Talk:2015 Liège–Bastogne–Liège

2015 Liège–Bastogne–Liège 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.
Review: October 19, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Cycling Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling 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.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belgium Low‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sources[edit]

Dan Martin broken ribs

Relentlessly (talk) 18:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2015 Liège–Bastogne–Liège/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 21:10, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On it. Zwerg Nase (talk) 21:10, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Some minor things:

Background: In the first sentence, I think established would be a better term.

Oh, that's it. Made some more minor changes myself.

Good edits, thanks. I've moved the images back up a bit, though, because they were dropping down into the section below on very wide screens. I've also made all the many changes listed above! Thanks as ever, ZN. Relentlessly (talk) 16:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, as always! Pass :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 20:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]