Wikipedia:Peer review/2013 Mudsummer Classic/archive2

2013 Mudsummer Classic[edit]

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have plans to bring this up from GA to FA status in the future, though I believe there could be improvements made that I may have overlooked.

Thanks, Zappa 24 Mati 04:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These may be personal concerns more than anything else, but I thought I'd bring them up.

I tend to find red links distracting, especially if they're excessive. This article has a lot that I think could be removed. I know it's a GA, though, so maybe the reviewer didn't have an issue with that.

I'm not familiar with the general standards for NASCAR articles (I skimmed through Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR). With tennis articles, the usual practice is to exclude match scores in order to avoid cluttering the article with numbers. I notice that there are a lot of numbers in the "Practice" section? Are these necessary, especially for practice results? Personally, I wouldn't pause to read each of them.

Again, those are mainly personal concerns. The things I mentioned may actually be acceptable. Just thought I'd check. -- James26 (talk) 23:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@James26: Yeah, I guess the practice section has an awful lot of numbers and parentheses. I guess I could either reduce the top 10 to top 3/5 or do what other race reports do, like at the 2015 Daytona 500 (also a GA): Zappa 24 Mati 23:55, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Bentvfan54321 @James26 and ZappaOMati: I'd use either 2010 Sylvania 300 or 2012 Budweiser Shootout for comparison; as the goal is to get this article to FA status, I think it would be beneficial to compare it to the project's other 2 Featured Articles. I'll also note that 2015 Daytona 500 is currently up for reassessment here. Good luck, let's get a third FA! --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also something I just noticed, the mph in the sentence "The fastest Ford truck was Dave Blaney, with a lap time and speed of 21.872 seconds and 21.872 mph (35.200 km/h), respectively" can't possibly be correct. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 14:05, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bentvfan54321: Heheh, whoops. Anyway, looking at those two articles, I think the biggest issue with this page is that it doesn't have a lap-by-lap like NASCAR.com did, so passes for positions besides the lead are going to be hard to find without actually using the race broadcast, which should be somewhere on YouTube. Dang NASCAR.com for not doing this for the Trucks. NFL is Awesome 15:07, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NFLisAwesome and ZappaOMati: (Just pinging both to ensure you get the message.) I think that's the biggest problem with most of this season's articles. They all detail the entire race report but NASCAR.com only has one individual url for the lap-by-lap now. Thus, the sources are going to be quite difficult to find, unless we want to create a {{cite nascar race}} citation template... --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bentvfan54321: I recall some articles citing the race broadcasts as a source. The only problem is that I don't know how much of a reliable source it would be. If it's okay, it's a good thing the full race is on YouTube. Zappa 24 Mati 04:25, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pos	No.	Driver	Team	Manufacturer	Time	Speed
1	17	Ricky Stenhouse Jr.	Roush Fenway Racing	Ford	44.413	202.643
2	9	Sam Hornish Jr.	Richard Petty Motorsports	Ford	44.512	202.193
3	6	Trevor Bayne (W)	Roush Fenway Racing	Ford	44.512	202.193
Source: