Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 1 to Stage 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good topic candidate
Promoted
Current status: Good article

Shading for riders wearing jerseys for others

I thought consensus was shading for people leading a classification, not specifically wearing the jersey. In particular, after stage 1 and 2, Mark Cavendish held the white jersey, but had the more prestigious pink to wear, and after stage 3, Alessandro Petacchi held the violet jersey, but was again wearing pink. I think we should keep to this: it is the leaders of the classifications we want to highlight, not who was actually wearing the jersey (which, in this instance, is misleading). SeveroTC 19:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding was that shading was done in this way for the GC table, but on the stage results table it was just for the jersey that was actually worn. Obviously, though, I don't seem to be on the cutting edge of this issue anymore.
break my slumber 02:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Someone mentioned somewhere that they thought we should shade/indicate however only the most prestigious jersey. I find that pointless. Anyone with a basic understanding of stage races knows Cavendish was awarded the pink jersey (or, moreover, any overall leader in any race is awarded a special jersey), and anyone who doesn't have basic understanding of stage races can reasonably be expected to read an article like
break my slumber 06:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

GA Review

Please see Talk:2009 Giro d'Italia, Stage 1 to Stage 11/GA1 for more information. Chris (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA

Below is a copy of the GA Review submitted on September 7, 2009.

1. Well-written?

  • In last paragraph of lead section, please define queen stage to the average reader.
  • For all prose in article, please list nationalities of all riders the first time they are mentioned.
  • On all length, please include conversion of kilometer to mile, meter to foot, and kph to mph to non-metric users in the English Wikipedia.
  • For Stage 1 - please spell out TTT.
  • On all team results, please list team nationalities. I realize these teams have multiple riders from different nations, but the teams has a home base. In Formula 1 motorsports as an example, people know Ferrari is from Italy even though the drivers that have worked for them have in some cases not been from Italy (Michael Schumacher from Germany and Kimi Räikkönen are recent examples of this.).
  • For Stage 4, please create articles for San Martino di Castrozza and Serafin Martinez.
  • For Stage 10, the last sentence of the first paragraph seems confusing. Did Fausto Coppi win the stage in 1949 and if so, when? Was this course exact. For the first sentence of the third paragraph, what does "going clear" mean? On the second sentence of the third paragraph, what does "came clear" mean? On the first sentence of the fourth paragraph, please spell out GC.
  • For Stage 11, please create articles for Alessandro Donati and Vladimir Isaichev
  • For See also section, what else is in there printed out. I see the template on screen, but not printed out. Shouldn't this template be moved after the references?

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?

  • Pass - no issues.

3. Broad in coverage?

  • Pass - no issues.

4. Neutral?

  • Pass - no issues.

5. Stable?

  • Pass - no issues.

6. Images?

  • On the Infobox for the tour map, the image looks fuzzy. Also, what do the red and green lines siginify on the map?

7. Overall.

  • Good article. Needs work, but the article is there once it is fixed.


Chris (talk) 12:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is . The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
here
for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    See notes below.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to
    reliable sources): c (OR
    ):
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have
    suitable captions
    )
    :
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

--maclean (talk) 01:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notes
Thanks so much for reviewing.
Talk · What keeps her up) 03:20, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Conclusion

Please respond to the above notes. The article is generally good. It could be expanded in areas describing the courses and other more interesting incidents. The writing is generally clear but could be improved. maclean (talk) 06:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing.
Talk · What keeps her up) 00:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 14:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.