Talk:Aston Martin DB9/GA2

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


 * Reviewing at original nominator's request. This review is third in a list of three, so not much is likely to happen before the weekend. Pyrotec (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * Sorry for the delay. I'll be starting this review shortly, today. I'm going to quickly skim-read the article first so as to draw some initial comments. Pyrotec (talk) 15:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I've now done a quick read of the article, but I've not checked any references or looked at the copyright status of images, but these will be done later. My first comments are: the lead seems to have a bit of marketing hype "the spiritual successor of the DB7." - really! and "... built at Aston Martin Gaydon facility" is missing an apostrophe and an "s". Later, in the body of the article, the car (British, I presume) has some American terminology, "fender" is a US term, in Britain its a "bumper". Regardless of these comments, its probably a GA-class article.

I'm now going to review it in a bit more depth, starting at the Development and design section and finishing with the Lead. Pyrotec (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Didn't want to break up your comments, but I have tweaked the lead and fixed the USism. The car is indeed British, but many of the sources (in addition to myself) are American, so I've likely become confused. If you see any more, please let me know; I'm sure I've missed a few. Superflat Monogram 20:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fixes. The language and spelling of the article appeared to be almost entirely British-English; so, firstly, "fender" stood-out somewhat and, secondly, I had not realised that you were American. The statement of mine above was not intended to be anti-American comment. Pyrotec (talk) 19:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * P.S. If you need to add any comments, questions, etc, just stick them below the relevant comment of mine (signed & dated). There is no need to collect them all together in one place, well you can if you want to. Pyrotec (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Development and design -
 * First (untitled) subsection -
 * I'm not too keen on "spiritual successor". I'm not going to delay sentencing because of this, but the substitution of another comparable clause would be an improvement.
 * ✅ Pyrotec (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The final sentence is: "At launch, Aston Martin planned to build between 1,400 and 1,500 DB9s per year.[10]" and its referenced with a ten-year old (2003) citation. I'm likely to come back to this later: I don't think (I might have missed it in my quick-scan) the article gives the actual production rates.

Note: the info box and the Lead claim that production started in 2004, but that "fact" is both unreferenced and absent from the body of the article. At this point I'm beginning to regard the article as non-compliant with WP:WIAGA clauses 1(b), (possibly) 2(b), and 3(a); but I'll make a final decision when I get to the end, in the case the end of the Lead.


 * Interior -
 * The first paragraph is unreferenced, but I'll let that go as (possibly) it does not include "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". However, I'm not too keen on the phrase "The DB9's interior is made of leather with walnut trim", more strictly "The DB9's interior trim is made of leather with walnut wood".
 * ✅ Pyrotec (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The second paragraph makes a number of claims that are referenced by two references, the first of which (ref 11) specifically refers to the 2013 model. This reference does not necessarily confirm that the seating package was available in earlier models: this aught to be clarified.


 * Exterior & Wheels -
 * These two subsections look to be OK.


 * Chassis -
 * To verify my thoughts, I looked up Chassis on wikipedia and it discusses: In the case of vehicles, the term rolling chassis means the frame plus the "running gear" like engine, transmission, driveshaft, differential, and suspension. I'm happy to accept "chassis" and "rolling chassis" as being interchangeable, but this subsection also discusses body structure and inner door frame. I suspect that the subsection title should be something like Chassis and body work, perhaps the word "design" might be used; however, this subsection is slightly "wider" that just "Chassis".
 * ✅ Pyrotec (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

.... stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Variants -
 * DB9 Volante -
 * Looks OK.


 * DB9 LM -
 * This needs a minor update: It states "... to be available in the first quarter of 2008 and a September 2007 article is being used as a citation that only a limited number will be built.


 * DB9 Carbon Black, Morning Frost, and Quantum Silver -
 * Looks OK. Pyrotec (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Motorsport -
 * This section looks OK.

.... stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 18:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Reception -
 * This section looks OK.


 * WP:Lead -
 * This appears to be non-compliant with WP:WIAGA clause 1(b) and WP:Lead:
 * The first paragraph contains a statement that does not appear in the body of the article (and which is unreferenced). It states that the car was ".....launched by Aston Martin in 2004". The body of the article only mentions that the car was "...first revealed at the 2003 Frankfurt Auto Show.[4][5]". This statement should be added to the body of the article and a citation provided.
 * It does not cover (summarise) the "Variants" section, which is almost one quarter of the body of the article, by size.


 * Other comments -
 * The inclusion of an Info box is not a GA-requirement, but it does include information that is not adequately covered by the article. The infox box gives the layout as Front-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout, but that is not covered in the body of the article. Well, in Motorsport, DBR9, the prop shaft is mentioned as being carbon fibre. Note: this change is not mentioned in the Lead.
 * Production is somewhat undermentioned. so, I'm considering non-compliance with WP:WIAGA clause 3(a). "The DB9 is the first model to be built at Aston Martin's Gaydon facility in Warwickshire, England." and "At launch, Aston Martin planned to build between 1,400 and 1,500 DB9s per year.[10]" is about all that is given. The latter is referenced with a ten-year old (2003) citation; and almost no newer information was given. The exception being the DB9 LM was intended to be a limited edition of 124 cars, but that information did not appear to have been updated to reflect actual sales. Pyrotec (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

At this point the article appears to be non-compliant with WP:WIAGA clause 1(b) and clause 3(a), so I'm putting the review "On Hold" for these and other outstanding problems to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Due to lack of progress, I amended the Lead myself to make it compliant. I'm also closing this review, so the existing GA-status remains in place. Pyrotec (talk) 17:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)