Talk:Hispania F110
 | Hispania F110 was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 4, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Article name
editI don't get how this works, seeing as HRT is the official constructor name (according to the FIA) as well as the car name. - mspete93 23:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- All resolved now. Cs-wolves(talk) 16:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
GA comment
editOnly an observation, not a GA review, but there doesn't seem to be very much in this article that's actually about the car. In the main it's a more detailed version of what is at HRT F1 for the 2010 season, which is essentially a blow by blow account of what the drivers did at each race. Suggestions for further relevant content:
- What kind of car is it? Single seat, open cockpit etc etc. Readers don't necessarily know this.
- How is it constructed?
- What is the design concept? An F1 car is a very particular thing, very unlike a road car, but there's nothing here that would indicate this.
- Suspension?
- How did its design and performance affect the season?
- Was it upgraded throughout the year? How? Successfully?
- What were its technical shortcomings compared to more advanced cars?
- What caused all the Xtrac gearbox problems? The other Cosworth teams suffered from this too, I think.
Sorry to knock the article, which has obviously received a lot of care and attention, but I don't think it really covers what is claimed as the topic See Brabham BT19 (FA) and Brabham BT49 (GA) for my idea of what a good F1 car article looks like - and note the blatant conflict of interest!
I would fail the article for failing on the breadth of coverage criterion ("it addresses the main aspects of the topic"), but felt that since I obviously have a specific idea of what an article like this should look like based on my own work, I might not be taking a fair view! 4u1e (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have marked the GA nomination as being on hold pending updating based on 4u1e's comments above.
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Hispania F110/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: WaitingForConnection (talk · contribs) 18:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I intend to review this tonight. At worst I'll have a good chunk of the review up within 24 hours. Regards, —WFC— 18:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
On hold I'm putting this on hold per the comments on the talk page. I concur with 4u1e's view that this doesn't currently meet 3a, and there seems little point in reviewing now and potentially reviewing a substantially different article in the near future. Instead, I'll review in a week or so. If there are no improvements I'll fail this nomination, but give constructive feedback on the GA criteria which should help for any future attempt. If improvements do happen I'll review the article with the intention of allowing further time to pass, if necessary. —WFC— 03:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- Been a few weeks; will the review continue? Wizardman Operation Big Bear 13:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Per 4u1e's concerns I'm closing this. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry for not getting back to this in a timely manner Wizardman, I've been unexpectedly busy in real life. I agree with your close. To the original nominator, if you would like me to go through the article with you, feel free to ping me on my talk page. —WFC— 19:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Per 4u1e's concerns I'm closing this. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hispania F110. 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/20100307074348/http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=47861 to http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=47861
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100402082816/http://www.hispaniaf1team.com/en/home/112-first-hrt-f1-team-race-finish-qantass-australian-grand-prix to http://www.hispaniaf1team.com/en/home/112-first-hrt-f1-team-race-finish-qantass-australian-grand-prix
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100327215837/http://www.hispaniaf1team.com/ to http://www.hispaniaf1team.com/
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) 11:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)