Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vuelta a España general classification winners/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 22:22, 22 May 2011 [1].

List of Vuelta a España general classification winners[edit]

List of Vuelta a España general classification winners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 22:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe this list is close to featured list, it is similar to the already featured Tour de France and up for nomination Giro d'Italia lists and will hopefully form part of a featured topic. Thanks in advance for your comments NapHit (talk) 22:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "held over 23 days in September" always 23 days? Always in September only?
  • "the newspaper Informaciones, " no link? And presumably it's a Spanish newspaper?
  • "Spain and countries with a close proximity in Europe such as the Netherlands" when was Spain close to Holland? It's probably closer to Morocco.
  • "into day-long segments, called stages. " no need for comma.
  • "There are other jerseys as well: " - perhaps "Other jerseys are awarded, including: "
  • "French cyclists are second with 9 victories " - nine.
  • "also been set up by newspapers" maybe established rather than set up?
  • "The first race was won by Gustaaf Deloor, he won again the following year" not ", he won" perhaps "who".
  • "four year suspension" four year needs a hyphen.
  • "Frenchmen Jacques Anquetil" man.
  • "by the smallest margin," ever?
  • "following year Pedro Delgado won his second Vuelta." no need to repeat Pedro.
  • dashes in the table should sort as zero.

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think I've addressed everything here, thanks to Edge as well for clearing up the issue over the month of the race and for your other edits, much appreciated. Thanks for your comments TRM. NapHit (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 18:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I checked this, and fixed some inaccuracies in the lead. Did not get to checking the table, but sources look good. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 13:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC) More detailed analysis, checking the table with the general source ([2] etc)[reply]

  • The current total distance in the article does not agree with the source. Some examples:
    • 1958: The source says the race was 3242 km.
    • 1960: The source says the race was 3567 km.
    • 1961: The source says the race was 2857 km.
    • 1962: The source says the race was 2813 km.
    • 1964: The source says the race was 2860 km.
    • 1965: The source says the race was 3410 km.
    • 1966: The source says the race was 2950 km.
    • 1968: The source says the race was 3014 km.
I suggest that you change all total distances in the article to the distances in the source. Or, if you have reason to believe that the Vuelta website is in error (which is certainly possible), show the source that you used.
  • 1935: The total time for Deloor does not agree with the source
  • 1936: Gustaaf Deloor won 3 stages, not 2
  • 1946: Not given in the source, but [3] (not reliable enough to use as a source in a FL) suggests Dalmacio Langarica was part of the "Galindo" team. This source also indicates that before 1955, except in in 1946 and 1948, the race was run with individuals.
As you say the source is not reliable enough although very well detailed so unless others deem the source reliable I'll have to leave that out. Plus there is no mention of the team on the vuelta website. NapHit (talk) 01:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1948: Bernardo Ruiz was part of the "AGRIS RADIO" team
according to [4] he was part of another team. NapHit (talk) 01:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I looked at the wrong 'Ruiz'.
I checked the races until 1969, and hope to be able to check the rest later.
  • Other detail: the cyclingnews website should have work=Cycling News|publisher=Future Publishing Limited. Similarly, the publisher for the Vuelta website is Unipublic. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 20:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 20:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

done all these NapHit (talk) 01:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Checked the other years, they seem fine.
Resolved comments from Arsenikk (talk) 12:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments:
  • I would have said the semicolon on the first line should be a comma.
There isn't a semi-colon on the first line assuming your talking about the lead? NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When I think of it, using lines is not accurate since it will depend on screen width and size rendering. The place I am thinking of is "three "Grand Tours"; along ". Arsenikk (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done NapHit (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the 1941 edition the only which also took place in countries "with close proximity"? Particularly if this is a recurring phenomena, which countries are these?
Someone had changed the sentence from what it originally meant, rectified that issue. Regarding the countries, the only one I can find a reference for is the Netherlands which is not close enough to Spain to warrant being put in the lead. See TRM's comment above. NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph of the lead is without references.
Added a ref NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the history section there are some very short sentences, such as "He won his second Vuelta in 1983." that perhaps could be merged with adjacent sentences.
I'm not sure the prose would read better if I did this, as I would end up saying "so and so won this year, the following year" over and over again which is not good practice, so I think its fine. NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The history section seems completely referenced except for the last statement of the third paragraph.
done NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • To me it seems odd to have rows for years without a competition.
Each to their own I suppose, I personally think it would be odd not to include them, as it conveys to the reader clearly what years the event did not take place. It would look odd in my opinion if the table jumped from 1951 to 1955 without explanation. NapHit (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Linking years countries in the table and elsewhere is overlinking.
The countries are only linked in the table as far as I'm aware apart from Spain obviously. I was of the impression that sortable tables were allowed to overlink and this has not come up in any candidacy for a while. Unless policy has changed I'm not sure if there is an issue. NapHit (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference between overlinking and repeatlinking. Tables have an exception from the MOS guideline of only the first occurrence being linked, i.e. tables can have the same link repeated in multiple rows. However, tables do not have an exception from the guideline of overlinking, which involves linking to terms deemed to general to serve a purpose, for which countries are specifically mentioned. More about this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking). Arsenikk (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to the MOS page you brought this quote from the repeatlink section would seem to contradict what your stating; "where the links are in a table or in a list, as each table or list should stand on its own with its own independent set of links." NapHit (talk) 20:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As you say, the table can repeat links from other places in the article, and can repeat links within itself. Nowhere does it say that tables are allowed to have links which normally should not be linked. The repeatlink section does not give any exceptions from the overlink section. Arsenikk (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well if this is the case then nearly every list promoted would fail this requirement as most lists link countries in the table. I would be interested to see what other reviewers think because I don't think this is an issue at all. I have been at FLC for three years now and this is the first time this has come up so I'm not sure if your interpreting the MOS wrong or everyone else is or they are not clear enough, but in my eyes there is not a problem. NapHit (talk) 15:31, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore the above, I've fixed this now. The countries now link to the relevant national cycling federation article for that country except for Kazakhstan which does not have an article. Hope that meets your demands. NapHit (talk) 11:55, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "stage wins" column sorts oddly for me. In an increasing sort, it sorts zero, emdashes, larger numbers.
fixed this NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, when sorting by "cyclist", 'not contested' is sorted in the middle under NOT..
I tried to fix this, unfortunately as there is a cyclist whose last name starts with Z I can't get the not contested bit to sort after him so I'm afraid there is not much I can do unless there is a way around that issue. NapHit (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think my last edit solved this.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it did thanks Edge NapHit (talk) 19:32, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What order is used to display the multiple winners with the same number of wins? It does not seem to be sorter either by year or surname.
It's sorted by the year of their first win NapHit (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then Fuente is in the wrong order. Arsenikk (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed NapHit (talk) 20:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image licenses look good.

Arsenikk (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:16, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Pretty sure the apostrophe shouldn't be there in "Vuelta's" (multiple places).
    • Still see a couple in the history section: one in the first paragraph, one in the fourth. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:08, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
should have corrected them all now NapHit (talk) 10:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The one in the fourth paragraph is still there. This is the only one I see left. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
changed it, fairly sure that was the last one. NapHit (talk) 00:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comma after "The current champion is Vincenzo Nibali of the Liquigas-Doimo team"?
  • History: Feels like the comma after "The Vuelta was not held in 1949" should be a period.
  • Comma before "led to dwindling international interest in the race" should be removed.
  • Is it "Grand tours" or "Grand Tours"? I see both in close proximity to each other.
  • No need to link the Tour de France twice in this section.
  • Comma after "Roberto Heras won his first Vuelta in 2000" feels like it should be a semi-colon.
  • Team should be decapitalized in the headings of the main table.
  • The Cycling News website has the publisher given four different ways. Pick one and stick with it. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:25, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments Giants all your concerns have been addressed. NapHit (talk) 11:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Vuelta_a_España_general_classification_winners/archive1&oldid=1089078204"