards decided to end the session one hour earlier than planned".
• Third paragraph, final sentence: I am not sure of the relevance of Ron Dennis not criticizing Silverstone for the weather. I suggest deleting the second half of this sentence.
• Fourth paragraph, fourth sentence: Should "Club Corner" have a small "c" for "Corner"?

 Not done

• Final paragraph, final sentence: I suggest changing "causing flames to emerge from the Prost car's rear on the way to pit lane after 25 minutes" to "causing flames to emerge from the rear of his car on the way to the pit lane after 25 minutes of the session."

Qualifying

• First paragraph, final sentence: Please clarify what is meant by "to avoid being hampered" - presumably this would be by slower cars already on the circuit. Can you provide more detail on the "driver error" did Ralf Schumacher make?

Race

• First paragraph: Please start this paragraph by giving the date of the race and the number of laps. It might be sensible to restate the formal name of the race (LIII Foster's British Grand Prix) here.
• First paragraph, sixth sentence: Please delete "had" from "This forced Michael Schumacher had to slow".
• First paragraph, eighth sentence: Should "Maggots Corner" have a small "c" for "Corner"?

Post-race

• First paragraph, third sentence: Reference [98] (Coulthard – the best is yet to come) is redirecting to the motorport homepage, so please remove |url-status= live.

Sources

• In addition to the sources discussed above, I have checked and found no problems with: [9], [10], [11], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [26], [27], [29], [30], [32], [33], [35], [38], [46], [47], [48], [49], [51], [52], [68], [69], [71], [77], [99], [100].

Stopping here for now

That's all for the first pass through the article. Over to you @EnthusiastWorld37: Best wishes, Mertbiol (talk) 13:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• @Mertbiol: Changes to the article have been made based on the above issues. What else will need to be addressed? EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 18:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

@EnthusiastWorld37: A few points not addressed, which I have marked with  Not done. I will read the article through again and will give you any further feedback tomorrow evening. Mertbiol (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Testing by Luca Badoer

There appear to have been three distinct tests in Italy in the weeks before the British Grand Prix:

• 11–12 April at Fiorano – reference [15] says this was for "testing of new components"; reference [14] does not give a purpose. There is no indication that the new components were intended for use at the British Grand Prix. Therefore the mention of this testing should be removed from the article.
• 13–14 April at Vairano – references [16] and [17] agree that this was for aerodynamic testing. Neither reference links this testing with the British Grand Prix. Therefore the mention of this testing should be removed from the article.
• 15 April at Fiorano – not currently mentioned in the article. Reference [16] (Testing April 14th: Vairano day 2) says "Ferrari returns to Fiorano, tomorrow (Saturday) for the shake-down of the three F1-2000s to be used at the British Grand Prix on Easter Sunday." This is the only mention of a direct connection between the testing in Italy and the British Grand Prix.

Please therefore replace "Luca Badoer, Ferrari's test driver, conducted a two-day car development programme... as extra preparation for Ferrari" with "Shakedown testing of the F1-2000swas undertaken by Ferrari on 15 April at Fiorano Circuit in preparation for the British Grand Prix.^[16]"
@EnthusiastWorld37: Mertbiol (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

• @Mertbiol: Made the changes. Anything else? EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 17:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Final verdict

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Promoting to GA status Mertbiol (talk) 18:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)