Talk:2015 Tirreno–Adriatico

2015 Tirreno–Adriatico 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: August 25, 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.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 07:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On it! Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:18, 16 August 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:

Issues that need to be adressed:

In general: There need to be sources for the individual stage results. See 2015 Tour de Suisse, it is done correctly there.
- Done. I may change precisely how this is done shortly, but I won't change the cited-ness of it. (All the information was already contained in a source, FWIW.)
No references necessary in the lead. Move those into the infobox.
- Disagree: that's not an MOS requirement. From WP:CITELEAD: "The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article." The information is not duplicated elsewhere in the article (what the infobox says is simpler), so in my mind it's in the correct place.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this. I would say that WP:CITELEAD rather agrees with me, but this is certainly not a reason to fail the nomination.

Route: The first sentences need references.
- Done.
Pre-race favorites: First sentence needs a source.
- Done.
Nibali, however, had not yet shown good form in the 2015 season, while Quintana had not raced for several weeks following a crash. - Please give a source for these statements.
- Citation 3, already there.
Participating teams: The statement that World Tour teams are obliged to compete needs a source. Check with 2015 Tour de Suisse, there is one there.
- Hmm, I'd say this was already covered. I've duplicated that source anyway.
Stage 2: a sharp Theturnd a bridge - something went wrong there.
- Indeed. Fixed. Though I see some linkrot has occurred with the source...
Stage 3: who had beaten him the previous week in a similar finish at the Strade Bianche. - please add a citation.
- Or remove the text, since it wasn't all that accurate!
Stage 6: Cavendish, along with his entire sprint train, pulled out of the race at they crossed the finish line for the first time - can you give a reason why?
- I've done my best to summarise it – it's fairly tangential.

That is all that I could find. Good job so far! On hold for seven days. Zwerg Nase (talk) 18:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your review, Zwerg Nase. I have made one other change, which is to introduce all the final standings into a new Classifications section. Relentlessly (talk) 21:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No reason not to grant this article GA status. Well done! Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2015 Tirreno–Adriatico. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150702030045/http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/82/39/2-ROA-20150619-E_English.pdf to http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/82/39/2-ROA-20150619-E_English.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Terminillo.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:36, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]