Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Big Four (cycling)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cielquiparle talk 15:59, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Big Four (cycling)

(
)
  • ... that journalists have described cycling's Big Four riders as having a "lockdown" on winning the sport's biggest races?
Moved to mainspace by Verylongandmemorable (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Verylongandmemorable (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC).

  • If a cyclist represents his country at these races, is there a reason why the nationality of each rider is omitted in this article? Flibirigit (talk) 02:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
    • Cyclists ride in professional teams (not national teams) for Grand Tours and the stage races focused on in the article. For example, Tadej Pogačar rides for UAE Team Emirates XRG. That being said, adding their nationality to the members section is probably a good idea. Verylongandmemorable (talk) 05:31, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
    • I've added some more basic biographical information on each cyclist, including their nationality Verylongandmemorable (talk) 16:47, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
      • Great. Placing a red icon here to indicate that a full review is still needed. Flibirigit (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
 Reviewing... it's been two weeks without comment, so I will do the review myself. Flibirigit (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - ?
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: None required.

Overall: The article was moved to the main space on April 2, and nominated within one day for DYK. Length is adequate. There is one citation needed tag in the "Origin" section for a direct quote. The prose in the "Career statistics" section has no citations. Also, please clarify the source(s) for the results in the "General classification" and "Major championships" sections. The article is neutral in tone, and I found no plagiarism concerns. ALT0 is an interesting hook. It is mentioned and cited in the article and verified by the source. ALT1 is a bit confusing, since it is not clear what is "the top level", and I cannot find where it is mentioned or cited in the article. All of the images used in the article are in the public domain on the Commons. QPQ is not required. Overall, this is a good attempt for the first DYK nomination. Some attention to sourcing is necessary. I look forward to seeing this on the main page. Flibirigit (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  • Thank you for your review! I believe I've fixed the two citation issues: the first was just my mistake in using quotes, I was trying to highlight that I was referring to the term Big Four, so I've replaced with italics, per my understanding of MOS:ITAL and WP:WORDISSUBJECT. For the "Career statistics" section, I've added references to the prose for the overall summary statistics, and references to a reputable cycling database (procyclingstats) for all four rider's results. For ALT1, by "top level" I was referring to the UCI WorldTour, which is the top level of men's cycling. I worried that using "UCI WorldTour" in the hook wouldn't be meaningful to a non-cycling audience, but it is the most explicit/verifiable phrasing. Please let me know if there's anything else to fix! Verylongandmemorable (talk) 00:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
    The source of the first sentence in the "Origin" section is still unclear. The only citation in that paragraph mentions the term Big Four, but it does not specifically state "began appearing in cycling media in 2024", nor does it state "particularly in the lead up to the 2024 Tour de France". If such a specific source cannot be found, I suggest rewording the sentence. It would also be beneficial to have more than one reliable source describing the Big Four, as opposed to just one article at this time. ALT1 still cannot be verified since there is no corresponding mention of "top level" in the prose. Without such mention, the hook will be rejected. The citations for the charts are helpful, but one paragraph in the "Career statistics" section has no clear source. Flibirigit (talk) 01:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
    Here are some suggested sources [1][2][3] which also mention the term Big Four, for adding into the "Origin" section. It is best to have mutliple reliable sources to define the term, which is the key point of this article. Flibirigit (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
    Thanks for the source suggestions! I've re-written the Origin paragraph to be more neutral and have more references for early uses of the term. On your suggestion, I also added a note to the lead of the article, which has multiple independent sources both analyzing the term and showing widespread use in coverage of cycling. I will address the sourcing in "Career statistics" section tomorrow. I understand that ALT1 is not verifiable in its current form, that's my fault for bad phrasing. It seems like you are happy with the first hook though? If not, I can try to come up with more alternatives. Verylongandmemorable (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
    The changes look promising. Will review in more detail tomorrow. I have struck ALT1, but remain open to new hooks and ALT0. Flibirigit (talk) 14:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
    Hi, have you gotten a chance to review? I've added sources to the "Career statistics" section, supporting the Olympic/world championships paragraph. Verylongandmemorable (talk) 16:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
    Not yet. Will do tonight or tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
    This nomination is placed on hold, pending the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Four (cycling). I suggest focusing on getting more reliable sources to support the origin and notability of the term Big Four. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 22:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
    @Verylongandmemorable and Flibirigit: No consensus. What else needs doing?--Launchballer 15:43, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
    I was already aware of the AFD. It is not necessary to ping me. I will get around to it when I have time. Flibirigit (talk) 15:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
    Approved ALT0 I found no further sourcing concerns in the article. The term "Big Four" is now better defined with sources. ALT0 is approved as per my original review. Flibirigit (talk) 23:35, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Big_Four_(cycling)&oldid=1293242799"