# Talk:2018 Tour de France

Should there be Points classification points or we could remove one word Points in tabele bellow !? --PetarM (talk) 07:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

This edition, unpaved used since 1987. 20th Stage of 1987, Col du Coq has 300m unpaved section. (from TDF roadbook 2018 edition) 2400:7800:8316:C300:34A2:2893:9CC:439C (talk) 16:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Are the Team Classification results correct, my understanding is that this is based on the three highest placed riders on GC, disregarding bonuses and penalties.  Therefore this would be:
Team Sky 250:22:22 (Thomas @ 83:14:46, Froome @ 83:19:41 & Bernal @ 83:44:55);
Movistar 250:41:14 (Landa @ 83:24:50, Quintana @ 83:31:41 & Valverde @ 83:44:43); and
Bahrain-Merida 252:07:43 (Pozzovivo @ 83:56:21, Ion @ 84:04:01 & Gorka @ 84:07:21).
But the article shows them as follows:
1	Movistar Team 250h 24' 53"
2	Bahrain–Merida	+ 12' 33"
3	Team Sky	+ 31' 14"
Am I missing something or is the result wrong?  White&BlueWasp (talk) 14:28, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

@White&BlueWasp: I think your "Thomas @ 83:14:46" is a typo and you mean 83:17:46. The article matches the official source [1]. It's not based on GC. The rules [2] say: "The general team ranking is established by adding together the three best individual times of each team in every stage." And later: "If the Commissaires’ Committee judges that the offence committed by a rider benefits his team’s general time ranking, the team receives a 30-second penalty." I don't know whether bonuses are counted. I guess Movistar and Bahrain–Merida have better team times than your calculation because there were stages where riders outside their final top-3 GC had better times than those riders. I cannot explain why Sky has a much worse team time than the sum of their top-3 GC. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

I came to this article to read about the incident in which Froome was mistakenly grabbed by a cop, and his bike broken. It's nowhere in the article even though there are secondary sources. Why isn't it in the article? Abductive (reasoning) 18:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

It was a minor incident with no influence on the race (it actually occurred outside the race). Hardly notable, or even relevant. Kittens n thugs (talk) 23:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:2018 Tour de France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 13:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Will review shortly. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@BaldBoris: Sorry for the long delay. I will try to post my review tonight. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)


### Review
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Lead
The lead so far has only three paragraphs, I feel it can be longer, giving a broader overview over how the race unfolded.
Per MOS:LEADELEMENTS, there is no set amount of paragraphs to use, only a max of four. I believe less is more with a lead, and that it should only include the most important information with no padding. If it's too long the reader may feel daunted and leave the article. BaldBoris 12:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


### Teams
Maybe add the information that the Tour de France is a World Tour event here, and specify that therefore, the organizers had to invite the 18 World Tour teams.
It's mentioned in the UCI rankings section as with all the other Tours I've worked on, but I agree it's better up there. BaldBoris 12:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"The Tour's race director Christian Prudhomme wished the team the best in their inaugural season." - I feel this sentence should be cut, this is trivial.
Done. I had thought that too, but left it. BaldBoris 12:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"the usual 198", well that number is no longer usual. I would rephrase to say "instead of 198, which had been the number of starters since 1998" (I think there was no year in between with a different number). Van den Akker probably has a statistic for that, I'll check when I get home.
Done. It's 2010. BaldBoris 12:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
There should be a comma behind "(UCI)".
Done. BaldBoris 12:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


### Pre-race favourites
I feel like there should be a comma after "before the race" in the first sentence.
Changed to "In the lead up to the Tour,". BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"The sample contained twice the allowed amount of the asthma drug salbutamol." - this should be specified. As far as I understand the case, his level was twice the amount allowed for him, considering he was generally allowed to take Salbutamol in certain dosages. Come to think of it, I actually believe that I wrote that sentence..
I believe you did. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Done. I'm far from an expert in this, and I have very little interest in the science side of cycling (blinkers?). BaldBoris 16:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"who had in 2018 moved to Movistar" - would move "in 2018" in front of "had".
Done. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
You should decide if you want to do the Oxford comma or not. In the first list of contenders, there is one (", and Adam Yates") but in the list of further contenders and in the sprinters list, there isn't ("and Ilnur Zakarin").
Not. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"Sagan was again aiming equal" - missing the word "to".
Done. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Make a full stop behind "six points classifications".
Done. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"seven wins so far in 2018, including the points classification at Giro" - classifications do not technically count as wins, so I would rephrase "and additionally the points classification..."
Done. It was actually the Tour of California. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
"who turned 36 at during the Tour" - one word too many there. Would cut "at". Also change the tense to "had taken" for consistency.
Done. BaldBoris 13:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


### Route and stages
"the opening stages of the 2018 Tour (known as the Grand Départ) take place" - would add "would" or "were set" after the brackets.
Done. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"The departments in the Pays de la Loire region hosted the Tour de France in its first edition back in 1903." - this sentence confused me on first reading. Maybe cut it and add "since 1903" in the next sentence? That would also take away from the undue coverage the Vendee gets at the moment, compared to other regions that featured.
Done. Rewrote and cut out Pays de la Loire. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"Of the route, Mark Cavendish labelled it "absolutely brutal"." - Does this mean the entire Tour route or the stage with unpaved road? This should be clarified.
Done. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"stage 3's 35.5 km (22 mi) team time trial" - Here the stage numbers are in numerals, further down they are written out. I would suggest doing this consistently.
Done. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"six as mountain" - this sounds weird. "Mountainous" would be better, I think.
Officially it's "mountain" not "mountainous". I had previously had them all in quotes for other Tours but I think an FAC advised me to remove them. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: I don't think though that this is a case of WP:OFFICIAL. We can change the exact wording to have it sound better grammatically. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Done. I think I used "mountainous" years ago, but wanted to be too correct. BaldBoris 11:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
The weird Formula One grid start should be mentioned here, even though the idea fell flat on its face.
Done. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
The table needs a source for the stage winners.
Done. BaldBoris 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


### Race overview
"Kévin Ledanois (Fortuneo–Samsic) took the first polka dot jersey as the leader of the mountains classification." - it should be mentioned that he collected those points while he was in a breakaway, to explain that to lesser-informed readers.
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
with Dion Smith of Wanty–Groupe Gobert claiming the polka. - Same applies here. Also, "claiming the polka" is too colloquial, I would rephrase to "claiming the lead in the mountains classification".
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
* "Also in stage five" - on stage five

"gave him the polka" - again, too colloquial
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
* "In stage six" - again, "on". I did a quick Google search to confirm that all publications I know use "on" as a preposition for "stage", not in. You could use "during" though.

"In stage" returns plenty of high quality results (search: "In stage" Tour de france). I find nothing unusual about it. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: Once more, you prove that you are way better at googling than I am. Point taken. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"with a kilometre remaining" - use convert template to give distance in miles (necessary until the U.S. finally gets the metric system, it's about damn time). Also, I feel like the comma after "remaining" can be removed.
Done. The UK isn't fully metric either. I use miles, as do the road signs. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: I know, that is even weirder to me to be honest, but well... Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"contained general classification contenders" - missing "the"
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"included were the promising young Belgian all-rounder Tiesj Benoot (Lotto–Soudal), Luis León Sánchez (Astana), and the 2017 Tour points classification winner Michael Matthews." - I would definitely drop "promising young Belgian all-rounder" since this is editorialising. Furthermore, the selection whom to mention seems quite random, specifically since Benoot and Sanchez have not been mentioned before as being significant. Maybe cut it down to just mention Matthews as an example. He was introduced earlier in the article, so that makes sense to highlight his retirement.
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
* "in the eighth stage" - on.

"sett paving sections" - sett-paving sections (also in the image caption)
The stones pictured are clearly cobblestones. Kittens n thugs (talk) 15:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@Kittens n thugs: What I mean is, there needs to be a hyphen, since it's a compound adjective. Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"numerous riders had tyre punctures as well, including Bardet, who got three of them" - change to "including three for Bardet" to tighten the sentence up a little bit
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"to extend his lead in the yellow jersey" - "in the general classification", the jersey is not the competition, so he cannot extend anything there.
Done. You must know that I'm aware of that? BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: Sure, I am, I just want to make my points as clear as possible. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"extended his lead to 2 min 22 s" - change to "2:22 minutes"; this applies to several other instances as well.
Either can be used per MOS:NUM. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: MOS:NUM is the most mysterious part of the guidelines to me. I never find the information on there that I am looking for, this subpage needs a serious workover to make it more understandable. But thank you for pointing that out. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"Alaphilippe also took the mountains classification." - took the lead
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"Thomas achieved back-to-back wins" - You introduce that Thomas won two stages, but one of them is outlined after a paragraph break. I would recommend doing the paragraph break before this sentence to pull that together. Or, since the first paragraph would then be very short, do no break at all.
It was one paragraph until it was recently expanded. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"passing lone breakaway rider Mikel Nieve (Mitchelton–Scott), and was" - remove the comma
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
The entire part about the reactions to Nibali's crash are way too detailed, considering they take up more space than the actual report on the stage itself. I would cut out everything starting from "Nibali's team" up to and including "French police". They can be included in the stage report articles, but here they add nothing to the actual report of the race.
Partly disagree. The part starting with "Nibali's team" is essential as it offers an explanation for why he crashed and needs to be there. Agree that the part iw too detailed though, I cut most of it. *:However I think it's notable that the incident became a legal matter and it's worthy of the last short single sentence. Kittens n thugs (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@Kittens n thugs: I can go along with the way it stands now, however, I will point out that when the legal matter is introduced, it should also be resolved, meaning it needs to say what came out of it, otherwise, it's a tease that goes nowhere. I was not able to find an article about what came of it, do you know? Or is it still ongoing? Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@Zwerg Nase: It's still ongoing as I understand. According to La Gazzetta, ASO took half a year to answer the first letter they received from Nibali's lawyer, and I doubt they've answered the next one yet. Regarding the French police investigation, I think it's ongoing as well (but better ask someone who can read French news) Kittens n thugs (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Done. Probably the most memorable moment of the race. BaldBoris 12:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"cut-off time" - it should be explained how that works in a note.
Done. BaldBoris 11:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"attack in closing meters" - missing "the"
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Also, that sentence reads like there wasn't a sprint but that Sagan attacked and had a gap. It should be clarified that it was a sprint finish. "Duelled it out" is also way too colloquial.
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"the peloton finished eighteen minutes ahead of the breakaway" - other way round.
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"Following the stage controversy arouse around Team Sky rider Gianni Moscon, who had punched Fortune-Samsic rider Élie Gesbert during the opening kilometres of the stage." There needs to be a comma after "stage", otherwise it reads like "stage controversy". Also, I would add "allegedly" to the claim about Moscon, since he still maintains he didn't do it and we don't want to be sued for libel here. Oh, and it's "arose", not "arouse", even though some people might feel emotionally aroused by a fiery Italian.
Comma, U and libel insurance added
It might be worth adding the fates of Gilbert and Yates after their crashes.
Gilbert is definitely worth atleast the three sentences I just gave him. Regarding Yates, is his fall really noteworthy for the overview when there's a main article? Kittens n thugs (talk) 14:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think their fates is noteworthy, crashes always happen. Restored Yates. Kittens n thugs, there's no need for that much on Gilbert. As you say, expand on the stage articles. Also, please make sure you sign all your comments with ~~~~. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I'd disagree, if a crash is considered noteworthy enough to cover which rider crashed, where he crashed and how he crashed, it's also relevant if the crash had any influence on the race. Which is the case for Gilbert. He sustained serious injuries and had to quit the race, he is also one of the biggest names in cycling which is enough to make him leaving the race noteworthy, despite it having little or none influence on the final standings. Had he simply remounted his bike and lost ten seconds on the stage while not in contention for any of the jersey and then continued the race to Paris, it wouldn't have been noteworthy. That's why I can't see why Yates fall should be covered in the race overview. Thanks for reminding me about the tildes, I'll do my best! Kittens n thugs (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
He was not considered a pre-race favourite nor did he appear up until this stage, so held no more significance than any other rider. He may have an excellent list of results (only one Tour stage though), but that doesn't mean much in this article. He's only mentioned because he was in the lead and likely to to win the stage. Can you still sign your old comments for future confusion, don't worry about the time; Zwerg Nase isn't required to as he's the reviewer. This really isn't the place for discussion, read WP:FORUM. BaldBoris 00:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris and Kittens n thugs: Strange case here. My suggestion would be: "While Gilbert had to retire, Yates carried on, but was overtaken by Alaphilippe, who took his second stage victory." Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Why were the farmers protesting? Yes, I'm fairly certain their message had zero do with the Tour, but people wondering why are likely to go here to check for an answer. I'd argue 20 characters explaining the reason for their protest would be wisely spent. Kittens n thugs (talk) 14:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Added the reason, with a copy-edit. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Nice. It struck me that I didn't know what they were on about, even though I watched it live. Kittens n thugs (talk) 00:27, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
"attacked following the final climb, to a misty Col d'Aubisque, and on the descent and he soloed" - rewrite as "attacked on the descent following the final climb, to a misty Col d'Aubisque, and soloed"
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"Roglič took Froome's final podium position." - "final" makes it sound like the final GC. Maybe rewrite to "took third place from Froome"?
Done. BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"After the stage, Dumoulin were critical of a TV motorcycle driving too close ahead of Roglič, suggesting it had given him an advantage by riding in the slipstream of the vehicle. He made clear that he didn't put any blame on Roglič, who he believed was a worthy winner as he was 'the strongest today'." - I would cut this sentence, it is pretty trivial towards the great scheme of things.
I can't argue.
"was won by Dumouli" - n missing.
Fixed
"whose time was one second ahead of Froome" - who finished one second ahead of Froome; then do a full stop and "Froome in turn managed to retake third place from Roglič".
Done. "Froome. Froome"? BaldBoris 23:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
* "in the final stage" - on the final stage


### Classification leadership
In general, I would take out the "would" forms. So for instance instead of "The first three riders would get 10, 6, and 4 seconds...", just "The first three riders received..." Otherwise, it all sounds so hypothetical.
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"It would affect the general classification, but not the points." - Would rephrase "It would affect the general, but not the points classification".
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"The leader wears a white jersey." - switch to past tense.
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"The riders in the team" - maybe better "on the team"?
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"The team classification winners was given" - either "winner was given" or "winners were given"
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Below the table, "on stage" for all of the notes.
Done. BaldBoris 16:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


### UCI rankings
"World Ranking individual ranking" - avoid repetition
I know it looks odd, but it's correct. BaldBoris 16:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris: Made some minor tweaks here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


### Other
I don't think the note in the lead is needed. The postponement is mentioned in the Route and stages section, that's enough. Also, the note is missing a full stop, but that point is mute when it gets removed.
Done. BaldBoris 16:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
That's it from me for now. Overall, very good job! The thing with Froome is the favourites section should still be addressed. Looking forward to your edits! Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I've realised how much I didn't write, although I should've sorted it. I'll care take of the rest when the article becomes stable. BaldBoris 16:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Everything is done now. Those points about "in stage" should be struck or removed. BaldBoris 11:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


### Routes and stages 2
"The longest mass-start stage was stage seven, at 231 km (144 mi), and the shortest was stage seventeen, at 65 km (40 mi).[46] The aforementioned, a mountain stage, was the shortest since 1985 and began with a standing start grid formation, with positions based on riders general classification ranking."
For those unfamiliar with the subject, it should be (again) clarified that it was the shortest mass-start stage since 1985. It should also be clarified that the 1985 stage was just one of two half-stages raced that day. Perhaps it'd be more relevant to refer to the last time the route included a shorter mass-start stage that weren't a half-stage? Which I have a vague memory of being in the early seventies. But don't ask me for a source. Kittens n thugs (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I believe it was the 15th stage of the 1972 edition with only 28 km from Aix-les-Bains to Le Revard. Won by Cyrille Guimard. Kittens n thugs (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
"The innovation for the Tour was universally welcomed, but it failed to make an impact on the stage."
Some quotes from the source: Wegelius: "It'd be nice if they did it the opposite way around actually" Visbeek: "It maybe would have been better to test it here at the Dauphiné, to see what it really does." Sciandri: "For sure it's just a way of trying to get the show going"
I wouldn't call it universally welcomed. Perhaps it should be rephrased as "The innovation was generally regarded as a spectacle for the audience, and was believed to have little, if any, effect on the race. It was met with some criticism, but also welcomed as a sign of the race organiser's willingness to try new ideas". Kittens n thugs (talk) 23:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

"universally welcomed", meaning no one wasn't negative about it. The second half of my sentence is a summary of post-stage opinions. Changed to: "The grid formation was an innovation for the Tour, and with shorter distance, was beforehand universally welcomed, but it was thought to have made little effect on the race." BaldBoris 01:09, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@BaldBoris and Kittens n thugs: I agree with the new first part of the sentence, but I feel that the second part was better as in it made it clearer that the concept did not quite pen out. Another way to deal with it would be to leave the sentence as it is now, and tackle how it actually played out in the race overview? Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Done. BaldBoris 11:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 I am satisfied and gladly promote this to GA. Well done! Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)