Talk:2010 Kobalt Tools 500 (Phoenix)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Bushranger (talk · contribs) 19:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

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

---

Overall nice work here. Just has a few quibbles that need working on.

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   Nice work here. Do have a few quibbles, however. To wit:

• "The standard track at Phoenix International Raceway is a four-turn short track oval that is 1 mile (1.6 km) long." - No mention of the dogleg?
  • How does "The back stretch, which has a dogleg shape instead of a straight..." work? -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "The back stretch had a 9 degree banking." - might be better as "has 9 degrees of..."
  •  Done -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "was eleventh and twelfth" - "were", not "was"
  •  Done -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "Edwards retained the pole position lead" - slightly awkward, perhaps "retained the lead from the pole position"?
  •  Done -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "collided into the wall" - appears several times but is also slightly awkward, would "...hit the wall in turn (#)" work?
  • Since it doesn't specify which turn it occurred in, I just substituted "collided" with other words in the other instances. -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "reclaimed the lead away from Hamlin" - shoud be either "took the lead away from..." or "reclaimed the lead from..." I think.
  •  Done -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• "caused him to fall to nineteenth on the grid" - sounds like the starting grid is being referenced. "...nineteenth in the field"?
  •  Done Removed "on the grid." -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• In the results tables, "Stewart-Haas Racing" should have the dash.
  •  Done -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 19:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Article is fully and factually referenced, with citations throughout and free of WP:OR. I do have a quibble with the citation style used though, as it may be unclear to some viewers. I'd suggest using the following for certain sites, with the format work=/publisher=: Rotoworld.com = Rotoworld/NBC Sports; NASCAR.Com = NASCAR.com/Turner Sports; Jayski.com = Jayski's Silly Season Site/ESPN; racing-reference.info = Racing=Reference/USA Today Sports Media Group; MotorRacingNetwork.com = Motor Racing Network/International Speedway Corporation. Also, I'm not sure Auto Racing Daily is universally recognised as a reliable source, would it be possible to perhaps cite a newspaper report instead, like The Charlotte Observer's?

    Done... I had to change the quotes while I was at it... -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 20:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Article covers the event well and broadly without needless digression.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Article is neutral.

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. 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):

   Images are appropriate, appropriately licensed, and captioned.

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Very close, just needs attention to the issues above; placed on hold until then. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

   Looks like I have fixed all of the problems you have expressed. -- Nascar1996^{(Talk • Contribs)} 20:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

   And pass, good work! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)