Wikipedia

Talk:2007 Malaysian Grand Prix

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Cyberbot II in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page
Good article2007 Malaysian Grand Prix has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 9, 2024Good article nomineeListed
August 31, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 30, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
November 18, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 5, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Good article review edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago15 comments4 people in discussion

I've put the GA review process on hold for the time being, due to some fixes being needed. Details are given below.

  • Well written:  
    • The intro needs to be expanded a bit. It should mention who was on pole, and perhaps a couple of sentences describing the race itself, which can be expanded on later in the article.
    • In the pre-race section, the phrase "the Customer Car row quickly flared up again" assumes prior knowledge. You need to either explain the situation more fully, or link to an article about it. Also, customer car should not be capitalised.
      • Done - I think. I've explained instead what the customer car row is about, and why Spyker complained. AlexJ 18:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • In the pre-race section, the phrase "with some people trying to claim that Ferrari's car was illegal in Melbourne" contains Weasel Words. Who was trying to claim that? It also needs to be referenced.
      • Done - Slightly reworded to say that McLaren asked for clarification of the rules. Given a source to back that up. AlexJ 18:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Pre-race - "with Barrichello calling it extremely frustrating". The reference given doesn't appear to make any mention of Barrichello saying that.
      • Done - the ref was directed to the wrong place - so I've changed it to the right source. Neldav 19:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Qualifying 2 - the phrase with Pat Symonds later stating that they "didn't maximise our chances" sounds a bit odd, switching from the third person to the first person in the middle of it. Perhaps it would be better to change the quote to say "didn't maximise [their] chances".
    • Qualifying 2 - "However, it was revealed after qualifying that Coulthard had changes engines before qualifying". The word qualifying is used twice in quick succession. It would be better to say "...it was later revealed that Coulthard...". Also there is a typo - should be changed, not changes.
    • Race - The Sato-Liuzzi collision: with none of them laying the blame on themselves. Should say neither, rather than none.
    • Race - Albers gearbox-fire should not be hyphenated.
    • Race - Räikkönen says "...to challenge either of them (Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa)". Would be better to write it as "...to challenge either [Hamilton or Massa]".
    • References should come after punctuation, not before it.
  • Factually accurate and verifiable:  
    • As mentioned above, the Ferrari cheating claim needs to be referenced, and the reference to the Barrichello quote needs to be fixed.
  • Broad in it's coverage:  
  • Neutral point of view:  
  • Stable:  
  • Appropriately licenced images:  
  • Overall:  

When this is fixed, leave a message on my talk page and I'll come back to review it again. Gasheadsteve 14:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Reply


Almost there now, just a couple more little things to fix:
    • I've spotted another typo that I missed first time round - In the pre-race section, it says "Ferrari duo Felipe Massa and Kimi Räikkönen said the performance F2007 would not be compromised in any way", it should say "...performance of the F2007...".
Done 4u1e 11:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Race - Räikkönen says "...to challenge either of them (Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa)". Would be better to write it as "...to challenge either [Hamilton or Massa]", as above. This one hasn't been fixed.
Done 4u1e 11:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Another one from above that got missed - WP:REF says that footnotes/references should come after punctuation, most of the ones given in the article come before the punctuation.
Done 4u1e 11:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Well done on fixing everything else, just sort these out and you'll be there. :) Gasheadsteve 20:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re-review edit

  • Well written:  
  • Factually accurate and verifiable:  
  • Broad in it's coverage:  
  • Neutral point of view:  
  • Stable:  
  • Appropriately licenced images:  
  • Overall:  

Congratulations. Gasheadsteve 14:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Copy edit edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

I have been asked to copy edit this article by Davnel03. Please forgive my total ignorance of F1 racing. I have started copy editing, but have done so very conservatively to avoid introducing any errors into the article. Please inform me instantly of any errors I do make so that I don't make them in the future. Also, I have started placing internal comments and questions in the article (best viewed with something like WikEd that color-codes the various types of editing). These often ask for clarification or suggest changes that I was unsure about. Awadewit | talk 08:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Upon arriving in Malaysia, a row over the use of cars that the team had not designed, as required by the FIA Technical Regulations, became an issue with Spyker protesting against Scuderia Toro Rosso. - I thought that the row was over only one team, not all of the teams. Would this, for example, be an accurate revision:
  • One general comment - you might think about expanding the lead so that it summarizes more of the article per WP:LEAD. It is supposed to be a little article in and of itself. Awadewit | talk 22:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Okay, I've now copy-edited the article, bar a few stylistic inconsistencies in the race section, which I'm aware of and will address in due course. Please see my footnote on Button in the race section. Apologies for my over-zealous editing of the white stripe section; I think it crossed the line between being bold and removing content when there was consensus to keep it. However I do think the topic is over covered. My reasoning for putting it in the lead was that a reference belonged in the lead; at the very least it's potentially historically significant and this was the first time the stripes were used. I removed it from background because I felt the content in the lead was all that was needed. My rationale is that convention on what belongs in the lead shouldn't force us to merely repeat content, or needlessly elabourate for the sake of adhering to the convention. Thoughts welcome.
Yep, that's OK. I've made an internal comment on the Button situation. Davnel03 20:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
I have two things left to say about the article. One, whether coverage of the race is too heavily weighted on the first part of the race, or if this is justified by what happened later in the race. Two, and this is a general question that I'll raise at WP:F1 if there's support, whether it would be appropriate to show the driver's and constructor's standings at the end of the race?
—This is part of a comment by BeL1EveR , which was interrupted by the following: - This point has been discussed numerous times at WP:F1, see here as an example, and the overall consensus is that we on the whole do not like it. Davnel03 20:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Going back to my opening sentence, I'll leave the finishing touches of editing the race section until we're agreed as to whether all relevant content is there i.e. whether after the first pit stop requires more detail, and if so, what specifically. I have a copy of the highlights of the race which I'll probably watch tomorrow afternoon, and if anybody else has thoughts of what's missing this would be a welcome input. BeL1EveR 20:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
The pitstop section will probably need more detail. If you can add anything while watching highlights tomorrow to that little section, that would be great. Davnel03 20:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Barrichello edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

For clarity, was Barrichello's penalty upheld? If so this should be reflected in the classification with a footnote, if not this should be indicated in the qualifying section. BeL1EveR 22:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Coulthard's penalty went, but Barrichello's penalty stayed. Davnel03 09:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. Footnote added. BeL1EveR 20:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

FAC edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Okay here's where I see the article being at the moment, based on the featured article criteria.

1(a)- Well written: I think it passes here, but I've worked on the article extensively so it would be better to ask somebody not involved in the article. 1(b)- Comprehensive: No problems here. 1(c)- Factually accurate: there is a {{fact}} template in the article at the moment, and article needs a wider range of sources. By this I'm saying references are in the correct place, but ITV and Autosport too heavily dominate the citations. Introducing equivalent sources from other respectable media outlets (BBC, FIA mediacentre etc) would be a good idea. 1(d)- Neutral: Post race reaction from Alonso, as well as from McLaren themselves, required to balance reaction. 1(e)- Stable: No problems here.

2(a)- Lead: No problem in my opinion. An F1 race lead should include polesitter, podium finishers, noteable achievement(s) (BMW beating a Ferrari) and any other historically significant events associated with the race (white stripe). 2(b)- Sections: Post race to be created, otherwise fine. 2(c)- Consistent sourcing: Fine at present. We must be careful to ensure that sourcing remains consistent when we address 1(c)

3- Images: It passed GA with same images, which are relevant and have appropriate captions.

4- Appropriate length: Good length for non-controversial race.

I'm about to give this article a mention at WP:F1 to see if I can get an extra pair of eyes or two, additional thoughts (in particular on 1(a) and 2(a)) welcome. BeL1EveR 19:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've added a BBC source in the end of the race section part - to do with Alonso. Davnel03 19:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 24 external links on 2007 Malaysian Grand Prix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2007_Malaysian_Grand_Prix&oldid=1196501418"