Talk:2010 Food City 500/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Big  Dom  20:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * Lead
 * "Entering this race also marked the first of three races that Carl Edwards is on probation, after his altercation with Brad Keselowski..." — this is slightly unclear, and in any case it should be in the past tense. Something like "The race marked the first of three races for which Carl Edwards was on probation after a previous altercation with Brad Keselowski..."
 * ", which sent him airborne and crashed on his sidedoor from the previous race at Atlanta Motor Speedway." Did you read the rest of the sentence?  N ERDY S CIENCE D UDE  (✉ message • changes) 22:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, of course I read the sentence. The change I meant to propose was as follows: "The race marked the first of three races for which Carl Edwards was on probation after an altercation with Brad Keselowski at the previous race at Atlanta Motor Speedway, which sent him airborne and crashed on his sidedoor." —Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDom (talk • contribs)
 * ✅  N ERDY S CIENCE D UDE  (✉ message • changes) 22:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't have spaces between punctuation and citations, and where there are multiple citations there shouldn't be spaces between them. This applies throughout the article, not just the lead.
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "13 different leaders, 39 lead changes, 10 cautions" -> "13 different leaders, 39 lead changes and 10 cautions"
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Why does the lead say there were 103 laps, when the infobox and the race summary say there were 500?
 * Those are the laps under caution. -- Nascar 1996  00:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "This marks the end of a long streak of sellout seats at the track, which can seat up to 158,000; only 138,000 attended the race" -> "The race attendance of 138,000 marked the end of a long streak of sellout seats at the track, which has a capacity of 158,000"
 * ✅ -- Nascar 1996  00:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Practices and Qualifying
 * Qualifying shouldn't be capitalised in the section header
 * ✅  N ERDY S CIENCE D UDE  (✉ message • changes) 22:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Race summary
 * "perform for the fans" --> "performed for the fans"
 * ✅ -- Nascar 1996  01:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The quote shouldn't be in italics because emphasis isn't really needed
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Per the MoS, numbers such as "thirty-six" should be written in figures
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "Johnson would keep" --> "Johnson kept"
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually per the above point, you use this construction quite often. These all need to be changed to the past tense, e.g. "Biffle remained the leader"
 * ✅ -- Nascar 1996  02:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Aesthetic point: that first paragraph is very long and could do with splitting in half
 * ✅-- Nascar 1996  01:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Results
 * The way the results are cited, it appears at first glance as though it is only a reference for Jimmie Johnson, rather than a general reference for the entire table
 * ✅ One of the references wasn't in the right location. -- Nascar 1996  01:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * One last point
 * Some of the references have information missing. You need to add the author's name and the date of publication where possible. Big  Dom  07:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I will work on that. It should be easy for the documents. -- Nascar  1996  11:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The one you have done is OK. Keep doing it the way you've done that one and it'll be fine. Big  Dom  13:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Some of the references are not showing the author or date, but I will do as many as I can.-- Nascar 1996  21:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine, no problems as long as you do all the ones you can. Big  Dom  22:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Nascar 1996  22:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Criteria check

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Some good work done by the nominator to sort out the references.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * I made a couple of image layout fixes myself
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * I made a couple of image layout fixes myself
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Summary
A pretty good article overall, which is very comprehensive in its coverage of the race but has a few problems, mainly Manual of Style issues. Once these have been sorted out, I will happily pass this as a GA. On hold for seven days. Big Dom  21:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Problems have been suitably addressed. Pass with congrats. Big  Dom  23:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)