Talk:2018 24 Hours of Daytona/Archive 1

Archive 1

Yes, but why?

Seems we are inserting information which isn't really relevant unless we explain it to readers. To illustrate I have broken down just one paragraph here (in green) with comments.

The week before the official three-day test session at the circuit, IMSA altered the balance of performance in all three categories.

What does that mean? If it means it amended specs to create equal playing fields in class/es, then we should explain that.

All classes had their maximum revolutions per minute (rpm) defined by IMSA.

OK, but to what? Higher than last year? Lower? Different for various classes/engines?

10 kg (22 lb) of weight was added to the Cadillac DPi-V.Rs compared to 2017 with its air restrictor increased by 1.8 mm (0.071 in).

Why?

The duo of Nissan Onroak DPis and the two Acura ARX-05s had their weight increased to 940 kg (2,070 lb), 10 kg (22 lb) more than the global-specification LMP2 chassis and the pair of Mazda RT24-Ps.

There has to be a reason for that. Why?

The Nissan and Mazda engines were not altered

Suggesting that others were. And why?

but IMSA changed the aerodynamic packages on some Prototypes.

Why? And why only some prototypes had changes?

The debuting BMW M8 GTE's weight was established at 1,250 kg (2,760 lb) and its turbocharger boost curve was revised over its predecessor.

As it was on debut, what was its predecessor? Was its weight established higher or lower than others in class? Or the same?

The Mercedes-AMG GTD car had its air restrictor enlarged by 1 mm (0.039 in).

Why, and why such a minimal amount?

It seems to me we are adding stuff just because we can, padding really, without explaining the significance/relevance of it. It it is too difficult to explain each point in the paragraph, maybe it shouldn't exist at all. Also, there is a single ref at the end of the paragraph. Don't know whether or not it supports the whole paragraph, because it's in German.Moriori (talk) 01:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2018 24 Hours of Daytona/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 22:08, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

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 will 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 ^{(talk • contribs)}

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.

Immediate Failures

• It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
• It contains copyright infringements -
• It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
• It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Prose

Lede

• I know infoboxes aren't always standard, but I was surprised there wasn't one at all here. Seems like there could be one. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  • There is no infobox that can be used for endurance races ATM. MWright96 (talk)
• The image caption is a bit weird for me - Can it state that it's the venue? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Can we reword "endurance sports car race" to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• same at Daytona International Speedway combined road course Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• the 56th running of the event - Should metion what event (IE Daytona), as you mention another series just before this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Are car numbers particularly lede-worthy? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Perhaps the first paragraph could mention exactly what types of cars can compete? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• I know the title gives it away, but the lede doesn't actually mention it's a 24 hour race. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• You don't really need to mention the constructors/vehicle the second time you mention a driver. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• The final paragraph of the lede is not very succinct, and probably could do with being removed from the lede, as not all that important to the summary of the event Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

General

• Performance Tech Motorsports, CORE Autosport (one each). a trio - typo? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Should we use "sextet", or just say "six"? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Is the Prototype Challenge different from the Prototype class mentioned in the first sentence? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes. It was a slower open or closed cockpit version of the Prototype class cars as seen in the WeatherTech SportsCar Championship. MWright96 (talk) 11:32, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
• first caption should link Formula One Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• The mention of seaofblue is everpresent in the article. Some things probably just need a reword. Such as "Some drivers competed at Daytona on a one-off basis, such as two-time Formula One World Champion Fernando Alonso" to something like Some drivers competed at Daytona on a one-off basis, such as Fernando Alonso a two-time Formula One World Champion. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Lots of lists of peoples in the entry list (go figure), but could be culled to only the really important players Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• I'd argue most of the preview info would be better served before the entry list Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• It switched to a 24-hour race in 1966 and has remained that way all but once since then. In 1972 motorsport's world governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, requested it be shortened to six hours for safety reasons. - seems like a strong statement without a source Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Rather than using tooltips in prose, could we spell out what car numbers mean? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  • I do not believe that would work. MWright96 (talk) 11:32, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
• The "Post-testing balance of performance adjustments" subsection seems a little pointless. The information could be exactly the same without the subheader. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Fourth para in "Practice and qualifying" needs a split. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• What is "practical quarantine"? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• I'm not sure the drugs he was prescribed is of note to wikipedia here. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:25, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Lee Vilenski: Have made all of the necessary changes so far and have done some supplementary edits. MWright96 (talk) 11:32, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Additional comments

• Could we get a little bit of extra info in the qualifying results? It currently says "Pole positions in each class are indicated in bold and by double-dagger", an extra note on the table being the qualifying results, and what the classes stand for. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Done. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
• Same for the results table Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • See above response. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
• He was able to recover the car back to the pit lane where extensive repairs were carried out for the next two hours and eight minutes.[54][55][56][57] - four refs is quite a lot, close to WP:REFBOMB. It's hardly a controversial statement. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Done. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
• A few MOS:NUM errors in here, (Ctrl&f for "eleven", "twelve" etc.) brings up some that should be in numbers. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Fixed. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
• This surpassed the previous record set by John Paul Jr., John Paul Sr. and Rolf Stommelen in a Porsche 935 at the 1982 race. - what was the record, and it'll need a source. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Added. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
• Nothing to do with the article, but why is the 1974 struck through in the navbox at the bottom? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • That year is struck because that race was cancelled due to an oil crisis. MWright96 (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
    • I see. Usually for events that don't take place, we would remove them from the navbox. Is this race notable enough due to the oil crisis to be suitable for a standalone article? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): 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): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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:

Comments

• Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}
  • @Lee Vilenski: Been ten days since the review was opened. Any progress? MWright96 (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
    • Sadly, pings don't work without a sig! Sorry for this one, MWright, been quite burned out recently. I'll make a start now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
      • @Lee Vilenski: Would like to know whether the review will be continued or not. If not because of personal issues than it is understandable. MWright96 (talk) 17:28, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
        • Sorry mate, been uber busy, just been doing some gen fixes recently. I only had a couple more points that I've added. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
          • Apart from the one item that isn't really in this article's remit, this one seems fine. It's not the most in-depth review, due to the length of the prose, but there isn't much that struck out to me. If you plan to take this to FA, I suggest a thorough read-through, but it's clearly of high quality, enough for me to have no issues in passing. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:27, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

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 97198 (talk) 02:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Filipe Albuquerque, João Barbosa and Christian Fittipaldi won the 2018 24 Hours of Daytona and broke a distance record that had been held since the 1982 race? Source: Albuquerque wheels home No. 5 Cadillac DPi to overall Rolex 24 at Daytona victory: NASCAR
  • ALT1:... that Chip Ganassi Racing's victory of the Grand Touring Le Mans (GTLM) class at the 2018 24 Hours of Daytona was the team's 200th in auto racing? Source: Albuquerque wheels home No. 5 Cadillac DPi to overall Rolex 24 at Daytona victory: NASCAR
  • ALT2:... that a victory for a Lamborghini car in the Grand Touring Daytona (GTD) category of the 2018 24 Hours of Daytona was the manufacturer's first in a 24 hour auto race? Source: Cadillac claims record-breaking Daytona 24Hrs: Speedcafe

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Und es waren Hirten in derselben Gegend, BWV 248 II

Improved to Good Article status by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:39, 15 December 2019 (UTC).

• Article is new enough (GA on 15 December), long enough (37,990), NPOV, no obvious copyvio/ close paraphrasing / plagiarism, and effective use of inline citations. I personally would support ALT0 as it's the most interesting of the bunch, it is verified by reference, short enough. Adequate QPQ provided. Good to go. Cowlibob (talk) 12:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)