Talk:2002 Australian Grand Prix/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dawnseeker2000 (talk · contribs) 02:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

MWright96, I wanted to watch the race on YouTube before reviewing the article, but didn't see it anywhere, so my plan is to look for typos, fix dashes and formatting if necessary, then will give the thumbs up. I'm pretty sure I've reviewed your work before, and I'm pretty sure that means that it's unlikely there will need to be any changes on your part. Great presentation as always. Dawnseeker2000 05:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Dawnseeker2000: Thought I leave a comment as I've reviewed a Formula 1 race before. There's a copy of it on the Internet Archive if you're looking for a copy. I used this site when reviewing a 2014 F1 article for MWright as well. I'll leave the review to you :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. Much appreciated! Not that it's totally necessary to see the race for a review, but I won't complain about hearing the glory of the V10 era again. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000 20:05, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Watched the race. What an event. Action packed. I'm giving the OK on the seven items that I absolutely know are fine. I think that the remainder are going to be OK or nearly OK as well, but that is just after having a quick look at the article. I have not read it completely yet. Dawnseeker2000 10:07, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I've made some minor changes in light of the manual of style. It is a good read. I'm marking all requirements met. Good job. Dawnseeker2000 15:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)