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

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase (talk · contribs) 05:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to review this. I will be on vacation until the 12th. I'm taking a printed out version of the article with me so that I'll be able to give you my thoughts as soon as I get back. Zwerg Nase (talk) 05:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

A very good article on this race. I made some minor changes myself. What's left is very little:

• Lead: I feel that the sentence '#In the World Constructors' Championship, Red Bull retained their lead but were reduced by McLaren, who were thirty-five points behind. sounds weird. Can Red Bull be reduced? It rather is the lead isn't it?

Reworded

• After the race: Post-race is the more conventional way to name this section, I believe.

 Done

• Optionally, you might think about bolding the names of teams and drivers still able to take the title in the standings after the race section.

 Done

So much from me. Cheers, Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @Zwerg Nase: I believe I have dealt with the issues raised. Thank you for the review. Z105space (talk) 07:35, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed you have! Congrats, it a pass :) Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:37, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]