Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tesla Model S/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 8 January 2025 [1].

Tesla Model S

[edit]
Nominator(s): 750h+ 07:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second candidacy, following this one. About an electric sedan produced by Tesla, Inc.. Asking previous reviewers @Epicgenius, Femke, and UndercoverClassicist: for a second review on this one. 750h+ 07:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EG

[edit]

Thanks for the ping. I looked at these changes and have only one additional concern:

  • Environmental impact, paragraph 2: "its 68 percent higher manufacturing emissions are offset within a few years of average driving" - Do we have a more specific time frame besides "a few years"?

This is not a major concern, so my support from the previous FAC still stands. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not per the source, no. I'm assuming it means half-decade, but that's an assumption. Thanks for the support. 750h+ 14:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Femke and UndercoverClassicist: pinging in case. 750h+ 05:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed, but avoid sandwiching text between images. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by (sorry...) from UC

May not have time for a full review, at least not in the near future, though I note the article seems to be in pretty good nick following its last round at FAC.

In the footnote for "Rollover", we have This means it has a 5.7 percent chance of rolling over.. That needs some more context to me -- is that a 5.7% chance of rolling over while parked on your drive, or while taking a corner at speed? UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UndercoverClassicist: late response sorry. fixed the footnote. 750h+ 10:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima

[edit]
Lede:
    • I don't think we need the month or location of the first fire for a lede level overview.
    • Should "Best 25 Inventions of the Year" be in quotes? (genuinely not sure here)
        • bit confused here, since it was never in quotes
    • I feel we should mention the Model S Plaid at some point in the lede if its so important as to change critical opinion on the car.
      • don't really think so since it was one review.
      • Fair enough. - G
Development:
    • Wasn't the Roadster also electric? That should be mentioned for context.
    • Maybe a little bit about the state of electric cars at the time for context? I'm not a car nut, but I remember the Teslas being quite novel at the time.
    • You can combine the $50,000 and $70,000 figures into a single "$50,000–70,000" to avoid needing multiple parenthetical statements of the modern equivalents.
    • Shared a chassis design, or were they taking the same chassis off one car and placing it on the other? I'm assuming the former.
      • to be fair, it's both.
    • Did Franz von Holzhausen have any relevant experience beforehand?
    • I think you can shorten the background context about the Fremont plan - i don't think we need to know when it was built - and avoid having to jump back in time. Maybe something like "Toyota and Tesla announced a partnership and a transfer of an factory in Fremont, California, which had been abandoned by General Motors and Toyota during the Great Recession" — but like, better worded than that.
Design
    • Some stuff here is a bit technical. We don't need a crash course (heh) on all the parts, but if there's a simple way to explain the difference between an induction motor and a permanent magnet synchronous reluctance unit, and what that move accomplished, that'd be nice.
    • I think a portmanteau of "front" and "trunk" could be EFN'ed or even omitted
Models and updates
    • This is all quite solid, good job.
    • Lowest drag coefficient of any automobile or any consumer automobile? That seems crazy if true.
      • This was at the time
    • That bit on the restyled taillights drifts a bit into OR for my tastes; as its such a minor tweak, it might be best to just omit it until a magazine explicitly mentions that.
Technology
    • Also quite solid throughout.
    • What is a "yoke" steering wheel? That isn't really explained.
    • Entirely personal preference here, but I think an image that shows what the supercharger stations looks like would be good context for viewers - we already know what the car looks like by this point.
Environmental impact
    • Since we're citing a claim by Tesla directly in the image caption, it may be good to cite it.
Production and initial deliveries
    • Don't see any problems here.
Safety
    • Reception and legacy
It might be good to try to merge a bit more of these lesser known names and big quotes into general summaries of critical reception - obligatory plug for Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections.

750h+ That's all from me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 07:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima: i think i've addressed these, but if you have anything let me know. 750h+ 08:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BP!

[edit]

I'm not really familiar with this or a car person, but I will try to read this article tomorrow. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 13:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 183, website isn't linked yet
  • What makes CNET reliable? They are treated in WP:VP as low quality for FA.
🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:RSP CNET was a reliable source before 2020 when it was bought by Red Ventures. All of the sources are from 206 or before. I fixed the other concern, @Boneless Pizza!: 750h+ 20:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to read the article, but I think I dont have any concerns left. So, I Support this FAC. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 22:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: Pass

[edit]

To follow. - SchroCat (talk) 15:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • FN206: Not sure why Emissions has a capital E
  • FN273: Ditto the M in Most
  • FN279: "Review, Pricing, & Pictures" should all be lower case
  • The ISBNs should be formatted in a similar manner (XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X, for example)
  • You don't need to link the publishers of the books (I'll lay money that someone will remove them at some point in the next year)
  • The sources are all appropriate to their required goals.

That's my lot - SchroCat (talk) 15:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SchroCat: all done. Thanks for the review. i'll try to get to one of yours hopefully within the week. 750h+ 17:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist and Femke: do one of you think we could fit a review in? this candidacy might require a large review from one of the previous reviews who had extensive concerns. thanks. 750h+ 18:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Z1720

[edit]

Non-expert prose review:

  • The development section is quite large. Can this be reduced or broken up with level 3 headings?
  • "a year before the company introduced its first vehicle, the battery-electric Roadster," I am not sure what this has to do with this model of car, and I think it can be removed as off topic.
  • "As of February 2024, the Model S has had seven product recalls." I think this might be against MOS:CURRENT, as someone would have to keep track of and keep updating it. I'm not sure if the exact number is necessary, especially if each recall is going to be explained later in the article. I would suggest removing it, and letting the reader count up the recalls if they want.
  • "Following the recall, Jerome Guillen, Tesla's vice president of sales," is this Jérôme Guillen?
  • The "Reception and legacy" is quite long and falls into the "X said Y" sentence structure. I think WP:RECEPTION's suggestions on grouping critiques by type of commentary, and reducing the quotes, will help make this section more appealing to readers. A quote from every source is not necessary.

I hope this helps. Please ping me when the comments above have been addressed. Z1720 (talk) 20:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: what do you think? 750h+ 10:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the reception section might still be a little too long, with a lot of "X says Y" (especially in the first paragraph). But this is not enough to withhold my support. It might be beneficial to take another look at each quote, and see if every single one is needed or if any of their quotes can be merged together and summarised. Z1720 (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

[edit]
750h+, I think you are misunderstanding. The rules for title case are here - MOS:5. Pretty much all of your article titles in the "Citations" section are in sentence case. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, they are consistently in sentence case. Ok, I guess I can live with htat.


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_article_candidates/Tesla_Model_S/archive2&oldid=1268164550"