Talk:2023 World Rally Championship/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Unnamelessness (talk · contribs) 10:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 07:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I will take this up and probably share the comments in parts. Good luck! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 07:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	As per Earwig, There is a 91.4% correlation with 1, but this seems to be a copy from the Wiki page (date indicated as 27-Dec-23, which was after the edits) and is not used as a source Otherwise ok
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	While I find that most sections are sufficiently covered, I am concerned about the Season report. The section seems to be a summary of the results written in prose and barely covers any details apart from few instances. This definitely needs a work upon to expand the section to cover in sufficient detail.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	I am keeping this on abeyance as of now. Will add more comments as I review the sections. But I would like to know the response of the nominator, if willing to make changes, as often you are better knowledgeable on the subject and even larger changes can be effected in a few days with sufficient effort. Promoting the article, post the addressing of queries and subsequent changes.

Comments

Lead

• fifty-first season of the competition organised : What competition? "..season of WRC" ought to do it!

Reworded.

Otherwise lead is good to go!

Calendar

• Image caption: Rally Mexico returned to the calendar after when, mention the year; What is pictured? (Description of year/details)

 Done.

• The championship was expected to be expanded to fourteen rounds: Expected by who? If it was the plan of the FIA, would be better to mention as such saying "FIA planned for so and so"

 Done.

• However, the number of the events was reduced to thirteen following a lengthy delay of the calendar: Better to simply specify the date on which the calendar was released as "lengthy delay" is subjective as reader does not know when the calendar is generally released.

 Done.

• The anticipated rally based in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia was absent from the calendar: Again, it needs to tie with the earlier sentence (who anticipated, FIA).

 Done.

• The organizers of the rally had previously held a national event in 2022 in the bid of a 2023 return: Bit confused here, the national event was held as a part of the bid to FIA (before the bid to host a WRC event was made?) or as a preparation to host the 2023 WRC event?

Both. Anyway, I reword the sentence to avoid the confusion.

• Rally Chile rejoined the calendar after the Chilean protests and COVID-19 pandemic respectively ruled out the event in 2020 and 2021: Suggestion that it can be rephrased for better understanding to "after having been ruled out in 2020 and 2021 due to so and so"

 Done.

• a tri-nation event running a day each: The rally schedule does not seem to be designed to run a day each as it crosses multiple countries on the same day. Can keep it simple, "a tri-nation event held across"

 Done.

• organizers were seeking : "sought a return"

Reworded.

• Several rally organizers also expressed their interests to return to the championship, including Rally Argentina, Rally Australia, the German Rally, and an event in Northern Ireland. The Argentine and Northern Irish bids ultimately failed: Rally Australia was already mentioned above, need not repeat. As the German rally bid was also successful, it can also be omitted. It can be simply, "Argentina and NI expressed interest in hosting so and so but failed"

 Not done. Rally Australia's mention is alongside Rally New Zealand, and the subject of that sentence is Rally New Zealand, which is the rally I want to emphasize in that part, so I don't think Rally Australia should be omitted here. The German Rally here refers to the Rallye Deutschland, which is a completely different rally to the Central European Rally. That being said the bid was compromised.

Rally Australia has its first mention in the line with Rally New Zealand. My understanding was that it was a joint bid, if it is separate it can remain as is. Regarding the last line, if indeed Germany is a separate rally bid, then suggestion would be add what happened to the German and Australian bids as well (similar to Argentina and NIR).

Not a joint bid. It is "I hold this year, you hold next year". I am also struggling to find sources that reports the final consequence. All we know is that Germany was planned to hold Rallye Deutschland, but now turn to hold the joint rally between Austria and the Czech Republic, i.e. Central European Rally, and Rally Australia's bid was failed as they are not on the 2024 calendar. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I have added so. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

• In addition to the candidate events, the WRC Promoter GmbH was also working on the calendar expansion to the Middle East and United States.: Expansion when? If it was 2023, it should be mentioned as WRC wanted to host so and so in 2023, but failed due to whatever reason. Middle east should tie with the Saudi Arabia point mentioned earlier if that was the reason.

 Not done. There is no explicit date or deadline according to the cited sources. All we know, by that time, is the FIA and WRC were working on it. If we go for consequentialism, Rally Saudi Arabia to become an official WRC rally in 2025, and so likely as the United States (no final confirmation yet).

If so, suggestion would be to make it relevant to the season at hand, "WRC Promoter GmbH was also working on the calendar expansion to the Middle East and United States, but no rallies were added for the 2023 season"

 Done. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

• The headquarters of the Rally Italia Sardegna : A clarification, Is headquarters and base of the rally same or different? If same, please use uniform terminology across.

 Done. Same. The headquarter is more formal, so I changed from "based" to "headquartered". Unnamelessness (talk) 13:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Entrants

• The following teams, drivers and co-drivers are under contracts to contest the championship under Rally1 regulations: "...contested", past tense

 Done.

• General comment: As sources 41 to 53 are used to note the entrants, can be combined under a single citation

 Not done. Not sure about this, because, correct me if I am wrong, it will have to copy the entire citation template if I want to recite it.

No, suggestion was to do a simple bulleted list. E.g.

Still don't think this is a good idea. In the F1 article, this would be good as they are only cited once, but in the WRC article, we use all 13 sources in the manufacturer-scoring entry table, and use most of them in the non-manufacturer-scoring entry table (For this article, it is 11/13). This means in the non-manufacturer-scoring entry table, it will have to be bulleted and copy the 11 sources again. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness You need not copy it again. The entry list is used in two places, and if you have seen my example, you can use a combined reference tag and re-use the tag as is. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

• M-Sport signed a full-year deal with Ott Tänak and Martin Järveoja, who terminated their multi-year contract with Hyundai: the first part says the manufacturer signed a contract and the second part says that the drivers terminated the contract. Should probably follow uniformity. "A and B terminated their ... and signed a full year deal for 2023 with M-Sport"

 Not done. I want to write the paragraph with each manufacturer begins so that the readers could easily catch the info.

Then, as a contract is an agreement with two parties, suggestion is that it can be tweaked to, "M-Sport signed a full year deal with Ott Tänak and Martin Järveoja after their multi-year contract with Hyundrai was terminated."

Reworded. I think the passive voice is kind of implying Tänak and Järveoja were forced to leave the team, which they weren't. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

• Pierre-Louis Loubet's programme with the team was expanded, with Loubet entered every round as a manufacturer-registered points scorer.: "the team" refers to M-Sport or Hyundai? "Pierre-Louis Loubet's programme with xxx was expanded, and Loubet entered every round as a manufacturer-registered points scorer."

 Done.

• However, their partnership was ended before the 2023 Central European Rally. Benjamin Veillas, the ex co-driver of Sébastien Ogier, is set to replace Gilsoul.:Tense mismatch. "Their partnership ended before xxx and abc replaced xyz."

 Done.

• Adrien Fourmaux was demoted to the team's: Who was Fourmax? Fourmax, who drove for xyz in 2022, was demoted...

 Done.

• though he would substitute Loubet at the season finale: past tense, "substituted for"

 Done.

• his top-tier debut..." better to mention what the top tier is though it has been mentioned in the lead or simply keep it debut in the WRC

 Done.

• So was the Luxembourgian driver Grégoire Munster at the event: confusing, wasn't Munster at WRC2 as mentioned earlier? Better to remove the earlier reference to Munster and introduce him here directly. "abc and xyz made their debuts for the team at so and so as private/non point scoring."

He got the promotion in-season. A bit of like Oliver Bearman this year. Anyway, "joining Grégoire Munster" was removed to avoid confusion.

• Gus Greensmith left the team after eight years. He drove for Toksport in the WRC2 championship. : Combine the sentences pl. Second sentence does not add any information as such to the article at hand.

 Done.

• They were joined by Esapekka Lappi and Janne Ferm as the team's full-time crews: If they replaced Oliver Solberg and Elliott Edmondson, which is my understanding, those should be combined as the dropping comes in the last part.

 Not done. No sources suggest this. You could also speculate Lappi and Ferm replaced Tänak and Järveoja.

• Teemu Suninen was announced to succeed his position with co-driver Mikko Markkula: move to past tense as season is done, "succeeded"

 Done.

• As the defending champions, Rovanperä and Halttunen kept their car number 69 for the season, instead of opting for the number 1 plate.: My understanding is that the no.1 plate is an option for the champions similar to F1. If so, wouldn't it be better to put it this way as it conveys the right meaning, "Rovanperä and Halttunen retained the car number 69 for the season, despite the no.1 plate being available to them as defending champions"

 Done.

• The team's fourth car is available for privately funded competitors when Ogier does not compete: past tense please, "car was made available.. Ogoer and xyz did not compete.."

 Done.

• a one-off return at the 2023 Rally Finland, announced after the Safari Rally.: Suggestion is to mention private or non-scoring; also "which was announced after the Safari rally" seems to be more apt

 Done. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Regulation changes

• Tyre warming zone (TWZ): please keep all capitals for first letters or tyre also in small letter

 Done.

• between Time Control (TC) and the start of a Special Stage: Does it mean that time between the time control of a previous normal stage and start of a special stage?

TC IN (check-in of a special stage (where applicable)) and the start of that special stage.

• ..., as well as evening: please split into two sentences as the second part states a different regulation, not determined by rally organizers. "The evening flexi-service for Rally1 cars was limited to a maximum of two hours on every rally weekend.

 Done.

• Morning service on gravel rallies would also be removed: for consistency, "Morning service on gravel events was also removed"

 Done. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Season report

As stated above, suggest that the season report section be expanded. The current report seems like a brief summary, which might be ok if the article talks about multiple seasons. In my opinion, as the article concerns that particular season, at least 2-3 lines of every event shall serve better.

I was intended to write the summary short as I received the feedback from the 2021 article GA review. I used to write a long paragraph per round, but ultimately got trimmed down around 20K of text for overdetailed. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

The last section is fine.

Citations

Have done a spot check on the citations. As of now, there are no concerns, it is perfectly well sourced and good to go.

@Unnamelessness, I have given my comprehensive comments. Though I have followed rallying in the past, I have limited knowledge on how it operates currently, so you can be a better judge on certain aspects and please revert so if there are any comments. There are some corrections which might not effectively concern GA review as such, and I do not want to sound as a grammar police here, but are based on the view of a neutral reader, so if there are acceptable versions in English, you can keep it as such. That's all for now. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 12:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Just completed the fixes to some of the issues as addressed above, apart from the season report section. You are free to go through it again, in case of any question. For the season report, if the expansion is a must, I will do it when I am available, hopefully this weekend. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness I have added my comments on the few cases, where there are disagreements. Regarding the report section, I have taken liberty to make a few minor edits myself. Other than that, my view is that the section can be tweaked and expanded a bit. While excessive detailing is not necessary (say a para for each rally) and most rallies are summarized enough for the section, some rallies can be expanded say the opening round, Croatia if there are any significant events during the rally itself. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Cleared 2 out 4 comments. For the report section, I only expanded the Croatia, where the lead change/retirement is significant to the results, wherea the season opener Monte is just Ogier being typical Ogier from the start to finish, business as usual. No drama, so I remained as it is. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamelessness, Now that the changes are made, I am happy to promote this. I know it had been waiting for a fair bit of time. Better late than never. Congrats on the GA! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

References