GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Z105space (talk · contribs) 18:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take on this review. What a historic day for all of motorsport. Z105space (talk) 18:52, 10 June 2016 (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:

General

[edit]

Lead

[edit]
Both  Done

Free practice

[edit]
 Done
 Done
 Done
 Done

Qualifying

[edit]
According to MOS:NUMERAL, fifty-second is acceptable.
 Done

Race

[edit]
 Done
 Done
 Done

References

[edit]

That is all I found. On hold until the issues have been addressed. Z105space (talk) 08:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Z105space: Should be good to go. Thank you for another swift review! Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Zwerg Nase: I can now pass. Once again, good work! Z105space (talk) 19:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]