# Talk:2017 FIA GT World Cup

This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 FIA GT World Cup/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 16:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful. 
If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)
I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy. 
Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.


### Immediate Failures
It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria - Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It contains copyright infringements - is clean, images are tagged well. Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). - I couldn't find any in the text on first inspection Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. - No edit warring Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


### Links
no dablinks Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
One dead link requires tagging or archiving Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


### Prose
#### Lede
The 2017 FIA GT World Cup (formally the SJM Macau GT Cup – FIA GT World Cup) - When you say formerly, when was this? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Mercedes-AMG Team Driving Academy - Is this an official name? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
That is the official name of the team. MWright96 (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Ideal, just checking it's a proper noun. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
looking through the article, there's a bit about post race, and an automated warning system. This seems like it could be added to the lede in some way? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Only mentions of any changes of championship position (teams'/constructors' and drivers') or the disqualification of the race winner through a technical infringement or a sporting infraction is deemed necessary to be inserted in the lede, not matters such as the lobbying for a system that is not likely to be implemented into motor racing. MWright96 (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Makes sense, I wasn't sure what contributed to a full summary for racing articles. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
overall, lede is well written. :). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


#### Entry List
This section feels a little long for one paragraph - Can it not be split? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Are the silver and bronze licenses really notable topics? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree with the wording surrounding the restrictions. The events were restricted to just people with platinum and gold licenses, however silvers were also sometimes allowed? Perhaps re-word to say that the event was restricted by license, and then list what licenses were allowed. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Do we need a list of what accomplishments the field had won? Prior years champions and world champions should suffice Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Have removed only one driver because his series is lesser known. MWright96 (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


#### Background
As the link for Laurens Vanthoor was in another section, it may be wise to either re-link him in this section, or state his full name. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
what are TecPro barriers? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
"Pommer pirouetted 360 degrees at more than 250 km/h (160 mph) on the kerb at the inside of Mandarin Bend corner but he narrowly avoided striking the wall beside the track." - This comes out of nowhere. did they not stop the session for this accident? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
"Solitude Esses" - I'm guessing this is part of the track? As there isn't a list of corners in the article, it may be an idea to put this in brackets next to this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
As a whole, this section is very well put together, and well cited. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


#### Qualifying & main race
Not really an issue with the article, but it's quite confusing that there is both qualifying, and a qualifying race. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
"tightly-packed field could avoid due to a lack of reaction time" - The references make it seem like this was more of an opinion, rather than fact. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Overall, well written. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Not a big fan of the quote being on the left, but I suppose that's personal preference. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


### Notes & References
references are well layed out Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Notes are cited well Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


### GA Review
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  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):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

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: 

Comments
I'll most likely do a little bit today, and follow up with the rest of this review tomorrow. I used to be a bit of a formula 1 fan, but haven't seen a race for over 10 years, so if anything I raise is usual, please bare with me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

So, I'm going to go ahead and pass this GA. The above is some really nit-picky stuff that I saw, but nothing that stops the article from meeting the GA criteria above, so feel free to completely ignore the above; however, if any of it is useful, feel free to use it to improve the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

As a reader, this makes no sense to me: definitionally, I don't understand how an "uninvolved" driver can be said to be "involved" (or vice versa). I would fix it, but I don't understand what it's actually trying to say! Aawood (talk) 08:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)