Jump to content

Talk:2010 AAA 400

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article2010 AAA 400 has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 20, 2010Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:2010 AAA 400/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Resolute 16:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
Comments
  • The American Flag in the infobox title should be removed per WP:MOSFLAG. This appears to be a function of the infobox however, and is something the NASCAR project should discuss.
  • "it was the 28th, as well as the second race in the Chase for the Sprint Cup during the 2010 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series season." -- How is it both the 28th and second race in the Chase? Consider rewording: "it was the 28th race during the 2010 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series season and the second in the Chase for the Sprint Cup."
  •  Done Nascar1996 20:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Some of the Chase for the Sprint Cup participants, such as, Clint Bowyer and Tony Stewart were in the top-ten for most of the race, but halfway through the race all of them had problems, like speeding penalties and contact with the wall." -- This reads rather awkwardly. Consider rewording along the lines of "some of the participants, including name (speeding penalty) and name (contact with the wall) were in the top ten for much of the race before suffering problems."
  • "Afterward, during qualifying, forty-six cars were entered, but only forty-three were able because of NASCAR's qualifying procedure." -- Able to what? Able to participate in the qualification round, or able to qualify for the main race?
    •  Done
  • "...with a time of 23.116." -- should specify the unit. 23.116 seconds.
  • "When the drivers pitted, Allmendinger remained the leader, but Johnson lost three positions to fifth." -- Kinda sucks that fifth took three positions from Johnson. "Johnson lost three positions, falling to fifth."
  • "Tony Stewart was the only team to change only two tires, which resulted in him losing position quickly." - This confuses me, as in most pit stops, teams change two or four tires, so logically, changing only two should allow the driver to move up. That implies to me that everybody else changed no tires? If so, should be clarified. Also, you don't need to note a second time that Stewart changed two tires (two paragraphs later).
  • "Ten laps later, Johnson reclaimed the lead after Allmendinger pitted. Following his pit stop, he was one lap behind in twenty-seventh." -- This makes no sense. Who is "he", and which pit stop are you referring to? There appears to have been two or three by that point of the race. If it is Johnson, clarify that he had been in 27th at some point before coming back up to reclaim the lead.
  • There were a lot of disjointed statements in the race section caused by unnecessary commas. I've reworded several statements to simplify them and remove those commas. Please check that I did not inadvertently change the meaning of a passage to something you did not intend.
  • I am curious as to why there is no mention of the standings in the Chase.
  • Images and references look good.

Overall, it is a very good article. Just needs the prose fixed in a few areas, after which I will pass it. Cheers, Resolute 16:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I finished revising the article be meet the requirements. Nascar1996 20:39, December 20, 2010 (UTC)
Looks good, I'm now passing it. Cheers, Resolute 23:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]