Talk:2016 24 Hours of Daytona

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Tayi Arajakate in topic GA Review

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2016 24 Hours of Daytona. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2016 24 Hours of Daytona. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 22:03, 25 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

5x expanded by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC).Reply

  •   Expanded well over fivefold on 7 January, long enough, well referenced, with no copyvio hits on Earwig. The original hook is interesting and cited (I changed "be" to "finish" as "saw two cars be" sounds very unnatural to me). The hook could also be tightened by dropping "in first and second places" as this is implied. I suggest not running the ALT1 hook because as someone unfamiliar with motorsport I don't exactly understand what it means or why it's significant, and the hook doesn't entice me to click the link to find out. QPQ is done. 97198 (talk) 13:42, 12 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:2016 24 Hours of Daytona/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 16:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • Hello MWright96, I'll be taking up the review for this nomination and will present it to you in some time. I hope you will find my feedback to be helpful. Tayi Arajakate Talk 16:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
    MWright96, good work on the article, I've completed the review and could not find any significant issues. There are two minor ones which I have mentioned in the comments but otherwise this is more or less a good article so I've promoted it. Tayi Arajakate Talk 13:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Comments edit

  • "It was the third consecutive year it was part of the WeatherTech SportsCar Championship and the 54th 24 Hours of Daytona." This line should have an inline citation.
  • Since the information in the image caption under "Entry list" is not present in the article, the caption itself should have an inline citation.

Assessment edit

  1. Comprehension: The article is very well written.
  2.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The prose is clear, concise and understandable.   Pass
    (b) (MoS) The article is compliant with the manual of style.   Pass
  3. Verifiability:The article is verifiable.
  4.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The article has a list of references and inline citation in the body, some minor issues exist.   Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Sources used appear to be largely reliable.   Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research found.   Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No copyright violation or plagiarism found, note earwig's brings a number of false positive due to the names.   Pass
  5. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive enough.
  6.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The article has a broad coverage of all major aspects.   Pass
    (b) (focused) The article is focused without any unnecessary deviations.   Pass
  7. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
  8.   Pass
    Notes Result
    The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.   Pass
  9. Stability: The article is stable.
  10.   Pass
    Notes Result
    No ongoing edit warring or content disputes exist.   Pass
  11. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
  12.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) Images used are tagged with their appropriate copyright statuses.   Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Use and captions are appropriate and illustrative.   Pass