Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Whistler Sliding Centre/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 13:16, 31 August 2010 [1].

The Whistler Sliding Centre

Featured article candidates/The Whistler Sliding Centre/archive1

Nominator(s): Chris (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because this article meets the necessary requirements to qualify for WP:FA. It has undergone two different peer reviews, one before it was nominated for WP:GA and one after it received WP:GA. This venue was the subject of controversey during the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver in the wake of Nodar Kumaritashvili's death prior to the opening ceremony and I have done my best to present him and the Olympics in as best and as neutral of a light as possible. Chris (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—the link to FIL leads to a dab page and the external links to http://www.nbcolympics.com/news-features/news/newsid=412058.html#luge+officials+tweak+track, http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancouver/bobsled/news?slug=ap-bob-two-manbobsled&prov=ap&type=lgns, http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/vancouver/bobsled/news?slug=capress-oly_bob_latvia_withdraws-2467691&prov=capress&type=lgns, and http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/news?slug=ap-weighingtherisk&prov=ap&type=lgns are dead. Ucucha 05:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- - First link removed while the remainders were adjusted. Chris (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC) All FIL links are legitimate. Chris (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - - I checked all of the individual FIL links. There link up where they should be. For the results, you will need to drag down to the respective event to get those. Chris (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there a guide somewhere on the technical specifications and analysis on the track? Because for say, a motor racing track, different layouts require different emphasis on skills or car (sled) specifications or how it needs to be set up to optimise the speed/traction for the corners on the given track. eg, for formula One, on the BBC website they have a talk by a driver for each circuit discussing how to drive there, and set up their vehicle etc. I'm guessing statistics on the speed at various corners or straights, or the slope on various sections could also be useful (All the cycling experts know the slope of each mountain and know the gradient variation at different sections). I'm also wondering if anyone has said anything about how the corners and layout can require different physical attributes and how it could favour/hinder certain physiques or driving/steering techniques. Is this possible/available as it seems core to non-standardised sports venues (ie a swimming pool) YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- - I have not seen any major track analysis for a venue like this except for general venue details. Most of the track sensors listed are that for times though there are speed trap listings for each of the eight events that were run on the track for the 2010 Games. When I set up the info box, it was for a general sports venue and not a motorsports based venue which I was unaware they had until now. I have looked at this venue IB and see that it could fit, but not in its entirety given you have start and track records for each event. Usually the FIBT or the FIL do not show any listing of track gradients and have never gone into that much detail, not even in the Olympic reports I have seen on venues like this. Chris (talk) 13:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - - Changed the Infobox to a motorsports venue rather than a sports venue per request. Chris (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alt text isn't compulsory anymore, but simply saying "man celebrating a victory" isn't going to help a blind person who needs to have the actual literal colour, shape etc described to them eg "man wearing ??? standing on ?? with a ?? medal around his neck and ?? flowers ??. In the background is a sign....." YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm this I stand corrected YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per criterion three:
- ~~File:Wsc6.jpg - Same as above.~~ Эlcobbola _talk 16:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - - Images removed per request. Chris (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Image issues resolved. By the way, the "Wsc" images would be resolved if the uploader just added "own work", "author: Earl Andrew" or something analogous (if that's indeed the case) - that would be sufficent sourcing (the {{PD-self}} template alone just isn't explicit enough). Эlcobbola _talk 17:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comments

It would be helpful if acronyms (VANOC, FIL, FIBT, BCRMCA) were spelt out at first mention
- - They are listed at first mention. Chris (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I meant at first mention in the references. Brianboulton (talk) 10:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 41: New York Times needs italicisation.
- - - They are fixed. Chris (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- - Done. Chris (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Still unitalicised in what is now ref 48. Brianboulton (talk) 10:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fixed. Chris (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a source is in English it is not necessary to state this. English is the default language on Eng wikipedia
- - Extra English removed from source 99 per request. Chris (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - ...but not from ref 60. Brianboulton (talk) 10:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fixed. Chris (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, sources look OK Brianboulton (talk) 08:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the Motor racing track infobox does seem to make more fitting parameters such as the number of turns and the banking parameter, if desired YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 07:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Inforbox adjusted per request. Chris (talk) 15:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

2008–09 Luge World Cup, including training: Try not to start a sentence with a number like in "2482 runs took place...".
- Fixed. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should all of these figures in the thousands have commas in them?
- Excess comms removed. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
2009–10 World Cups, including training: Typo in "were allowed to train before to 2010 Games."
- "to" to "the" Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Public opening and post-Olympic usage: "Costs to the public was 5 Canadian dollars...". To make the tenses match correctly, "was" should be "were". Alternatively, you could start this with "The cost to the public".
- Adjusted to alternate sentence. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bobsleigh: "Meanwhile, the Germany-2 sled of Cathleen Martini and Romy Logsch was in fourth place after the third run, but were disqualified...". Is it "was" or "were"? Has to be one or the other, I'd imagine.
- Fixed. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Edwin van Calker of the Netherlands withdrew to a lack of confidence...". Feels like "due" is missing from this passage.
- "due" added between withdrew and to. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"despite no crashes during four-man training had taken place before that day." After training, "that" or "which" should follow. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 15:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "that" added between training and had. Chris (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Overall safety concerns: "It has raised debate on tightening qualification standards to weed out unqualified athletes, require a large number of training runs, slow down the sliding tracks, or a combination of all three." I'm confused by this sentence. Would the tighter standards lead to these three things, or is that one of the three items itself? If the latter, "require" and "slow" need to be in "ing" form to work grammatically. If the former, the structure itself is okay, but I don't know what qualification standards have to do with track speed.
    - "ing" added to "require" and "slow" Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - "FIBT President Storey wants to wait...until after the 2010 Games". It's well after the Games now. A little past tense is in order.
    - Changed to past tense. Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't see "to" in the Rogge quote as the source has it.
    - "to" removed. Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Construction: "This venue was constructed on First Nations designated site." Missing "a" in the middle?
    - "a" added between "on" and "First". Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - "the track actual costs were...". Add an "s" at the end of "track"?
    - "'s" added after "track". Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Last but not least, there's a typo above the infobox. Look for "Slding". Easy to miss something like this, and I almost did. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fixed. Chris (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~. Tony (talk) 06:19, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linking: why is "Canada" linked, when more specific locations are linked next to them and have prominent links themselves to the more generalised article? The opening is a link-farm that dilutes the high-value links. Why is "French" linked, as though the French language were a mystery, or readers would want to divert there suddenly at the top of this article? More: "Prague" is link enough without its country-name linked. And the rest in that para.
- French language is part of the template lang-fr. The French language is wikilinked automatically. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Site construction of the facility began on 1 June 2005 following environmental approval from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Construction site safety and security was put in place at that time." Repetition; and why site construction? "were put in place". Then "construction" for the third time. And up to five times by the end of the short para.
- Adjusted per requested. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Insufficient commas: for example, after "2007".
- Where specifically? Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Plain English: "The first run was on ...".
- Adjusted. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remove "located".
- Done. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Austria", "Great Britain" linked again, in a sea of links.
- The only time the countries as is are linked here. All of the other ones shown are Nations at the 2010 Winter Olympics piped in for their respective country. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~in order~~ to
- Done. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is "homologation"? Do we have to divert to the link-target to find out?
- Changed to certification. Homologation is a fancy word for certification. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Quotation technique: Lueders commented that the track "... [is] definitely the fastest ... in the world and that's what makes it so difficult" while Kelly of Canada concurred with "... any loss of concentration ... [can get you] ... in trouble because it is technical as well.".—"said" is the normal speech tag. Why not: that the track is "definitely ...", which avoids the square brackets and the ellipsis points. Why the ellipsis points around [can get you]?
- Quote removed in its entireity. Chris (talk) 13:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This needs work. Tony (talk) 04:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still ellipsis points at the starts of quotations need removing; country-links ... I removed a few more. Other improvements could be made. It is hard to do this by oneself, through sheer over-familiarity with the wording. Tony (talk) 13:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ellipsis points removed completely. What other issues do you have that I need work on? Chris (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.