Talk:2022 Tour de France Femmes

Well, I asked Andrei Loas who does the excellent TDF maps, but he hasn't got back to me. So I've requested one. If anyone is a dab hand at map making, let Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop know! Turini2 (talk) 17:28, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Map has been done, and now added to article. Kiwipete (talk) 18:56, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Wonderful! Turini2 (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

The section comments on reaction to the length, and the need to waive restrictions, without explicitly saying what the length was and what figures exceeded the restrictions. The info may be available in infobox etc, but would be useful in this section. PamD 08:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@PamD - is this what you mean: "Women's WorldTour races have a maximum stage length of 160 kilometres (99 mi) and a maximum race length of six days"? Kiwipete (talk) 09:16, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kiwipete: That and "The overall length of the event was also met with agreement, with some teams noting that they do not "yet have the staff or numbers ... for a three-week event."" - so how long, in distance and days, is this race? PamD 09:19, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@PamD - I see what you mean. The distance and days are indeed in the infobox, but also the "Stage characteristics" table in this section has them. This article closely follows the equivalent article for the men's tour. Kiwipete (talk) 09:26, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kiwipete: It just seems to me that that section would make much more sense to the uninformed reader if it included the figures being discussed. I'm not a cycling expert, just dropped by to look at the article after it was mentioned at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Tour_de_France_Femmes. PamD 09:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Have a look at the change I've just made. Let me know if this is what you're looking for :) Kiwipete (talk) 09:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, looks good: I've made one more addition, to provide context for the comment about restriction on stage length (or it could go into that later sentence if you think it makes its current place too cluttered). PamD 13:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I'll have a go at finishing the race summary later, I think we need a few photos (I think there's one of van Vlueten in the yellow jersey), and I hope there's some references about the event being successful etc. Turini2 (talk) 15:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Think I'm done, feedback welcome! Turini2 (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks Turini2, as I mentioned on the WP Cycling page a lot of the holdup was just getting the account of the race and citing all tables in order and not on the newsworthiness of the article. Let's push to get these done during the race next year for the sake of alacrity. Omnifalcon (talk) 15:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

high five Turini2 (talk) 15:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Just dealt with the last red linked rider too - Mischa Bredewold! Turini2 (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Reviewer: Grnrchst (talk · contribs) 10:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2022 Tour de France Femmes/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll take this on. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Grnrchst - I'll take a look at this over the weekend. Your hard work is much appreciated! Turini2 (talk) 10:13, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Have actioned the references point as a start - will do a final run through closer to the end of my edits. Turini2 (talk) 10:20, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@Grnrchst I think that's done - but I might need to do a final run through tomorrow if that's okay - to make sure I haven't missed anything. Take a look at my comments below :) Turini2 (talk) 20:37, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Turini2: Aye you seem to have addressed everything quite nicely! Thanks for taking the time and being so thorough. Let me know when you've done your final run through and I can pass this. :) Nice work. -- Grnrchst (talk) 08:09, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

@Grnrchst I think I'm done here, thanks for your efforts on this! Turini2 (talk) 07:13, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@Grnrchst One final tiny thing - can you change your overall comment at the end of the review? Thanks again for your help! Turini2 (talk) 07:48, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Done! -- Grnrchst (talk) 07:53, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@PeeJay - first you were bold, then @Turini2 reverted you, so now you should follow WP:BRD and open a discussion here about whether or not to capitalise "van". Kiwipete (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion took place on my talk page, thanks to @Turini2 for opening it immediately after reverting me. I have explained the grammar rule that should be followed, but just in case you don't want to click through to my talk page, I suggest you take a look at tussenvoegsel. The relevant passage reads "the tussenvoegsel in a surname is written with a capital letter only when it starts a sentence or is not preceded by a first name or initial". Hope that helps. – PeeJay 23:07, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

2022 was NOT the first Women’s Tour de France, 1984 was and it continued through 1989. Please make this factual correction. Thank you! 47.149.117.55 (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@47.149.117.55 Hello, the organisers ASO have referred to this event as the "first Tour de France Femmes" - so that's why the article says that. The article also links to Grande Boucle Féminine Internationale - which has information on the variety of similar events (some with Tour de France Feminin names) that were run in the 1980s. Turini2 (talk) 07:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

In reply to this - I've added a reference of ASO calling the event "The 1st edition of the Tour de France Femmes avec Zwift" Turini2 (talk) 20:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Reidgreg of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors did excellent work copy editing this article, relevant notes from said work can be found here: User talk:Turini2#Copyedit notes for 2022 Tour de France Femmes

Thanks again, Reidgreg! Turini2 (talk) 16:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Per MOS:SPORTFLAG, ... flags should only indicate the sportsperson's national squad/team or representative nationality. Where flags are used in a table, it should clearly indicate that they correspond to representative nationality, not legal nationality, if any confusion might arise. It is my understanding that in the TDF, riders represent their corporate teams, not their national teams. If that is the case, the flags should be removed per MOS. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

As has been discussed at length before (e.g. Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons/Archive 11) this is not followed in a variety of sports including Formula 1, cycling, golf and others - where people compete in a non-representative way. Every cycling article I can think of (e.g. FA 2012 Tour de France) has the nationality of the rider as well as the team name. To alter this would go against established consensus of a very large number of articles. Turini2 (talk) 11:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

MOS:SPORTSFLAG has been edited following the established consensus, and this matter is therefore resolved. Turini2 (talk) 17:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

This is an experimental check of the article sources by Citation Verifier. Treat it with caution, be aware of its limitations and feel free to leave feedback at the talk page.

Revision checked: 1345063118

More information #, Verdict ...

#	Verdict	Confidence	Source	Comments
[5]	Partially supported	30%	source	The source text mentions financial difficulties ('organisational concerns'), limited media coverage ('there wasn't a lot following the women's race'), and sexism ('photographer taking a picture of me brushing my hair in front of a mirror'). However, it does not mention trademark issues with Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO). (Source is long, only partially checked.)
[6]	Partially supported	70%	source	The source text supports financial difficulties ('faute de financements'), limited media coverage ('sous médiatisée'), and trademark issues with ASO ('ASO conteste à Pierre Boué le droit d’utiliser le terme « tour »'). However, it does not explicitly mention 'sexism' as a direct factor, though it implies gender bias through the treatment of women's cycling as a secondary event and the use of terms like 'maillot or' instead of 'maillot jaune'. (Source is long, only partially checked.)
[7]	Partially supported	70%	source	The source text confirms financial difficulties as a reason for the failure of the previous women's Tour de France (1984-1989) and states that current women's races lose money. It also mentions limited media coverage as a concern. However, the source does not mention sexism or trademark issues with Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO).
[8]	N Not supported	10%	source	The source text mentions women cyclists competing in a shortened version of the Tour de France for the first time in 1984, but it does not mention financial difficulties, limited media coverage, sexism, or trademark issues with the Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO).
[100]	Y Supported	95%	source	The source text states: 'the race achieved a cumulative live audience of 23.2 million people.' This directly supports the claim that 'broadcasters reported high viewing figures, with a cumulative live audience of 23.2 million.'
[101]	N Not supported	10%	source	The source text mentions a 'total of 20 million people watching across the entire race' and '75 million hours of live broadcast', but does not mention a 'cumulative live audience of 23.2 million'.

Close

Turini2 (talk) 14:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

1) Well, the combination of 5, 6, 7 and 8 support the claims – and 8 has a literal sexist quote in the citation ("Jacques Anquetil, a cycling commentator for the sports daily L'Equipe, and a five-time Tour de France winner, wrote, 'I have absolutely nothing against women's sports, but cycling is much too difficult for a woman ... I prefer to see a woman in a short white skirt, not racing shorts'"). I therefore disagree with the tool and consider the paragraph to be supported.

2) the combination of 100 and 101 support the sentence claim. Turini2 (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Alaexis hey, I tested the AI Source Verification tool on this article. Some points from above – does the tool look at quotations in the citation? Does the tool look at the combination of sources in a paragraph to consider whether or not the paragraph or sentence is supported overall? Turini2 (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, the tool looks at citations individually and doesn't consider them together, so you're right and these cases are false positives. This is noted as one of the major limitations. Checking groups of citations is a bit more challenging technically so I haven't tried implementing it yet. Perhaps, as the first step it would be worth marking such citations in the report. Then you would know that a citation is part of a group - so even if it doesn't fully support the claim it's attached too, it's not necessarily problematic.

Thanks for the feedback! Alaexis_¿question? 16:08, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

That sounds like a good first step! Thanks :) Turini2 (talk) 16:48, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

As to #8, it's an interesting case. Perhaps this is because it's not characterised as sexist by the source. The statement is obviously sexist but one could argue that this is WP:SYNTH ("Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by that source"). Alaexis_¿question? 17:01, 14 April 2026 (UTC)