Talk:Sinclair C5/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 14:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Like the ZX81 and the ZX Spectrum, this gives me nostalgia for the 1980s. The article has 61K of prose, which suits a lead of three paragraphs.

All of the online references check out okay. The biggest problem at the moment are the references, which need to have a fuller list of where to find the books. I presume "Dale" is "The Sinclair Story" by Rodney Dale, but we'll need the full title, publisher and ISBN to ensure the information cited to it is factually accurate and verifiable. Usually, I split references into "Citations" (where the {{reflist}} template goes) and "Sources" (where individual book entries appear).

Further comments to follow. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

  • The quotations in the lead don't appear to be in the body. Either they need to be duplicated and expanded, summarized or removed.
  • I've tackled this now - they're now reflected in the "Demise" section. Prioryman (talk) 18:07, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sinclair had made a fortune" - possibly "Sinclair had been financially successful" would be better
  • I've addressed this by explaining that Sinclair had become a multimillionaire from his computer business and hoped to repeat that success with electric vehicles, which I think puts it in context better.
  • "It was launched" - what was launched?

Design[edit]

  • The citation for the first sentence in this section needs more information. I assume this was a press release. Do we have an ISSN or similar for it?
  • No, it's from the C5 promotional brochure (of which I have a copy). No ISSN. Prioryman (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The chassis consists of a single Y-shaped steel member" - can you clarify what "member" means in this instance?
  • "in cross-section" sounds a bit awkward", perhaps "has a cross-section of" followed by the dimensions
  • I've addressed the above two points by rewording as "a single Y-shaped steel component with a cross-section ..." Prioryman (talk)
  • What are "power toggles"?
  • Reworded as "A power switch and front and rear brake levers are positioned on the handlebar." Prioryman (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The citation in the last sentence for the last paragraph is a little vague - can this be tightened up, particularly as there is a direct quotation, and referral to the "High-Vis Mast" I recall Crash had a special feature on the C5 (and scans of the magazine are available online) where they talked about the "Hi-Vis Mast".
  • It's from a different promotional brochure (again, I have a copy) that Sinclair shipped with each C5. I've clarified the reference. Prioryman (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

Origins[edit]

  • "while he was still a teenager" - "as a teenager"
  • "in the late 1950s" ... "fifteen years later" ... "in the early 1970s" - the narrative seems to jump around a bit

Early development[edit]

  • "a preliminary investigation into a personal electric vehicle" - best to put a direct citation after a quote
  • " It would be aimed at" - wouldn't "It was aimed at" be better (given the specification, which was completed, is what is being referred to)
  • "It would be easy to drive, park and enter or exit" - enter or exit where exactly?
  • Enter or exit the vehicle. I've made this clearer. Prioryman (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "costing £500 at the most" - is it worth putting in a conversion figure to show how much that is today?
  • Hmm. I'm not a fan of doing that, given the different ways of measuring values over time. Prioryman (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I still think it would be helpful. A typical reader may not have been born when the C5 was introduced, and hence might have no concept of the practical worth of £500 in 1985. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sinclair chose to rely on existing lead-acid battery technology, avoiding the great expense of developing a more efficient type of battery" - don't need the "of battery" at the end, we know the whole sentence is talking about that
  • "Tony Wood Rogers recalls" (before the quotation about battery choice) should be simply "Wood Rogers" per WP:LASTNAME, and shouldn't it be "recalled"?
  • Changed the name, but I think "recalls" is the proper style in the context. I'll look into this point. Prioryman (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sinclair head-hunted Barrie Wills" - "employed" is probably simpler
  • "established in Warwick in the West Midlands" - the problem here is that there is West Midlands (county), which was existent during the C5's lifetime, but Warwick was never in. Not sure what to do about this.
  • "in an area with" - don't need "in"
  • It would be helpful to give a brief overview of why VED was abolished for electric vehicles in 1980.
  • I have to admit I don't know. I'll have to do a bit more research on this. Prioryman (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Already fixed by someone else, it seems. Prioryman (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Development and design of the C5[edit]

  • What are the "A, B, C1 and C2 demographic groups"?
  • "one of the first such tests carried out on 29 July 1981" - how is this possible given that we've just been told that prototypes weren't available until late 1983?
  • Very good point, I can only think that this is a mistake by the cited author. I've removed it. Prioryman (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you sure the name is "High-Vis Mast", not "Hi-Vis Mast"?
  • Yes - that's how it's spelled in the Sinclair brochures. Prioryman (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was claimed" - per WP:CLAIM, say who specifically said this
  • "and took only about 70 seconds" - suggest "and only took about 70 seconds to complete"
  • Worth mentioning that the suggested DeLorean factory was in Belfast?
  • The WDA quotation needs a source
  • Already cited actually, but I've made this clearer. Prioryman (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Production, distribution and support[edit]

  • " Hayes, Middlesex, Preston in Lancashire" - inconsistency between using comma and "in"
  • "The C5's major consumable item, the battery, was to be supported by 300 branches of Comet and Woolworths." - this sentence is unsourced

Launch[edit]

  • The C5 was launched on a cold, snowy Friday 10 January 1985" - though the weather was believed to contribute to the negative impression left by the launch, I don't think "cold, snowy" belongs up front here
  • "The event was typically glitzy" - typically of what?
  • I've reworded this. I was aiming to say that it was in Sinclair's usual style. Prioryman (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The large quotation from the sales brochure in the third paragraph looks a bit too large and may invite accusations of close paraphrasing.
  • I've trimmed this. As a nit-pick though, surely it can't be "close paraphrasing" if it's a direct quotation? Prioryman (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could we explain who Ian Adamson and Richard Kennedy are?
  • "but this proved, as Adamson and Kennedy put it, "an unqualified disaster"" - missing a verb, should be "but this proved to be"
  • The Your Computer source is mistakenly attributed to Your Sinclair
  • The last sentence in this section is unsourced, and seems to be more of a linking narrative. The best solution would be to move it to the top of the next section.
  • OK, I'll find a home for this elsewhere. Prioryman (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions[edit]

  • Not sure about this section title. "Response" or "Reviews" might be a better choice
  • "The verdict from motoring organisations, road safety groups and consumer watchdogs was decidedly negative and probably sealed the C5's fate." But the only response given was from the BSC. The responses from the AA and Which could be moved here.
  • The source quoting James Tye (United Press International) could do with more information. If this is a press release, using {{cite press release}} rather than {{cite news}} might be a better fit

Sales history[edit]

  • The section about notable owners may need to be investigated. I don't believe Prince Harry would have been physically capable of driving a C5 throughout its original sales life, when he would have been less than one year old. I got the impression from reading The Scotsman source that the princes picked up second hand models years later when they were adults.
  • The source doesn't say this explicitly, though it would be a reasonable assumption. I've tweaked the wording of the first sentence of that para to make it clear that it refers to owners rather than necessarily meaning buyers of the first tranche of C5s on sale. Since we don't know exactly when they acquired their C5s we can't say either way. Prioryman (talk) 13:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure to be honest, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about mopeds. Maybe leave it as it is, and if someone else wants to add a link they can? Prioryman (talk) 13:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Financial Times source for vehicle theft needs a page number
  • "sales of the C5 remained in the doldrums" - this sounds like a colloquialism, how about simply "sales of the C5 remained weak"

Demise of Sinclair Vehicles[edit]

  • "what Rodney Dale calls" - per WP:LASTNAME, this should be simply "Dale"
  • The Sunday Times source for 15 December 1985 needs a page number
  • Unfortunately I don't have it - I had a press cutting that gives the date but not the page number. Prioryman (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we know when Ellar resold the remaining C5s. The Daily Mail source given is dated 1996, nearly a decade later. The source also needs an author (if available) and page number
  • They bought them in 1985 and presumably sold them over a number of years - I don't know how many. There is no named source for the Daily Mail story (presumably a staff reporter) and as with the Sunday Times story, it was a press cutting with a date but not a page number. Prioryman (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Andrew P. Marks' view particularly important? The quotations are a little overlong, similar to above
  • I've trimmed the quotations. His views are significant as an academic analysis (published in an academic (peer-reviewed?) journal) on the reasons for the C5's failure. He's the only author I've seen addressing the C5 in detail in the academic literature. Prioryman (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who are Nigel Cross and Gus Desbarats? These opinions (as with Marks) would sit better in the "Legacy" section as they're not specifically anything to do with the demise of Sinclair Vehicles itself
  • I've clarified these. I don't think they work so well in "Legacy" as they specifically address what caused the failure of the C5 and by extension, Sinclair Vehicles. "Legacy" is what happened after Sinclair Vehicles failed. It seems logical to me to include an analysis of the C5's failure before that point. Prioryman (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy[edit]

  • "Barrie Wills", per WP:LASTNAME should be "Wills". Likewise, "Tony Wood Rogers" should be "Wood Rogers"
  • Can you confirm the Toyota Prius source specifically refers back to the C5?

External links[edit]

  • Can you give a brief description to each of the owner's clubs?

Summary[edit]

  • Overall, this is a well written introduction to a particularly idiosyncratic piece of British engineering. Though I've been aware of the C5 ever since it came out, I've never actually seen one myself, much less driven one. Anyway, I'll put the review on hold pending resolution of the above issues. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think we're mostly there apart from the concerns in the lead. Once the few remaining issues are left, I can pass this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: Thanks for all your help with this. I've tackled the lead, so I think that's probably the lot now. Prioryman (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. The citation format is a little unusual, but that's not part of the GA criteria, so I can now pass this. Well done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sinclair_C5/GA1&oldid=627308854"