Talk:2000 Hungarian Grand Prix/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dawnseeker2000 (talk · contribs) 22:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Dawnseeker2000 and I'll be reviewing this article. There will be some time to get a start on it today, but as I'm a fairly inexperienced reviewer, this may take some time. The good news is that the article looks great; very well organized and nice to look at. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 22:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

This article has a great presentation. It's neat with nice full paragraphs and has good continuity.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
I made several small improvements to the text, but overall, the word usage in the article has been done well.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I swapped one reference (for the Minardi drivers qualifying last) but all other spot checks were fine.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
I find that for an average F1 race with not too much off the beaten path, this article is complete in its description of the events.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Again, the article reads well. Just the facts; and there are a lot of them. Good job.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Images of Hakkinen and Shumacher have CC licenses.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I'm passing this article. I still prefer to watch the races, but this is a good read.

Good work on this article. I'm promoting it. Dawnseeker2000 03:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]