Talk:2018 Berlin ePrix/GA1

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

Reviewer: Matt294069 (talk · contribs) 04:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Background

 * 'braking areas for turns one and six and the turn nine hairpin.' - Remove the first 'and' for this part of the sentence.
 * 'meanwhile came second in the 2016 edition of the ePrix and was confident' - Maybe change that to came second in the 2016 race instead

Practice and qualifying

 * 'Di Grassi set the fastest overall lap time in all four groups in the fourth group with a one-minute and 9.620 seconds' - Doesn't sound quite right, maybe it needs a little bit of rewording.

Post-qualifying

 * No problems here

Race

 * The ninth lap had Heidfeld overtake Dillmann approaching 'the hairpin' - I assume you forgot to add turn nine here
 * 'fifth around the inside at the turn nine hairpin on the lap' - Change at to of, and the to that
 * 'heading into turn six on the lap' - Remove on the lap
 * 'one-minute and 12,409 seconds lap' - Replace the, with a.
 * 'ahead of López that this distracted him and it allowed Engel to overtake him'. - Modify this part of the sentence to make sense

Post-race

 * When we changed strategy, I felt I could stay with the Audis but not be any quicker. They were super quick, both of them. When I saw them carry on and I pitted a lap earlier, that was it. They had a big advantage today in the race." - Missed the " on the start of this quote.

Review
With these few minor spelling errors I think this will be good enough for a good article. Not Homura (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Have done all of the points raised above and some supplementary edits to the article. MWright96 (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Good job, this is now a Good Article. Not Homura (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The review has not been closed at the talk page and that needs addressing for this to be registered as a good article per WP:GAI. MWright96 (talk) 20:33, 25 January 2019 (UTC)