Wikipedia:Peer review/Brawn BGP 001/archive1

Brawn BGP 001[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because me and many other editors have contributed to this page and I would like to know what else we could add to this page to make it better. To me it looks very informative and I think every piece of information is included, but that's me.

Thanks, Chubbennaitor 10:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about the car, so tell us about it. I added a bit on the engine & transmission, but there's nothing on the chassis design - I'd expect a fairly detailed analysis of key design features like the double-diffuser (plenty of information on this on the official F1 website). Basically, at the moment it reads like Brawn GP in 2009 whereas it needs to be about the Brawn BGP 001 of which it's racing/competition results is only a part of what makes it. AlexJ (talk) 11:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I shall try and do that. Chubbennaitor 16:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good idea to look at the project's existing high-quality chassis articles: Brabham BT19 (FA), Brabham BT46 (GA), BRM P261 and Eagle Mk1 (both A-class) for general ideas about structure. Aside from that, I would suggest the heading order: Chassis, Engine and transmission, Competition history (Testing-->2009 (season?)-->livery).--Midgrid (talk) 14:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would also recommend not taking this article to GAN or FAC until after the season ends, as information about the car's racing history will be continually added until then.--Midgrid (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I now know where to look for ideas and thank you for your advice. Chubbennaitor 18:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]