Wikipedia

Talk:2010 Carfax 400/GA1

< Talk:2010 Carfax 400
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Airplaneman in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago35 comments4 people in discussion

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

Reviewer: Airplaneman ✈ 04:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)—To save space, I will not sign my comments. I will also copyedit the article while reviewing; please review all of my revisions.Reply

Wow, you really getting picky! Only few web pages have sources and some of this can't be done, because I wouldn't know. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 14:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
Note that they aren't required for GA, but are good for article improvement. Maybe I'll ask someone else to take a look as well.

(deindent) Airplaneman asked me to look for any more improvements. I like how you expanded the lead paragraphs to about the right length. The background is great - I really like the history of the track layout. A newsperson did the national anthem? Wow! "due to accidents" - "due to" is one of the weak grammar phrases [1] so I bet a stronger alternative can be found. There are multiple cases of the phrase. "Kahne's vacated third position" - did he voluntarily give up the race like vacate implies [2]? "Debutant" - learned a new word that's in the dictionary - good job with the useful word - it's good day when you learn something new! "Said made a good restart, but because of his older tires, Ambrose passed him." - needs a reference that the older tires allowed him to get passed because lots of times older tires don't hurt that much. "Ambrose made a good restart on lap 70 to keep Johnson behind him." - "good" restart - it that WP:NPOV or can you use a more neutral term (several cases)? "because Keselowski had fluid coming out of his race car after being spun around by Gilliland." - anytime someone spins out someone then there needs to be reliable source because of WP:BLP. Overall - the quality of grammar is light years ahead of where you were at even 1 month ago. You now see how grammar and editing is supposed to be done - neutral tone, varied prose, great grammar. I'd love it if the WikiProject NASCAR crew would return the favor for me and peer review Alan Kulwicki to see if we can get our first Featured Article. Royalbroil 01:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I accidentally reviewed the wrong article: 2010 Toyota/Save Mart 350. My comments could be used to improve that article. The "due to" comment is universal and the same with the "good" comment . Royalbroil 02:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  One of you comments helped, "Kahne's vacated third position" - did he voluntarily give up the race like vacate implies" Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 02:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
Closing notes
Congrats, Nascar1996, for a job well done! Your timely response and hard work greatly contributed to the successful outcome of this GAN. Thanks also to NSD and RoyalBroil for their help. I feel that this article now easily meets the GA criteria, so I'm happy to pass it. Airplaneman ✈ 20:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Lead edit

Background edit

  • How many people can the racing venue hold?  Done Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 14:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • I'm looking at another racing GA, 2008 French Grand Prix. I have a few suggestions based off that:
    • Where there any other changes made to the cars?
      • No, since the COT, all cars are the same, and no differences. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 14:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
        • I'm certain certain tweaks are made depending on the track and throughout the year.
          • Only at Talladega and Daytona when they add the restritor plate. Other info is just unknown. They don't publish a lot of stuff like F1. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 15:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
            • Fair enough :).
    • Try getting reflections from drivers/other personnel from before the race.
    • History of the race from previous years (defending champ, etc.)
    • Changes made in the race or racetrack from previous years.
      • Same as above. Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 20:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
        • Have done some reading, can't find any news about racetrack activities (repaving, etc.) so I'll strike it for now.

Practice and qualifying edit

  • Are there any incidents worth mentioning during these sessions? Try adding some info like there is in the race summary.
  • Any driver/personnel quotes?
    • No. Not on any of the main NASCAR pages. It is just tables. --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 15:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC) Reply
      • I found [3] for a quote from Kahne (along with some other news on qualifying that would be good to add). Look here for lots of good news articles for all NASCAR topics. This contains info on how Jeff Gordon doesn't have any wins but is in second place so far; that may also be good to add. This is another article on Harvick's win and the Chase in general. So yea, check out the news archives. There's a ton of info there!

Race summary edit

  • Any international television coverage?
  • " Conditions were partly cloudy with a high of 80 °F (27 °C), making the track potentially slippery." – the reference does not support the part in bold.  Done Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 14:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • Big giant copyedit here. Please take a moment to look at my edit and the edit summary.
  • The two sentences below could be combined, assuming McDowell, Jones, and Nemecheck are all part of start and park teams. Try, On lap 23, Michael McDowell and P.J. Jones drove to the garage, followed by Joe Nemecheck two laps later, as the three drivers' teams were using the "start and park" tactic to save costs. Note that the race summary reference does not mention start and park, so you'll have to find another reference for that (do you remember the TV broadcast? Maybe it was mentioned there. Or try the race rewind).
    • Afterward, Michael McDowell and P. J. Jones drove to the garage. - when and why? "Afterward" is too vague for an event like this; in this case, it would be OK to say the lap number.
    • Then, Joe Nemechek drove to the garage because of being a start and park team. - could be worded better
  • Five laps later, light rain falling in turn three prompted the second caution. - define turn three with a link or a note in parentheses, or even a more detailed note in the reference section (see here for an example). I would mention the location of turn three ("the turn at the end of the backstretch" or something).  Done Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Post-race edit

Other edit

Qualifying
  • The "Car" header is a bit vague. Maybe "Car number"?
  • The "Speed" header needs to specify what value speed (in this case, miles per hour, or MPH) – sample header: Speed (in MPH)
  • The "Time" header needs to say what value of time – sample header: Time (in seconds)
  • Comment - I added "Failed to qualify" in the space between the drivers who race and the drivers who failed to qualify so the readers know what happened to those drivers. Hopefully there aren't any issues with that edit. Just being bold. ~NSD (✉ • ✐) 15:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
    • Looks good!
Race results
  • (again) The "Car" header is a bit vague. Maybe "Car number"?
  • Just like section headers, we capitalize only the first word in table headers as far as I know. So:
Standings after the race
Miscellany
  • It is getting harder for me to make suggestions every review, as you're already implementing suggestions from me and others from past reviews. Overall, this article could beef up on prose. I'm going to be extra-picky, then :)!
    • Obviously Airplaneman isn't picky enough; I just fixed some typos that were apparently missed.   ~NSD (✉ • ✐) 15:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
      • I haven't even finished reading through the article yet! :)
  • The references need a consistent format. For instance, I see four different ways of citing NASCAR.com sources:
    • NASCAR (ref #1)
    • nascar.com (ref #'s 5, 14, and 22)
    • www.nascar.com (ref #'s 9, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20)
    • NASCAR.com (ref #'s 10, 18, 21, 26, and 28)
  • I would suggest just plain NASCAR, as that is what you're doing with the rest of the news sources. Refs like "www.speedway-guide.com" should be just plain "speedway-guide.com" as that is what is in big bold letters at the top of any page on the site. To stick to that format, you need to change refs like "www.mispeedway.com" to "Michigan International Speedway". "racingreference.com." and "www.racing-reference.info" are therefore renamed "racing-reference.info".
  • Also, the date format needs to be consistent. Currently, there is Month-Date-Year (MDY) as well as Date-Month-Year (DMY). Since MDY is more common, I have formatted the rest accordingly. If you're interested, here is the script, although I'm not sure if it works in Internet Explorer.  Done and you missed one of my mistakes. The first ref doesn't show the information. Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
    • What information? It looked fine to me…
  • For news article references, please use {{cite news}} so the author and publication date can be shown.
    • Do you want me to do this for this article? Also grrrr you edit conficted me. :) --Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
      • Yes. I can't believe I overlooked it for the others. If you want Toyota/Save Mart 350 to be an FA, you should fix it there as well.
        •   Doing...Exactly where should the ref formatting appear? I added it to monobook. Nascar1996 Contributions / Guestbook 19:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
          • Under your toolbox. It just makes sure the dates are consistently formatted (I did it already). Unfortunately, you have to convert to {{Cite news}} manually. I can help if you want. Here are the ones that need conversion: 25, 23, 20, 17, 9, 8, 4, 2. How about I start from 25, you start from 2? Edit by section so we don't edit conflict (I think that works).
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_Carfax_400/GA1&oldid=1142749752"