Template:Did you know nominations/2015 La Tropicale Amissa Bongo

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 19:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

2015 La Tropicale Amissa Bongo

(

)

... that La Tropicale Amissa Bongo is the most important cycling race in Africa?

ALT1:... that La Tropicale Amissa Bongo is the most important cycling race in Africa in 2015?
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/M15 Half-Track
Comment: I'm not sure whether mentioning the year is necessary, since this is about one year's edition.

Created by Relentlessly (talk). Self nominated at 23:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC).

Length and history verified. But ... first, the hook isn't really stated in the article—I found one line about "the first and most important classification" in the classifications section, but nothing saying it's the most important race in Africa. Second, even if it were stated, "most important" is so subjective a statement that a) the hook should say who says so, as well as the article and b) it better be a source from whom this means something coming. Third, there's a lot of uncited text, especially in the classifications section.
All these things are, theoretically, fixable, and I hold nothing against you fixing them and asking for a new review, but given how long this has languished here I think we're best moving on.
Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Case thanks for reviewing. I think "most important" was bad wording in the hook, it should have been "highest ranked", which is in the first paragraph and cited.

ALT2 ... that La Tropicale Amissa Bongo is the highest ranked cycling race in Africa in 2015?

Regarding the uncited passage in "Classifications", it isn't. It is all covered by citation 40. I realise that it's a long passage to be cited to one source, but I don't think it's unreasonable. I can put a <ref name=.../> after each paragraph if you think it improves things, or try to cut the section down, but it's all true, verifiable relevant text. I don't think there's another passage in the article that could be considered to be uncited; I was very diligent about it. Moreover, I don't actually know very much about the subject, so nothing came from my own knowledge!

I'd really appreciate it if you could take a second look. I've written a few similar articles about European races, but this is the only one I've nominated for DYK as it seems quite important to try to avoid systematic bias Relentlessly (talk) 20:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I am satsified by the change in wording in the lede and the source for that. However, I would like to see every graf in "classifications" cited with the same running footnote as well as the one in "Stage 4" that's missing a citation. Daniel Case (talk) 05:16, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Case, these have been done, and yesterday I also added sources for the standings after every stage. Thanks for taking a second look at it. Relentlessly (talk) 07:15, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Alright ... Length, history and reference verified. Good to go. Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)