Talk:Michele Scarponi/GA1

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

Reviewer: Buttons to Push Buttons (talk · contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I remember hearing about Scarponi's death. Very sad. Will get stuck into the review over the next hour or so. (As a heads up, this is my first GA review, but as I have a familiarity with the subject, it should hopefully be smooth sailing :)) Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

First things first: it's very good, in solid shape all round. The prose is coherent and consistent with few flaws, making for a very easy read, and it seems to go into the appropriate levels of depth depending on the period of his career. There are some minor referencing issues, but they're brief and can be easily handled en masse via easily accessed routine coverage. No NPOV worries – all issues surrounding doping are covered sensibly and with balance. My only major reservation is the lead, which is, to be blunt, limp and lifeless. MOS:LEAD says: "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents."

But here, all it does is put into very basic prose the content of the infobox, not particularly the article... No discussion of his domestique beginnings, Operation Puerto, his three other top-five finishes at the Giro, his return to a domestique role in support of Nibali... At the moment I'd say it's fit for a start-class article, not a GA-class one, especially one with this much high-quality prose in the actual body.

Besides that, there are a bunch of smaller issues within, but they're absolutely routine, and nothing to really worry about. Could be handled in an hour or two, I'd imagine, and certainly shouldn't hold the GA listing up for very long. I've handled a few things here and there myself, as apparently that's fine per WP:GAN/I section 4, or WP:BOLD. But I've left the referencing work to the actual editors of the article. (For the record, most of the ref issues can be solved by just using his individual PCS season pages -- indeed, ref 173 already is one such case.) Going section-by-section:

2002–2004: Turning professional

 * Ref needed for turning professional in 2002 (ref 20, "A career of smiles and sacrifice", works for this, fyi)
 * Reference used accordingly. Craig  (talk)  10:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Ref needed for second overall in 2002 Settimana Lombardia
 * Reference added. Craig  (talk)  10:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Ref needed for 2003 Giro d'Abruzzo stage win & third overall
 * Reference added for the stage win, and the Abruzzo reference mentioned in major results has now been brought up here. Craig  (talk)  10:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Ref needed for 2004 Settimana Lombardia and Tour of Austria result
 * References added. Craig  (talk)  10:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

2007: Acqua & Sapone–Caffè Mokambo

 * Ref needed for 2007 Clasica de Almeria, including that he finished outside the time limit (not sure if PCS will cover that specifically. Perhaps CyclingNews would?)
 * Edosof, the company behind the timing for the race have results showing that only 21 riders finished the race in time. The full results show 102 classified, but 81 fuera control – all the riders beyond 21st are listed in dossard order, lowest to highest. Cycling Quotient mentions out of time too. Craig  (talk)  13:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

2008–2010: Diquigiovanni–Androni

 * Refs needed for 2008 Giro dell'Appennino and Giro dell'Emilia
 * References added. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Refs needed for 2009 Prueba Villafranca de Ordizia and Coppa Ugo Agostoni
 * References added. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Refs needed for 2010 Giro points & mountains classifications
 * Reference added to cover both. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Lampre-ISD

 * Ref needed for "Scarponi moved into the top ten of the overall classification definitively after stage 14,"
 * 2012 results ref added - shows stage and overall positions for each of the stage races. Craig  (talk)  14:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Ref "Classifications stage 20 – Rambouillet > Paris Champs-Élysées – Tour de France 2012" is now dead, and doesn't have a usable archive, unfortunately. Shouldn't be too hard to find a substitute, I would imagine.
 * Yep, Cyclingnews.com ref used for results. Craig  (talk)  14:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Refs needed for 2013 Gran Premio Città di Camaiore, Paris–Nice, Giro del Trentino, Tour de Suisse, Tour de Pologne, and 15th overall at 2013 Vuelta
 * References added for all. Craig  (talk)  14:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I get what he had been part of a 28-man breakaway, but was the last rider to remain clear of the field, after Alexandre Geniez had finished three minutes ahead as the stage winner. means, but it reads a bit awkwardly to me, and I think a layman may not catch its meaning. It kind of implies he was the only one of the 28 to stay clear, where it actually means he was the last of the only two to successfully stay clear.
 * Reworded this for clarity. Craig  (talk)  14:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

2014–2017: Astana

 * Need a ref for "... as well as finishing two stages in sixth place." [in the 2015 Tour of the Basque Country]
 * Two refs added for the respective stage results. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Need a ref for "He again started his season at the Tour de San Luis," and "He competed in the Tour de Suisse, ..." -- ref 173, "Michele Scarponi – 2016 Results", covers both.
 * Reference used accordingly. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I'd also probably use that same ref for "... taking three top ten stage finishes, ..."
 * Reference (as above) used accordingly. Craig  (talk)  23:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Death section

 * Ref 183, "Individual Classification by time 5", is dead, and I can't find a working archive. This seems to be the new URL: but it doesn't list the date, which was the purpose of the ref, unfortunately -- needed to show it was the day before he died.
 * There is a PDF version, but doesn't have an immediate link visible. I've added a reference from CyclingTips.com, which has a quote from Astana showing a yesterday. Craig  (talk)  12:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The back-and-forth between Scarponi's racing in the Tour of the Alps & impending Giro versus what happened in the accident make things a little unclear here, at least in terms of sourcing. For example, He was riding along the SP 362 provincial road (Via dell'Industria), one kilometre (0.62 mi) from the town centre. looks unsourced, because it's not in the subsequent inline ref 184, but is verified by ref 185, for example. Could perhaps reshuffle the order of these sentence, or else simply repeat ref 185 for this part.
 * Reshuffled the order of the paragraph, as it was too much of a mash. Craig  (talk)  12:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Major results

 * Can't verify some of these results in any of the three given sources:
 * 2002, 1st Stage 4 Giro del Trentino (I believe they all say he came 2nd)
 * Yep, I'm seeing 2nd all round. Seems to have been wrong since 2009... Craig  (talk)  00:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2003, Giro d'Abruzzo points classification (no mention anywhere)
 * Cyclingnews.com reference added. Pink jersey as visible at 5:16 here. Craig  (talk)  00:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2004, Peace Race, 1st on stages 6 & 7 not verified (They all say he was top 3 in 6 & 7, but didn't win. That's in line with the prose section that mentions this, too. Overall and Stage 4 are verified and fine to remain)
 * Yep, I agree that Stages 6 & 7 are incorrect. Seems to have been wrong since 2009... Craig  (talk)  00:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2011, 4th in UCI World Tour (CyclingArchives hasn't accounted for Contador's disqualification -- reusing the refs from that part of the prose here would be great, perhaps via a footnote?)
 * Found the UCI points standings somehow (lots of 404s going back that far) – added as a footnote. Craig  (talk)  15:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * He won the 2011 Tirreno Adriatico points classification according to the refs, but that isn't listed. If we're gonna mention it for the Giro d'Abruzzo, we should surely mention it for Tirreno :)
 * Strange - was definitely visible at the time of the race in 2011, but appears to have been removed here. Craig  (talk)  00:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Within the Grand Tour timetable, the ref says 12th for the 2005 Vuelta, and 32nd for the 2009 Giro, whereas the article says 11th and 31st. Another awkward disqualification-driven one, but no idea who it was, as I don't think that was Contador.
 * 2005 Vuelta appears to be in relation to Tom Danielson – the USADA requested disqualification of his results, but like others implicated, the positions may not have been upgraded (such as the Tour de France for the first half of the 2000s). Cyclingnews.com had 12th at the time, and I cannot see anything showing 11th for Scarponi – thus amended to 12th. Craig  (talk)  15:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2009 Giro is incorrect, as the UCI is showing 32nd. To be updated. Craig  (talk)  15:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * No listed ref for the major stage race GC or monuments timelines. Simply reusing the overview of his PCS profile, ref 198, "Michele Scarponi – Results", would work fine.
 * Utilised accordingly; for the Monuments, there is a classics-specific link that can be used. Craig  (talk)  00:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Fix those and the lead, and it'll be a very happy pass from me. (As a brief aside, I had an interesting moment reading through this when I remembered actually watched some of the race in question, hah – Hesjedal winning the Giro.) Any questions or anything, feel free to ping. Cheers! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 22:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * One quick addition: I forgot about MOS:ACCIM, which says that images all need alt-text for accessibility (for both blind readers and those using screen readers). Should be another quick thing, though. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 23:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Lead has now been significantly expanded from what it was before, and alternative text has been added to images (I've not added such before, so I've tried my best to add the most appropriate terminology for these). Craig  (talk)  17:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Great stuff. I've done the same fine-toothed combing of the new references and their claims, and everything looks in order to me. Alts for images look completely acceptable. The lead is terrific -- on par with the rest of the article now.
 * The one thing I haven't particularly mentioned in the review is the image licensing -- I've been through them all manually, and they all seem proper to me. All but two were verified by bots as having the correct licensing on Flickr; one was released by the team as royalty free, as proven by the archive; the final one was taken by a Wikipedian who clearly lives in the area (given their other images) with no issues of copyright violation on their talk page, so I have no reason to doubt its status. Therefore, they all seem to have the appropriate licensing.
 * Given all this, I now believe this meets every part of the GA criteria, and I'm now delighted to give this a pass. When I took this up, I wondered whether to mention that I'd be happy to give you an extra week (at least), considering the 6-month delay in getting it reviewed. Instead, you've gotten it done in 24 hours! Remarkable, tbh. So congratulations, and thank you! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 20:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)