Talk:2010 AMP Energy Juice 500

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2010 AMP Energy Juice 500/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 11:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

• Bcschneider53 - I am going to start this review today, I will be posting feedback over a couple of days probably as I work through the various aspects of the GA criteria.  MPJ-DK  11:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

GA Tool checks

• Source 2 (Montoya Claims Talladega Pole) is dead.

•  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• No DAB links
• The high percentage results on the copyright violation tool falls into two categories that are okay
  • The results tables, hard to present race results in a different way
  • Quotes with proper citations

Well written

• Carl Edwards with 5,785 was twenty-three points ahead of Tony Stewart, as Jeff Burton with 5,752 points, was thirty-one ahead of Kurt Busch, and forty-seven in front of Matt Kenseth.[9] Greg Biffle and Clint Bowyer was eleventh and twelfth respectively with 5,682 and 5,592 points. In the Manufacturers' Championship, Chevrolet was leading with 236 points, forty-two points ahead of their rival Toyota. Ford, with 149 points, was twenty-four points ahead of Dodge in the battle for third.[10] Jamie McMurray was the race's defending champion. this section has several examples of numbers being spelled out vs. in numbers, it should be consistent in each sentence, probably all written as numbers.

•  Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• with a fastest time - is that a racing phrase? I would have thought that it would be the fastest'??

• Tweaked. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• Martin was quickest with a fastest time - I guess here it may be more appropriate to say "his fastest"??

• Tweaked. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• due to only NASCAR's qualifying procedure, only forty-three were able to race. - I am confused as to why the first "only" is in the sentence. And I don't it does not explain why only 43 were able to race? May be helpful to the reader to briefly state the rule?

•  Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• Stewart, one of the drivers in the Chase for the Sprint Cup, qualified - the way this is worded it makes it sound like Stewart was the first driver mentioned to be in the Chase?

•  Removed, not sure it's necessary to mention his time anyway considering how far down the order he was. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• was scored thirty-first - Is there something else influencing their position than qualifying times? being "scored" makes it sound like there are other criteria?

• No, just times. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

• if it's just time then "scored" sounds off, like they had judges at track side giving them points for style.  MPJ-DK  23:00, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

• No longer an issue as I removed the phrase entirely; the 31st place guy isn't that notable even if he's in the Chase... --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Keselowski until lap 36, when Bowyer passed him. - it feels like this sentence is missing something?

•  Added. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• On lap 37, Keselowski and Earnhardt - don't think this needs the comma?

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• the drivers who led were Harvick, Martin Truex Jr., and Reutimann - How about rewriting it to an active voice with "Harvik, Martin Truex Jr. and Reutimann all took turns leading the race"?

•  Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Martin passed him and led a lap, until Hamlin - does not need the comma

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• lead until lap 62, when McMurray - no comma needed

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• after Allmendinger lost the handling of his car - did he lose control of the car or was it a mechanical issue? I read it as a mechanical issue but I want to be sure that is what you are saying?

• He spun out, clarified. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• the leader, but was passed by - Comma issues.

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• led two laps, before Busch reclaimed - again the comma

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• meanwhile, Hamlin was not able to stay maintain the leaders' pace - something seems off here? And furthermore redundant to say he could not maintain the pace since he was not in the lead? or is there something I am missing??

•  Fixed and  Added a note explaining that he lost pace with the lead draft. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Earnhardt pass Montoya - I would assume that's "past"?

•  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Hamlin was scored a lap down - "Was scored" sounds odd here, is that a racing phrase when a drive is lapped?

• Yes, "scored" is not an uncommon term used; the leaderboard (timing and scoring) would list (or "score") him as one lap down. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• lead position, but was passed a lap - comma issue

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• which sent Ambrose down the track, as Harvick collided into him perhaps reword it to "which sent Ambrose down the track where Harvick collided with him"??

•  Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• who led one lap, before his team mate Kyle Busch - excessive comma and "teammate" is one word.

•  Removed and  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• mulit-car incident - multi.

•  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• collided into the wall - he either "collided with" or "hit the wall" or "ran into the wall"

•  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• in front of a crowd of 110,000 people. is really not necessary and at first I read it like he had won at Talladege before but there were like only 90,000 people there.

•  Removed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• left Johnson leading - I think "still leading" would be better and clearer.

•  Done. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Ford followed with 152 points, twenty-three points ahead of Dodge in fourth - should be "23"

•  Fixed. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Since this was in 2010 I think it'd be good to note how long the "indefinite suspensions" were?

• Honestly, I'm not sure this information can be found. Whitney was a small team with lower-end, lesser-known personnel working for them...and the team merged with another small team after the 2010 season. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Verifiable / No OR

• No sources in the "Standings after the race" section at all? is every fact listed in the table also mentioned in the prose and cited there? if not it'll need sourced

•  Added sources for these tables. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 21:44, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

• Source 17 is used for almost all of the race description, while I did not check it word for word, each of the incidents/descriptions i looked at could be found in the source.
• The other sources look okay to me in regards to reliability, formatting etc.

Broad

• Y has the standings prior to the race, qualifying, race, results, standings afterwards and also some fall out from the race. I think for a race article this is as broad as it's going to get.

Neutral

• Y - I think it's straightforward and factual in it's description of the events.

Stable

• Y - Not seeing any evidence in the revision history or the talk page.

Illustrated

• Non-free images have appropriate rationales
• Commons images look to be appropriately licensed
• Y

• Bcschneider53 - I am though with my review, I will put this on hold. Let me know when you are done or have questions and I'll review the changes.  MPJ-DK  17:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

• @MPJ-DK: Sounds great. Thanks again. RL work always comes first...and unfortunately, there has been quite a lot of it recently. Not sure when I'll have time to do this, but I'll get to it within the seven days I'm sure. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 01:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Bcschneider53 - 7... 10, 15 whatver you need, I'll keep it open for you for a while, past 7 days if need be.  MPJ-DK  01:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• @MPJ-DK: Well what do you know, sometimes time just appears out of nowhere and you have to take advantage of it. I believe everything has been amended. Let me know if you come across any outstanding issues on your second run-through. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

• Bcschneider53 nothing obvious has jumped out at me so this is passed. Good work.  MPJ-DK  12:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)