[go: up one dir, main page]

Jump to content

Talk:Mercedes-Benz CLK LM

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mercedes-Benz CLK LM/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 13:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]

General

[edit]
Yeah, cross referencing like that isn't suitable. Is there not a list of results per season or anything out there? Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski for lots of these cars, unfortunately, no. There are amateur databases, and some databases where you must select an individual race, rather than a car. racingsportscars.com is a USERG database (which personally I consider to be highly reliable) that is contributed by people who either personally saw the races or have paper copies of the results sheet. I might be able to dig up a season result from there. I'll see what I can do. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 19:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review meta comments

[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 Bruxton (talk22:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Mercedes-Benz CLK LM at the 2010 Goodwood Festival of Speed
The Mercedes-Benz CLK LM at the 2010 Goodwood Festival of Speed

Improved to Good Article status by X750 (talk). Self-nominated at 09:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Good article; is well-written, and was elevated to the GA status on 22 December 2022, so of a desired standard, and adhering to the stipulated window. Suffices the basic criteria set forth at WP:DYKCRIT; namely, is new, good prose, and long enough to boot. Hook fact is cited, and occurs in the article. It is appealing, and the uninitiated audience is likely to find it as such. DYKCRIT #4 is satisfied by virtue of its GA status. Earwig found no copyvio issues. This nomination is apparently editor's first, so a QPQ is not required per the rule. Image is properly licensed, apt, and in use in the article, so a good accompaniment. However, X750, the hook should include (pictured) in italics next to the bold hyperlink if you want the image to go as well. Once that's done, I'll mark it as ready for DYK. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 19:19, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, MBlaze Lightning. X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 21:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]