Talk:2001 Australian Grand Prix/GA1

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: HawkAussie (talk · contribs) 01:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

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:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

So I will be happy to review this article about the 2001 Australian Grand Prix. HawkAussie (talk) 01:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Lead edit

...the 16th edition of the event as part of the series. - This isn't entirely clear on what series we are talking about here.
...Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher from a pole position start. - Maybe you could change this to, Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher from pole position.
...second, and the - We don't really need the comma here.
...his fifth in row in Formula One - Forget the a between in and row
He maintained the lead at the start of the race and for the next four laps. - You could probably change this too: "He maintained the lead until lap five...
Following this, the first race of the season, Michael Schumacher... - You probably don't need "the first race of the season" as it was already mentioned in the first paragraph that it was the first race.

Background edit

...round as part of the series. - Again I assume this is a part of the F1 World Championship.
Of the 11 teams and 22 drivers on the starting grid,... - You could actually drop the 11 teams part so it might go: From the 22 drivers on the starting grid,...
The third rookie driver in the 2001 driver line-up was... - This part of the sentence feels like it might not be needed, especially when you didn't mentioned the second driver in the previous sentence.
Many observers, including Jaguar's Eddie Irvine, Button and the president of the sport's... - I feel like this sentence might need a reference instead of being bare.
...becoming illegal slick tyres albeit the FIA declined to enforce a regulation... - I feel like this section might be worth a comma just to take a breather before carrying on.

Practice edit

Barrichello was the fastest driver with a lap of 1 minute 29.056 seconds... - Change this to Rubens Barrichello and link it as it's the first one in the main section of the page.
Seven minutes into the session, Tarso Marques' engine failed and laid oil on the track. - Did this bring out any flags because I assume it would with laying oil out on the track.
Red flags were unfurled after 35 minutes when... - Maybe change this word to something that wouldn't need to check what it means.
I feel like the final paragraph is a bit too brief for the two practice sessions which was held on the Saturday.

Qualifying edit

Häkkinen had pole position early on albeit balance problems put him off the track at the bumpy turn one and he qualified third. - This section properly needs to be a bit clearer.
...as his best lap was 1.846 seconds off Michael Schumacher's pace; - What about changing into with his best lap being 1.846 seconds off Michael Schumacher's pace;

Warm-up edit

Seems fine here

Race edit

...128,500 spectators from 14:00 local time - Shouldn't be this "at 14:00 local time."
In the following sentence you could remove reference 43 from that sentence as it was already covered with reference 44.
...predicted to affect the race. Analysis suggested a solitary pit stop... - In theory, you could combine these two sentences into one.
Button used the spare Benetton. His mechanics... - The Button sentence I feel seems a bit too short to have on it's own as it could be merged with the following sentence.
He lost several positions and almost made contact... - You have two sentences in a row which starts with "he". Just putting it out there.
...turn two and pirouetted into a barrier to the... - You have pirouetted in this sentence which is fine until you realize that you had change that word to spin further up in the section. Consistency is all I can say here.
...in his slipstream, and - You have a comma following the "and" in this part of the sentence so I assume you wanted to go ...in his slipstream and Ralf Schumacher...
...detached from the car, and - Remove the comma here
...and lung and liver lacerations - This is just a personal thought but two and's within three words of each other doesn't look right.
...to move to 10th place on lap 17 - to move to tenth place on lap 17.
...under braking for the end of the back... - under braking at the end of the back
...now had a ten-second advantage... - now held a ten-second advantage instead of what it currently is.
...increase his pace and became the fastest driver. - This bit is unclear.

Post-race edit

Out of respect Beveridge's death,... - It should be Out of respect for Beveridge's death

Death of Graham Beveridge and inquiries edit

Beveridge was survived by his wife and three adult children. - This sentence needs to be worded better as "survived" is the right word in this sentence.

Coronial inquest edit

Looks fine here

Doctor's inquest edit

Looks fine here

References edit

Just to make sure that all of the Gale group references are the right pages as all of them are currently classified as uncategorised redirects.

Final comments edit

So just do those final edits and this article will be good to go as an Good Article. HawkAussie (talk) 06:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
- @HawkAussie: Thanks for taking the time to review the article. All of the necessary changes have been made. MWright96 (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
  - @MWright96: Checked through the edits and the edits are good enough. Well done on getting another GA. HawkAussie (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Add topic