Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ferrari FF/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 7 November 2024 [1].
- Nominator(s): 750h+ 02:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
This article is about a stunning station wagon built by the prominent Italian automaker Ferrari. This article recently underwent a good article review by Arconning for which I am very grateful. At 1,300 words long it is the second-shortest article I've brought here, after the Lagonda Taraf. Thanks for all reviews received, and they will be responded to in a timely manner. Best, 750h+ 02:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Image review - pass
[edit]Hi 750h+, happy to do the image review. The article contains the following images:
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2013_Ferrari_FF,_Blu_TdF,_front_left.jpg
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ferrari_612_Scaglietti_front.JPG
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2013_Ferrari_FF,_Blu_TdF,_rear_left.jpg
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ferrari_SP_FFX.jpg
The first three are own works published under CC BY-SA 3.0, the last one is from Flickr published under CC BY 2.0. All images are relevant to the article and placed in appropriate locations. They all have alt texts and the images in the body of the article have captions. I think the caption of "2013_Ferrari_FF,_Blu_TdF,_rear_left.jpg" should name the model to avoid confusion since we also have images of other models. Otherwise, I didn't spot any issues. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done, thanks for the review Phlsph! 750h+ 09:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
SC
[edit]Putting down a marker for now. - SchroCat (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- " Under the direction of Lowie Vermeersch—former Design Director at Pininfarina—and Flavio Manzoni, work on the shooting brake after the creation of the Pininfarina Sintesi, a concept car." I'm struggling to understand this sentence.
- "wanted the car developed": which car? The FF or the Pininfarina?
- "at the facility in" "their facility"?
- "manage airflow over and around its body efficiently" might work a shade better as "manage airflow efficiently over and around its body"
- "helping minimize lift and drag": "minimize" should be "minimise"
- The review section is a bit repetitive in the formatting, with 'John Smith of The Paper said...' appearing for every review – a little variety in the structure would be beneficial
It's quite short for a Ferrari than was produced for five years, but I guess you've squeezed every drop out of every source you can. That's my lot on the comments. - SchroCat (talk) 05:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done, thanks for the review SC (also five years of production in the car industry, believe it or not, isn't very long [but that may depend on model). 750h+ 09:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support All good from me. - SchroCat (talk) 10:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Source review: Pass
[edit]I'll pick up this while I'm here too. - SchroCat (talk) 05:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bunker, Ted (1 August 2024) isn't used in the article and should be removed
- "Quick Spin" should be "Quick spin" for consistent capitalisation
- "Geneva Auto Show" to "Geneva auto show" for the same reason (Its proper name is the Geneva International Motor Show, so 'auto show' is used descriptively here
- It's worth considering archiving all the weblinks (I think there's a bot or script that can help, but I don't know what it is). Not part of the review, just a suggestion. - SchroCat (talk) 05:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @SchroCat: all done, except for the archiving (doesn't seem like IABot is working). Much thanks for the reviews! 750h+ 09:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Pass of the source review. - SchroCat (talk) 10:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Seems like IABot worked. 750h+ 10:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Comments and support from Gerda
[edit]Coming to a topic I know nothing about, with thanks for Bach cantata GA reviews! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Lead
- I think that Italy is default for the production of an Italian car.
- I'll look at the lead again after reading, but find a bit confusing that first comes debut then design.
- Is the successor lead material?
- yep, Elizabeth II has it too
History
- I'm not sure that the predecessor has to be pictured. This particular photo doesn't only sandwich the text but also "looks" the wrong direction ;)
- "Official manufacture of the FF began" - do we really need "of the FF", - I mean: of what else?
- "Italy" as in lead
- I'd have expected a higher number compared to the prediction, - worth a comment?
- yes, it is a luxury car, and luxury cars usually have lower production outputs with a higher price.
- small, sure, but I expected 5*800 = 4,000 based on the prediction --GA
- yes, it is a luxury car, and luxury cars usually have lower production outputs with a higher price.
Design ...
- I didn't get "four-wheel" from the name in the lead, - should it perhaps be mentioned there?
- "wheel wells" - no idea what that is but I may be the only one. (I learned an estimated 15 words already but those were linked.)
Reception
- The Los Angeles Times' David Undercoffler - I'd prefer a construction without "Times'" which I'd have problems pronouncing, and which makes the paper's name similar to "The New York Times". The NY paper: I remember rules requesting that the "the" be lower case. Wrong?
- i don't see why. "times" is part of the name?
- We have two papers, The New York Times and Los Angeles Times. The placement of the LA one makes it look as if "The" was part of their name. I also dislike a possessive, for a long term, for a term ending on "s", and for the description of the relationship between paper and person. - For the NY one, I believe there's a rule to have lc in prose, or was that changed since I saw that we have to say "the Beatles", not "The Beatles"? --GA
- i don't see why. "times" is part of the name?
- Hannah Elliot, writing for Forbes, claimed that the FF was "the most perfectly balanced car I can ever remember driving". - I am no friend of a construction that has a third-person subject and then suddenly "I", - that could be helped by a colon before the quote, no?
- nothing wrong with the current one i don't think, i changed it to [she]
- no idea what "rakish" means but understand that you can't link from a quote.
- linked to wiktionary
- Patrick Hoey of Motor Trend called the FF "docile" and "user-friendly" and appreciated its light steering. Hoey, however, criticised ..." - by the time I reached the second "Hoey" I had forgotten the first, - how about simply: "Patrick Hoey ... appreciated its light steering, but criticised ...". One "however" less ;)
- general: I think that there's a lot of quotes in the reception, - could that be summarized, there or in the lead? Some of the quotes read to me as if the author wanted to be unique, at the cost of clarity, but again: that could just be me.
- "That year, the magazine Top Gear gave the FF the Estate Car of the Year 2011." - Isn't 2011 redundant, after "that year"?
How pleasant not to need five nights for a review! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Addressed these, with some responses. Thoughts now @Gerda Arendt:? 750h+ 06:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for changes and explanations, - all understood, two comments above. I missed that FF compares to royalty ;) - I'd like one sentence in the lead about reception that is more qualified than "mixed", and would prefer that summary (if length is a concern) to knowing the exact name of the successor which can be easily found in the informative infobox. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: thoughts? 750h+ 07:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Having read the lead again: I don't need the predecessor either, at least not before I even learnt what FF stands for. (In other words: that sentence got too complex when the 4-wheel was added.) How about a sentence of summary about reception? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: predecessor is necessary, in fact i've included it in the lead of every one of my FAs, and Elizabeth II also has it too. I added a sentence about the reception. 750h+ 08:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Accept, but still hope you will have the capability to split that sentence in two ;) - Support for FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: predecessor is necessary, in fact i've included it in the lead of every one of my FAs, and Elizabeth II also has it too. I added a sentence about the reception. 750h+ 08:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Having read the lead again: I don't need the predecessor either, at least not before I even learnt what FF stands for. (In other words: that sentence got too complex when the 4-wheel was added.) How about a sentence of summary about reception? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: thoughts? 750h+ 07:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for changes and explanations, - all understood, two comments above. I missed that FF compares to royalty ;) - I'd like one sentence in the lead about reception that is more qualified than "mixed", and would prefer that summary (if length is a concern) to knowing the exact name of the successor which can be easily found in the informative infobox. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Review by Generalissima
[edit]Will get back to this posthaste. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 14:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Generalissima: just checking in. 750h+ 01:01, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Apologies for the delay, I came down with a nasty bug.
- Use template:Lang when you have the italicized Italian text.
- Make sure the footnote is cited; cite #19 should be fine.
- "even suggesting that "Kia" I think this would be better without the "even", as to come off less editorializing.
- The reception section falls into a lot of common pitfalls, with a lot of X said "Y" statements. I'd recommend giving WP:RECEPTION a look-through. Is there a way we can summarize some of this coverage instead of relying on quotes? The two Dan Neil quotes could def. be paraphrased in favor of direct quotes, and could likely be combined into a single thought.
@750h+: That's all I see. Thank you very much for your work! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Generalissima: what do you think now? 750h+ 02:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good to me, support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Great, thanks 750h+ 03:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good to me, support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Co-ord query
[edit]@FAC coordinators: could i start a new nomination? this nomination has three supports, and a completed source and image review. 750h+ 03:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Go ahead. FrB.TG (talk) 05:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.