Talk:1962 Tour de France

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on 1962 Tour de France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160902063444/http://www.letour.fr/HISTO/us/TDF/1962/partants.html to http://www.letour.fr/HISTO/us/TDF/1962/partants.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hemeroteca-paginas.mundodeportivo.com/EMD02/HEM/1962/05/13/MD19620513-008.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hemeroteca-paginas.mundodeportivo.com/EMD02/HEM/1962/06/25/MD19620625-007.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hemeroteca-paginas.mundodeportivo.com/EMD02/HEM/1962/07/07/MD19620707-005.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hemeroteca-paginas.mundodeportivo.com/EMD02/HEM/1962/07/11/MD19620711-003.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://pages.rapha.cc/stories/tour-de-france-1962-6
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hemeroteca-paginas.mundodeportivo.com/EMD02/HEM/1962/07/15/MD19620715-005.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Combativity award winners

Stage	Combativity award
1	Jean Selic
2a	Gilbert Desmet
2b
3	Guido Carlesi
4	Giancarlo Manzoni
5	Pierre Beuffeuil
6	Francesco Miele
7	Rik Van Looy
8a	Jean Graczyk
8b
9	Franco Magnani
10	Jean Milesi
11	Eddy Pauwels
12	Rolf Wolfshohl
13	Jef Planckaert
14	Henry Anglade
15	Manuel Busto
16	Emile Daems
17	Édouard Delberghe
18	Eddy Pauwels
19	Raymond Poulidor
20	Henry Anglade
21	Giuseppe Sartore
22	Bas Maliepaard

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1962 Tour de France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sportsfan77777 (talk · contribs) 04:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this one. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 04:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Lead

• After more than 30 years, the Tour was contested again by trade teams (add "instead of national teams").

 Done

• The second paragraph doesn't do a good job of summarizing the race. Instead of just listing who held the yellow jersey, it would be better to discuss the progress of the race's contenders (Anquetil, Van Looy, and Poulidor) and eventual top finishers (Anquetil, Planckaert, and Poulidor). It's confusing to mention someone like Darrigade holding the yellow jersey in the lead if he had no chance to win. In particular, you should definitely mention Van Looy crashing out.

 Done Just holding the yellow is one of the best achievements a road cyclist can have. The race is all about who is leading the general classification if summarised. Added Van Looy. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

• Clarify that Tom Simpson was the first rider in history from outside mainland Europe to wear the yellow jersey. It sounds like it was just for this race.

 Done

• It might be worth mentioning the peculiarities of the route, in particular the four time trials.

 Done

• Were the time bonuses of a minute normal back then? If not, I would consider adding that to the lead as well.
  • I don't feel time bonuses are lead-worthy even if one minute was unusual. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Teams

• Of start list of 150 ===>>> Of the start list of 150

 Done

• The Legnano–Pirelli cyclists had the youngest average age while Margnat–Paloma–D'Alessandro cyclists had the oldest. <<<=== Can you add the ages?

 Done

Pre-race favorites

• At the Vuelta a España (one of the three Grand Tours, along with the Tour de France and the Giro d'Italia) which ended on 13 May,[40] he withdrew from the race before the final stage suffering from viral hepatitis;[41][42] his position in the general classification after the penultimate stage was 32nd.[43] His teammate Altig won the Vuelta and was ahead of his teammate and team leader Anquetil overall until he quit the race,[40][43] so observers expected some internal team struggle in the Tour.[42][44] <<<=== The grammar is a little off here (parallelism; repeating "teammate"; awkwardly starting a clause with "so"). These sentences could be condensed along the lines of: "Less than two months earlier, Anquetil had withdrawn from the Vuelta a España, the previous Grand Tour, before the final stage due to viral hepatitis. Although he was the team leader, he was 32nd in the general classification at the time of his withdrawal, while his teammate Altig won the race. Observers expected some internal team struggle in the Tour due to (the reason isn't articulated so well?)."

 Done

• add up to eight minutes (add "due to the one minute bonuses given to stage winners").

 Done

• and undermine his commercial value ===>>> and undermining his commercial value

 Done

• It might be worth adding that Planckaert was not considered a favourite, and going through his background since he ended up a contender.
  • If he wasn't considered by anyone as then he shouldn't be listed. Obviously because of Van Looy's withdrawal he was given the leadership or of Flandria (Willy Schroeders out on stage 14). I could add that to the race overview if I can find a source. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Routes and stages

• Add that the tour passed through Luxembourg

 Done

• including the Col de Restefond and Col de la Bonette passes, respectively, <<<=== Why is the word "respectively" here?

 Done: I must have done it to explain the order in which they were passed. Removed. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Race overview

• a 23-man breakaway group of riders escaped the peloton (main group) as it passed Luxembourg City with 145 km (90 mi) remaining. It stayed away <<<=== Shouldn't it be "they" when referring to the group?

 Done

• Mention that Anquetil was in the group, assuming he was?

 Done: Changed to "Of all the pre-race favourites", as the three were the only ones missing out of the all the favourites listed. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

• At the end of Stage 12, it might be worth catching up on where Anquetil, Planckaert, and Poulidor are in the standings.
  • I'm not keen on mentioning where the final top three were in the middle of the story as to the reader they aren't yet involved yet. Possibly Anquetil and Poulidor as they're the top pre-favourites. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
• the British rider became the first non-mainland European (add "in history") to wear the yellow jersey

 Done

• Can you add more about Stage 20, since that stage was so important? What was expected to happen? Was it expected that Anquetil would make up that much time on Planckaert?

 Done

• It was revealed later that Anquetil had ridden the race with tapeworm. <<<=== Should that have affected him?
  • It's just a fact that I thought might be interesting. I don't know if any of the symptoms could have affected his performance. Not sure if it's needed? BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Doping

• Good.

Classification leadership

• Good.

Final standings

• Good.

Overall

• At the end of end of sentences with multiple references, those references should be in numerical order.

 Done

• No dab links.
• Well-sourced; no bare refs.
• No plagiarism detected.
• No dead links.

@BaldBoris: Overall, the article looks pretty solid. The biggest issues I brought up are to focus more on the podium finishers and favourites in the lead, and in the race overview section (particularly in the mountains). Placing on hold. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: A very good job you've done there! I take it you saw the FAC? Will try again once we're finished here. I've sorted everything with some replies. BaldBoris 00:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

@Sportsfan77777: Hi, just want to check that you haven't forgotten about this or if there any reason for the delay. I'm ready to get it sorted. BaldBoris 00:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@BaldBoris: Sorry about the delay; I was distracted. I think it's worth adding the bit about Planckaert ending up in contention because he took over for Flandria once Van Looy went out; I didn't realize they were on the same team when I first read through it. But anyways, passing, and best of luck with the FAC! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@BaldBoris: No worries, thanks for the swift reply. Will do. Once again, great job on the review and all the best with your GAs. BaldBoris 17:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Edition?

I always think this looks funny and pretentious. Is the Tour de France, in some sense, a publication? Was there a first edition? Can you get signed copies? Will it ever come out in paperback? Maybe "staging" would be less hokey. But actually you don't need anything there at all. For this to be displayed as Wikipedia's finest work makes the project look amateurish. --84.64.251.19 (talk) 10:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I too thought the same when I first got into cycling. I can assure it's very common language within cycling, just search the web for "Tour de France edition" to see for yourself. BaldBoris 12:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Wording

I recently changed:

The '''1962 Tour de France''' was the 49th edition of the [[Tour de France]], one of cycling's [[Grand Tour (cycling)|Grand Tours]].

to:

The '''1962 [[Tour de France]]''' was the 49th instance of that [[Grand Tour (cycling)|Grand Tour]].

Disappointingly, that has been reverted. I'm not precious about the exact wording, but repeating "Tour de France" in "The 1962 Tour de France was the 49th edition of the Tour de France" is awful; especially when the plural "tours" is then used immediately afterwards. And in the openings sentence, doubly so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

You have a fair point about the repetition of "Tour de France", but I think there were problems with the other version too. I'm at work but will try to get back to this over the weekend and find better phrasing; or someone else may come up with something. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Andy, I don't think anyone can deny that the close repetition of "Tour de France" is awkward. It has for a long time been a bug bare of mine which unfortunately has never been solved. This problem must have similar instances across Wiki due to the effort to embolden the article title within the opening sentence. All featured cycling stage race articles (Category:FA-Class cycling articles) have used the same wording, using "edition" or "running". Your change to be honest doesn't sound right. I think we need a Shakespeare on this. BaldBoris 00:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

If no one can deny that the close repetition is awkward, why was it restored? We don't need a Shakespeare, just competent writing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I restored it because I thought the revision was worse. How about "The 1962 edition of the Tour de France, one of cycling's Grand Tours, took place between 24 June and 15 July."? I think this is an example of MOS:AVOIDBOLD. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:17, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

• If this dreadfully clunky sentence is being reworked, maybe it's a chance to lose "edition" as well. I know this is a popular term among some sports fans, as noted in the above section, but it is unencyclopedic (a bicycle race is not a book), and it adds nothing. A Featured article should be better than this, surely? --84.64.251.19 (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I am not against rephrasing, and not against getting rid of the word "edition", but if you look at the dictionary entry for "edition", you can see that it does not exclusively mean something printed on paper, but more generally means something that is presented as part of a series ([1], [2], [3]). So bringing up that the Tour is not a book is not a very good argument. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 13:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing me to the dictionary definition of "edition". I am well aware that this is a meaning that the word has: see above I know this is a popular term among some sports fans, but as your first link shows, "edition"'s first meaning is related to publications, things which are edited. A bicycle race, not being a publication, doesn't need this word in the way that a Shakespeare folio would. It's just a bit of pretentious jargon, and the article would be better without it. --84.64.251.19 (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

It must be noted that this issue isn't specific to this article, and that the majority of road bicycle races follow the exact same wording, or just swapping "edition" for "running" as I've mentioned above. Because of this I'm moving this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling#Race opening sentence wording. BaldBoris 00:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)