# Talk:2014 Tour de France

Stage 12 is listed as a medium-mountain stage in the current revision of the article. But on the Tour website [1] is is listed as flat. --Kompik (talk) 12:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I have corrected this, but no doubt someone will change it back on the grounds that, with 4 climbs similar to stage 11, it is hardly flat.  Bikeroo (talk) 13:59, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
The "official website" also lists stage 5 (the cobblestone stage) as "hilly", while there were no categorised climbs and the highest point was a measly 57 meters. Still, no reason not to follow the site for stage 12 (flat) and 11 (hilly/medium mountain) though. - FakirNL (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Stage 5 is listed as being flat with cobblestones - but is illustrated with the pic for a hilly stage. In the first place it would surely be better to use the flat stage pic, but also there must surely be an equivalent pic just for cobblestone races? Every other type of race seems to have its own dedicated graphic. JamKaftan (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2014 Tour de France. 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/20130209134934/http://www.roadcycling.co.nz/TourdeFrance/tour-de-france-demystified-part-1.html to http://www.roadcycling.co.nz/TourdeFrance/tour-de-france-demystified-part-1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 15:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm assuming that stages starting in Britain and in Ypres exactly a hundred years after the
start of the First World War are not coincidental. Does someone want to research this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4680:EE80:1D57:C7BD:2CD2:5425 (talk) 19:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC) 

The routes during WW1 and WW2 cannot be the same.  History of the Tour is lacking. --2600:6C48:7006:200:B056:6066:1296:EF0B (talk) 23:40, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Can you be more clear on this? What is "routes during WW1 and WW2"? Routes of what? Which part of the article are you talking about? -EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 07:02, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:2014 Tour de France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 19:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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: 

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—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

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): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

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: 
All images have appropriate licences
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Article meets GA standard.

Article looks good.  Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)