Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Tour de France 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 The Rambling Man 15:50, 6 October 2009 [1].

List of Tour de France general classification winners[edit]

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 13:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that after a peer review it meets the criteria necessary to become a featured list. NapHit (talk) 13:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from KV5
Oppose/Comments from KV5
  • "the tour is the most well known" - well-known
  • "three "Grand Tours"; the others being" - I'm really not sure about the punctuation here. I don't think the semicolon is correct, but I am totally at a loss for what to suggest.
  • "in more recent years" - more recently
  • "The rider with the lowest aggregate time at the end of each day wears the maillot jaune (yellow jersey).[3] The yellow jersey represents the leader of the general classification," - combine into one sentence. The rider with the lowest aggregate time at the end of each day wears the maillot jaune (yellow jersey),[3] representing the leader of the general classification.
  • "there are others jerseys" - other, plus this should begin a new sentence
  • "King of the Mountains classification" - since the article linked here says that it's officially called the mountains classification, that's what I would change this to, instead of WP:JARGON like King of the Mountains.
  • "The race was won by Frenchmen" - Frenchman
  • "He won again the next year," - de-link year, it's a stretch to link this, plus it's easily accessible from the table. Also, end with semicolon.
  • "however he was disqualified" - however,
  • "that had ridden in or been pulled by cars, and used the railways" - awkward wording. Consider that he had been transported by car or rail. This covers everything generally.
  • "Henri Cornet after the dispute was settled, he is the youngest person to win the tour." - eh? Sentence fragment.
  • "with the cyclist who had the least points" - change "who had" to having
  • "1912" - comma after, plus why is this one un-linked?
  • "French cyclists were successful in the early tours," - comma to semicolon
  • "Belgian riders became more successful," - remove comma
  • "which suspended from 1915 to 1918" - which suspended the Tour from 1915 to 1918
  • "trade teams came to dominate" - what is a trade team? I have a vague idea, but the casual reader may not.
  • In general, I am starting to see an overuse of the word "dominate" and its forms. Consider replacing some.
  • "However when Alcyon cyclist" - comma after However
  • "tour in 1929, while sick," - no comma after 1929, and consider ill instead of "sick" or replacing with the actual disease he had if a source can be found
  • "to stop team tactics undermining the race" - I believe this should be from undermining, though this could be a Britishism.
  • "After the Second World War, no one dominated the Tour. Louison Bobet changed that when he won three successive tours from 1953 to 1955, the first person to achieve this feat." - Consider linking these sentences differently. Perhaps After the Second World War, no one dominated the Tour until Louison Bobet; he won three successive tours from 1953 to 1955, the first person to achieve this feat.
  • "Anquetil, was the first person to win five tours, his success in 1957, pre-dating his four successive triumphs." - re-word; consider Anquetil, who had previously won in 1957, became the first to win five Tours.
  • "Anquetil's achievements were matched" - you need to make it clearer what achievement. Merckx didn't win five tours, and this is currently vague.
  • "Merckx looked to be heading for a record sixth tour victory in 1975," - needs a ref
  • "Thévenet won again in 1977, however he was eclipsed" - semicolon after 1977, and comma after however
  • "fellow Frenchmen Bernard Hinault" - Frenchman
  • "who won two consecutive tours" - two is extraneous, remove
  • "only eleven cyclists (including Fausto Coppi, Anquetil, Hugo Koblet and Merckx)" - would put unlinked names before linked
  • "In 1980, Hinault was going for a third consecutive win, but had to pull out due to tendinitis," - needs ref
  • "Hinault returned in 1981 and won as he did the following year." - comma after won, and linking "year" is a stretch again
  • "another Frenchmen Laurent Fignon achieved victory" - another Frenchman—Laurent Fignon—achieved victory.
  • "beating Hinault, however Hinault recovered" - semicolon after first Hinault, comma after however
  • "Greg LeMond became the first non-European" - where was he from? This is very notable since it took so long, so the country name should be in there somewhere. Something like American Greg LeMond or Greg LeMond, an American, became
  • "becoming the first person to win five tours in a row." - you've used "in a row" twice in quick succession, change to five consecutive tours
  • "1997 and 1998 respectively, however Pantani's victory" - comma after 1998, semicolon after respectively, comma after however
  • "1999 saw the return of Lance Armstrong to cycling, after he had overcome testicular cancer." - 1999 saw the return of Lance Armstrong to cycling after overcoming testicular cancer.
  • "Armstrong won the tour that year." - no space before ref
  • "Armstrong won the tour that year. [18] Armstrong won a further six tours taking his total to seven, all of which were consecutively won. Armstrong retired after his 2005 triumph.[19]" - very wordy. Consider combining three wordy sentences thus: Armstrong won the tour that year,[18] followed by six more, for a total of seven consecutive victories, after which he retired.
  • "The following year" - comma after year
  • "Alberto Contador won the 2007 tour, which was also marred by doping scandals. He won in 2009." - very abrupt, and no mention of the 2008 winner.
  • I appreciate the use of the colors in the key that represent the jersey colors; however, white will not fly against MediaWiki's background colors. Consider yellow or something similar.
  • All "also"s in the key are extraneous.
  • "king of the Mountains classification" - either King of the Mountains or king of the mountains
  • I see at least one instance of slanted minute and second markers in the table; do a check.
  • Country names in the table need to be written out, not abbreviated.
I'm not sure about this I think there fine as they are personally, most people can distinguish what countries they are from the three letters. NapHit (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Manual of Style disagrees. Abbreviations should be written out in full at their first occurrence, and you can't just expect that any reader (a fourth grader, for example) will know what "LUX", etc., means. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 02:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to full names now NapHit (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "#" symbol should also be superscripted in the table.
  • "Margin" needs to be explained in the key.
  • It needs to be delineated in the key that the "Year" links to the corresponding Tour de France, rather than "just a year".
  • In the footnotes, "performance enhancing drugs" - performance-enhancing drugs
  • There are extra brackets in Ref. #3.
I'm not sure how to fix this, it looks fine when I go to edit it. NapHit (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I fixed it; PDFs need to be "cite book", not "cite web". KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Turned out all it was the fact, that in the format parameter I didn't capitalise pdf, it's fixed now anyway. NapHit (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neither of the navboxes currently have a direct link to this article. Either link to them in a proper place or remove the navboxes.
  • Team names featuring more than one company name should use en-dashes to show disambiguation rather than hyphens. Ex: Peugeot-Wolber, Peugeot-BP-Michelin, Gitane-Campagnolo, Renault-Elf-Gitane, etc.
I understand that this had a peer review, but due to the amount of copyediting that is needed, please consider asking for a second opinion from the WikiProject as well before the next nom. Thanks. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I think I've dealt with most of the stuf you brought I left a few comments as well, cheers. NapHit (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments (KV5)
  • The table says that Alberto Contador won in 2007 with Discovery Channel, but the lead says he won with Astana. Which is correct? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The lead mentions is 2009 win which was with Astana. NapHit (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the history section only mentions him with Astana in 2008 and 2009. Even though he is mentioned in 2007, there's no reference of him with his team, so it's ambiguous without reading the table. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 22:09, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully cleared it up now NapHit (talk) 19:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "as his Astana team were banned" - team is singular, changed to was banned. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done NapHit (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who later admitted to using EPO" - what is EPO? I have an idea, but the casual reader may not. See MOS:ABBR. Write out the full name. The abbreviation is actually unneeded, because you don't mention EPO again. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done NapHit (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My comments have been satisfactorily resolved. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 13:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (17–14) 20:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • "The course changes every year, but has always finished in Paris, more recently along the Champs-Elysees." How recent, in terms of the year when the finish began being held there?
  • "Belgian cyclists are second with 18 victories, and Spanish are third with 11 wins." A word is needed after Spanish. To avoid repetitive phrasing, try "riders".
  • History: Change comma after "became the winner after the dispute was settled" to a semi-colon.
  • Similar change after "trade teams came to dominate the tour".
  • Comma after "Indurain would come to dominate the tour".
  • Try not to have a sentence start with a year, like "1999 saw the return of Lance Armstrong".
  • Space after "testicular cancer".
  • Footnote A: Change to "admitted to doping" for a cleaner sentence.
  • Footnote B: Delink date.
  • Title isn't rendering properly in reference 3.
  • Bic is a disambiguation link.
  • Lance Armstrong image requires alt text. Giants2008 (17–14) 20:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done all requests. NapHit (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support – After the improvements suggested by everyone were made, this list has turned out well. Giants2008 (17–14) 20:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
  • "Lance Armstrong has the most Tour victories, winning seven in a record sequence between 1999 and 2005." It's not clear what exactly the "record" is here.
  • Can you elaborate on the points system? How are points gained?
  • "Belgian riders became more successful before and after the First World War (which suspended the tour from 1915 to 1918)." This doesn't make any sense; if they were successful on both sides of WWI, then when did they become successful?
  • "Hinault won the tour at his first attempt in 1978; only 11 cyclists " 11 cyclists including Hinault, or 11 other cyclists.
  • Philippe Thys should sort after Bernard Thévenet. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done your requests NapHit (talk) 19:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • What source are you using for the data in the main table? --Jpeeling (talk) 12:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The main source is given below "general" in the reference section. (Jacques Augendre, Tour de France Guide Historique) All information of the table is there, maybe except the number of stage wins.--EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case then I'm concerned as I checked race distances from that source and there's a lot (about half) of differences. --Jpeeling (talk) 16:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the race distances, thanks for pointing that out NapHit (talk) 20:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Still discrepancies between race distances for 1908, 1909 and 2002. --Jpeeling (talk | contribs) 22:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's some other discrepancies: time - 1903, 1904, 1929, 1932, 1935, 1948, 1950, 1962, 1968, 1978, 1989 and 2006. Margins - 1903, 1914, 1919, 1932, 1979.
  • There's nothing on the PDF about the points system, what source is used for that data?
  • Is there a source for the number of stage wins?

--Jpeeling (talk | contribs) 22:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • About the discrepancies: The table in the reference apparently has some mistakes. There is also an official Tour archive. I checked the values with this table, and the status is now:
  • 1903: Corrected value in article.
  • 1904: The general reference table differs by one second. A description on the letour-archive[2] gives the winning time as 96 h 5' 55" 3/5, so this probably has something to do with rounding.
  • 1914: The general reference table is off by 10 seconds, probably a typo.
  • 1919: The general reference table is off by 10 minutes, also for the number three. I find no other source that agrees to the general reference table.
  • 1929: The general reference table is off (by one second).
  • 1932: The general reference table is off, both with time and margin.
  • 1935: Corrected value in article.
  • 1948: Corrected value in article.
  • 1950: The general reference table is wrong. Off by 10 seconds, probably a typo.
  • 1962: The general reference table is wrong. They typed 45 where they meant 54.
  • 1968: The general reference table is wrong. Don't know why. See also this newspaper article from 1968 that gives the results.
  • 1978: Corrected value in article.
  • 1979: The general reference table is wrong: The time for the winner is 103h 6' 50", and probably this confused them to make the margin 6' 50".
  • 1989: Corrected value in article.
  • 2006: The general reference table has the wrong value for total time: it shows the time of Floyd Landis, the original winner who was disqualified.
For all values from 1929 I can give multiple independent sources that show that the current article has the right values. They all agree to the official Tour archive. Unfortunately, they were not really good in condensing this into one table, so Wikipedia can do better. All sources (except the general reference table) for the values from before 1929 agree to the current article, but I am not sure if these sources are independent sources.
  • The official Tour archive does not give the point system results (1905–1912). This is where memoire du cyclisme does better. I checked the values there, they all agree to the ones currently in the article.
  • The number of stage wins of the winner in that Tour could be compiled from the sources above. But I don't know why this information should be included in this article, maybe the nominator can tell. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 08:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the detailed response, I would request that if other sources are used for verification of the data then those sites are added to the references section. --Jpeeling (talk • contribs) 16:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course. I just did it, is this format acceptable? --EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Armstrong also has the fastest Tour victory, completing the 2005 Tour de France with an average speed of 41.654 kilometres per hour (25.883 mph)." Source? I calculate, using data from the table, that the 1999 victory was faster.
The 1999 tour had an average speed of 40.315 km/h, which is slower.[3] See also page 115 of the general reference. Are you sure your calculation is correct? --EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The calculation is correct: 3870/91.58 = 42.26, 3593/86.25 = 41.66. However the data looks wrong, the source above has a distance of 3686.8 km. That distance is on the memoire site but the TDF archive like the PDF has 3870. Could you take a look at this please. --Jpeeling (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By adding up the stage distances, I end up around 3690 km. I checked a newspaper announcing the 1999 Tour, and that also says 3690 km (a rounded number). I am sure the 3870 value is wrong, but I don't see how they made that mistake of 180 km. In their communications in 1999, the Tour de France gave the 3690 number, but somewhere between 1999 and now they changed this to 3870 and the error stuck.--EdgeNavidad (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Spanish riders are third with 11 wins" according to the nationality table it's 12.
  • The source was written down before the 2009 Tour de France was over, so back then it was 11. I updated it to 12, but now it is unsourced does no longer completely agree to the source given.--EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 1999 tour saw the return of Lance Armstrong to cycling after overcoming testicular cancer." Needs tweaking, Armstrong's return to cycling was in 1998.
  • You are right, but I think it is even too trivial for this article, so I removed it. Together with the fact that Armstrong retired after his seventh victory. For other cyclists, this career information is also not given.--EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 'dated' Italian flag is used in the multiple winners table but Italian pre-1946 victories in the main table use a modern flag. Consistency one way or the other would be better.
  • Corrected it. The pre-1946 victories were supposed to have the old flag, but the coding was wrong.
  • Should Bartali's 1938 victory also have the old flag? Also I believe Spain had a slightly different flag when Bahamontes and Ocaña won. --Jpeeling (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are correct. The information was in the article source, but coded wrong. I missed it. Thanks. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • AutoMoto for 1923 and 1924, Automoto for 1925 and 1926. Should these be consistent?

--Jpeeling (talk • contribs) 16:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, and I corrected it to Automoto, the way the general reference gives it. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all comments resolved. --Jpeeling (talk • contribs) 16:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I've fixed the footnotes link to the table, it's now working. Anyway it's a nice list, great job! — Martin tamb (talk) 10:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment the list is missing media files. Why not add images of some of the winning cyclists to the side of the tables?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 09:40, 6 October 2009 (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_Tour_de_France_general_classification_winners/archive1&oldid=1143879289"