Talk:Forti/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Forti. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
August 2006
I've added some headings to help break up the continuous prose. --Diniz 21:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC
- OK, I've attempted a major rewrite to clean up the article. Feedback much appreciated.
- I've also removed the stub status, although the article could do with a (better) table and perhaps a photo.--Diniz 14:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Nice work - I took the cleanup tag off. Bretonbanquet 19:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
GA Review
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
Comments on images:
- Insufficent fair usage rationale for logo.
- Free-use picture of the car (especially in the different paintjob) would be nice, but not essential.
- Possible images: [1] (copyrighted)
Comments on prose problems:
- Chiefly remembered/known is used twice in the lead.
- A combination of an inexperienced team and an untested car was not a suitable platform for any success, and so it was no wonder that Forti did not score any points in its first F3000 year; the team did not even manage to attend every race. comes across as a bit POV-ish. I especially don't like the "it was no wonder" bit and the "even" towards the end.
- (of course, a change to Lola chassis was helpful, too) again comes across as if expressing an opinion. The of course should go as it wouldn't be obvious to all readers.
- although no Forti driver was ever able to win a championship title - ever seems redundant.
- Words like Naturally and Of Course at the start of the F1 again assume the reader is knowledgable about the subject which shouldn't be taken for granted.
- Idioms like But on the other hand don't come across as the right tone for an encylopedic article.
- "Formula One adventure." and So it became clear again doesn't come across as the right tone. Another of course, and a redundant In fact in Forti FG01 car section.
- 1995 Season - two sentences very close together start with however. and were far slower than the other (and poorer) backmarkers poorer could imply financially (as I assume it does here) or poorer in terms of some other means (inferior to). Perhaps it could be clarified which.
- Under the current points system, this would have seen Forti score two points. But it doesn't mention here that at the time, it scored no points. It implies it in the next sentence Nevertheless, despite not scoring any points, but I feel it could be clearer to a non/recent-F1 following reader.
- having hit, of all people, Diniz, who was attempting to lap him - of all people doesn't sound right tone wise.
- but the team has become just another story of a small, backmarking team unable to finance its aspirations; a true privateer effort in an era of increasing domination by the large car manufacturers. Forti, we salute you! That's how it comes across at least, needs serious re-working for tone.
- Done - or at least improved.--Diniz 15:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I know that might come across as quite harsh - there is the potential of a very good article here, as the teams full history is documented and well sourced. However at the moment, it comes across as a story rather than an encylopedic article. Rework the tone, fix up the niggly problems (e.g. FU rationale on the logo) and it'll be ready for GA status. AlexJ 13:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback! I will re-nominate once I have done all the things on the to-do list.--Diniz 16:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Tables
Should the results tables be as they are now (following their relevant section) or all together after the main article? There's arguments either way but I feel it breaks up the article too much the way it is now. Any other opinions? AlexJ 20:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- I put the F3000 table directly under the section as I think it makes it easier to refer to, instead of going between the top and bottom of the page.--Diniz 21:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Lead
Just a thought, should it contain the full name (Forti Corse)? As in something like "Forti Corse, usually known as Forti, was an Italian racing team..." AlexJ 13:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Done.--Diniz (talk) 15:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Legacy Section
Might want to mention that a FG03 has ended up at Rockingham [2] and Three Sisters Race Track [3] for track day style events. AlexJ 18:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the information!--Diniz (talk) 12:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)