Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/2008 Giro d'Italia/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

2008 Giro d'Italia

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…my intention is to get it to FA. This article very nearly follows the style of the FA 2009 Giro d'Italia, and I'd love to know if there are any rough patches in the prose or anything else that needs fixing before an eventual FAC.

Thanks, Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 07:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: Here are a few suggestions and ideas for improving the article. I've only done the first half at the moment, due to time pressures:-

  • General points
    • Three disambiguation links need fixing. Use the toolbox in top right of this page to identify.
    • Three external links (18, 29 and 61) show up on the tool as dead, though as far as I can see they are working. Get others to check these.
  • Points from lead
    • "...won by Spaniard Alberto Contador of Astana." Clarify that "Astana" is a cycling team, not a country or other geographical location.
    • "Contador first took the race lead after the race's second mountain stage, to Marmolada..." Omit unnecessary repetition ("race's"). The table of stages doesn't mention Marmolada, incidentally.
      • WP:CYCLING convention is to use the names for stage descriptions that the race itself used. The Giro referred to this stage as ending at the Passo Fedaia, which is the major mountain pass at Marmolada (you'll notice that the link in the stages table is to [[Marmolada|Passo Fedaia]]. Should I change this in the lead to refer to Passo Fedaia, then? Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 03:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "...who participated in a breakaway in the sixth stage which won sufficient time that he was able to hold the race leader's pink jersey for more than a week." Rather awkwardly put; suggest: "who participated in a breakaway in the sixth stage which won him sufficient time to hold the race leader's pink jersey for more than a week."
    • "Team CSF Group-Navigare appeared to perform quite well in the race..." You need to introduce this team as the winners of the team classification. I don't understand "appeared to perform quite well"; if they were the winners they obviously performed well. This phrasing should be replaced with a more positive statement.
      • Two of their riders, accounting for four stage wins, the mountains jersey, and their top two overall placings, have been revealed to be major dopers. They "appeared" to perform well in the same way that Floyd Landis "appeared" to perform well in the 2006 Tour de France. If you take away what their riders did not legitimately win (and, no, they haven't been stricken from the record book (yet), but there's ample citeable critique that these wins are dirty), their performance was basically nothing.
    • "In August..." Be more specific. If you don't have a date, at least give the year.
    • "Though no definitive positive tests have yet come to light..." This statement needs to have a time reference, e.g. "Though no definitive positive tests had come to light by March 2010..." - and will need to be updated if/when they do. Also, would "positive results" be more accurate that "positive tests"?
  • Teams: should you explain why certain ProTour teams were initially omitted, and why two were later given entry?
    • RCS originally excluded High Road and Astana for failing to meet their particular standards (I forget exactly what they are - something to do with quality of the squad that would be sent, and professional ethics...I can easily find this again), but I'm not sure there's any particular reason, other than public outcry, why they changed their minds. NGC Medical was omitted simply because High Road and Astana were later added. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 03:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Race preview
    • "Both Di Luca and Contador were noted to have..." Why not, simply, " Both Di Luca and Contador had..."
    • "...chose to skip the race in order to better prepare for the Tour de France" - "in order" is redundant (and likely to be picked on in a FAC review)
    • "Six stages were classified as flat and thought of as likely to be contested by sprinters." Why "thought of as"? Who's doing the thinking? Best left out, I think.
    • "famously won" reads like editorial opinion. In the interests of neutrality I'd omit "famously"
    • "...did not plan to start this Giro because of a lack of preparation owing to influenza and bronchitis." Probably better to say "enter" than "start". And "because of" and "owing to" shouldn't appear in the same sentence. Thus: "did not plan to enter this Giro, because influenza and bronchitis had hindered his preparation" (or something similar)
    • "This was later firmly cemented by his suspension from the sport, and termination from his Team Milram resulting from his controversial doping case from the 2007 Giro." This is another complex sentence that doesn't read smoothly. I'd change this to something like: "He was later suspended from the sport, and his contract with Team Milram terminated, as a result of his involvement in the 2007 Giro doping case" - with links and pipes where appropriate.
    • "due to a positive doping test" → "after a positive doping test"
  • Route and stages table: It might be useful if you added a column to the table which indicated the overall race leader at the end of each stage. I know this information is given below, but bearing in mind that Contador's name doesn't figure in the table, this would give a clearer idea of why he finished the overall winner.
    • This has been discussed and proposed at WP:CYCLING several times, and each time there's been general consensus against it. Yes, the other wikis do it, but we've always thought it to be redundant, not only to the table but also to the prose (which the other wikis are much worse at than us). Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 03:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me a call on my talkpage when these have been addressed, and I'll come back for the second half. Brianboulton (talk) 11:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'll get to these within 24. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 08:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC) Or rather, I would have had a massive windstorm not knocked out my wireless internet. Grumble... Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 02:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the rest of my review
  • Race overview
    • "still-imposing" - opinion?
    • Is it possible to avoid the "...Russ. Russ..." combination?
      • I don't know how. The two sentences are much too long to be joined as one (they're both already pretty long). Would four or five really short sentences be better? I wouldn't naturally go that way. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 00:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • What is "bonification"?
    • You use the low numerals "7" and "6", but later you use "seventh" and "eighth" for the ordinals (also, "4 seconds" appears later)
    • "They were collectively separated..." The word "collectively" is superfluous
    • "He led the classification after every stage except stage 2 and stage 8, which were both won by Riccò, gaining him the mauve jersey for one day on two separate occasions." Mid-sentence triple-use of "stage", followed by an ambiguous "him". Suggest; "He led the classification after every stage except the second and eighth, which were both won by Riccò who thereby gained the mauve jersey for one day on two separate occasions."
    • "taking the white jersey from Visconti when he lost the overall lead" - surely, the words "when he lost the overall lead" are redundant?
      • Actually, they're not. Visconti lost the pink jersey when he lost the overall lead. He just happened to lose the white jersey the same day. This contrasts with, for example, the 2004 Tour de France, when Thomas Voeckler held the yellow jersey for the race lead and the white jersey for the youth classification at the same time. Days later, when he lost the yellow to Lance Armstrong, he still held the white for several days thereafter, before eventually losing it to Vladimir Karpets. If Riccò hadn't been young enough for the white jersey, Visconti probably would have held the white jersey for a little while even after losing the overall lead. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 00:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Five teams repeated as stage winners" Does this mean "Five teams won more than one stage"? You don't name these teams, yet later you do name the teams that won one race each.
    • What is a "morning escape"?
      • In cycling, several riders (usually around three to seven, but sometimes only one rider will be a breakaway, and oftentimes late in a stage race breakaways of 20 or more riders will occur) will break away from the peloton early on and ride most (or occasionally all) of the day ahead of them. The reasons for this are many, and diverse enough that this happens in every road race. It's relatively rare that a stage win comes from a morning break (it happens maybe once or twice in a three-week Grand Tour), so it merits mentioning. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 00:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "...failed to be at all competitive" - suggest "at all" is unnecessary.
    • "...and were thus declined invitations." I think you mean "denied"
  • Doping
    • "Riccardo Riccò, a double stage winner and the best young rider, tested positive for Mircera during the Tour de France, and was subsequently expelled with his team Saunier Duval-Scott." Advise clarify "the 2008 Tour de France" and "expelled from the Tour, together with..."
    • "but Sella, Priamo, and Riccò's results..." Better exprssed as "the results for Sella, Priamo, and Riccò...", otherwise you need to say "Sella's, Priamo's, and Riccò's" which reads awkwardly.
    • "six to seven riders" → "six or seven riders"
    • "...the presumptive positives will be compared to values stored at an anti-doping lab in Lausanne, Switzerland, with those results known and names of riders announced within months." This statement explains the position as of now, but will soon be out of date. It needs to be time-specific in some way.
      • Actually, it doesn't describe the situation right now. It describes the situation from October. Updated. I don't like the "as of April 2010" construction, though I grudgingly understand why it's necessary. Once these riders are revealed, I'm going to update this article first thing. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 00:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Classification leadership
    • "cyclists got points" → "cyclists received points"
    • "The stage win awarded 25 points, second place awarded 20 points, third 16, fourth 14, fifth 12, sixth 10, and one point less per place down the line, to a single point for 15th. In addition, some points could be won in intermediate sprints." Suggested rephrase: "Each stage winner was awarded 25 points; second place was worth 20 points, third 16, fourth 14, fifth 12, sixth 10, and then one point less per place down the line, to a single point for 15th place. Additional points could be won in intermediate sprints."
    • "The fourth was the young rider classification which awarded a white jersey." Suggest reword: "The fourth classification, in which a white jersey was awarded, was for young riders. This was decided..." etc
    • "There were also two classifications for teams. The first is..." Tense change ("were ... is"). When discussing individual classifications you consistently used the past tense, so the "is" should be "was" (and follow through in the rest of the paragraph). Also, wouldn't "There were also two team classifications" be a neater start?
  • Final standings tables: A note should indicate that these only display the top ten.
  • Minor classifications
    • "Other less well-known classifications were awarded during the Giro..." "during the Giro" is implied and need not be included. Also, are classifications "awarded"? Maybe rephrase.
    • I got lost in the first paragraph of this section. Is the "Expo Milano 2015" the name of a minor classification, and should it be in quotes? Is the information about what the equivalent classification was called in previous years really relevant? It tends to over-complicate matters.
    • As someone who doesn't follow cycling, I find it difficult to understand the reasons or some of these minor classifications. Apart from points, what did the winners of these classifications receive? Were there trophies, cash prizes, etc? Perhaps a few more words of explanation would be helpful here.

That's my review. I hope the comments and suggestions are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 15:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/2008_Giro_d%27Italia/archive1&oldid=357173907"