A fact from 2010 Honda Indy Edmonton appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 June 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject American Open Wheel Racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of open wheelauto racing in the United States, with an emphasis on IndyCar racing, on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.American Open Wheel RacingWikipedia:WikiProject American Open Wheel RacingTemplate:WikiProject American Open Wheel RacingAmerican Open Wheel Racing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MotorsportWikipedia:WikiProject MotorsportTemplate:WikiProject Motorsportmotorsport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
@Z105space: - I am gong to start the GA review of this today, I usually add comments over a day or two while I look at all aspects of the GA criteria. If you have any questions etc. along the way feel free to let me know. MPJ-DK 23:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
External sources - the link to indycar.com is dead according to the tool N
Meets the broad in coverage - it has what you'd expect for an article on a race, ensuring that it also covers the context of the race, not just the results Y
Stability - Not detecting any issues on the talk page or the article history Y
Lead
"(including its three years" - the word "its" should be removed.
"CCWS" is used as an abbreviation - while it is spelled out in the lead the lead should be considered separate from the main body of the article so the first time an abbreviation is used it should be spelled out.
I believe this sentence "by teammate Castroneves and had the pole" should be worded slightly different, if I read it correctly you means "by teammate Castroneves who had the pole" otherwise the "and" refers back to Powers, which we've already established.
"After starting fifteenth, Tracy drove aggressively and moved up into tenth position by the 20th lap." either all spelled out or not, I don't have a preference for which way you go.
I will keep it the way it is. 16:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Is there some sort of link for "Green-Flag" and what it means in racing?
Linked it to Racing flags#Green flag
"pit box to repair damage" I find the sentence "to repair damage" kinda odd, missing something?
"The move was immediately reviewed by the IndyCar chief steward and competition president Brian Barnhart and Castroneves was shown a black-flag one minute later after Barnhardt judged that he blocked Power." How about
"The move was immediately reviewed by the IndyCar chief steward and competition president Brian Barnhart, which led to Castroneves being shown a black-flag one minute later as he was deemed as having blocked Power."? the original sentence reads a little dense.
Suggestion has been taken. MWright96(talk) 16:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Post Race
"that the series considered suspending Castroneves" - the term "the series" sounds odd to me? is that how they commonly refer to it in racing circles?
Similarities were made between Castroneves'" - either "comparisons were made" or "similarities were noted or something like that" - cannot make a similarity.
Just a source review is all that remains and my review will be complete. Sorry it has taken so long, I have been suffering from bad allergies that made it hard to focus.
Source review
Flagworld.com - I am not famliar with it, is it considered a reliable source for racing?
The rest look like they are reliable, well formatted etc.
@MWright96: - that's my completed review, I will put it on hold for up to 7 days to allow for you to address the minor issues I have found. MPJ-DK 15:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@MPJ-DK: Many thanks for the review. I have acted on all the points you've raised. MWright96(talk) 16:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@MWright96: - I am satisfied this is a Good Aricle. Contrats