Wikipedia

Talk:Christ Church Ground/GA1

< Talk:Christ Church Ground
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Desertarun in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago22 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Desertarun (talk · contribs) 19:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply


I'll take this one. Will read over and post initial comments as soon as practical. Desertarun (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • From the lead: Owing to the University Parks being on public land where an admission charge could not be levied, the privately owned Christ Church Ground was the preferred venue in Oxford for matches where a gated admission was to be levied on spectators, typically in matches between Oxford University and a touring international team. I don't really understand this, it looks contradictory, can it be clarified? Or moved out of the lead? (because it looks like a detail for the body and not necessarily a summary for the lead).
    • @Dersetarun: I have rewritten the lead, making it less wishy washy and introducing some more information. I do think it is important to note in the lead its importance as a venue where an attendance charge could be levied. However, I have reduced this to read "Privately owned, it was the preferred venue in Oxford for matches where a gated admission was to be levied on spectators, typically in matches between Oxford University and a touring international team". Is that any better? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 14:39, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • From Host ground for touring section: Subsequent matches with admission on the gate were preferred to be played at the Christ Church Ground, with Oxford University first playing the touring Australians there in 1882 on a cloudy May day, though it was recorded that the attendance was poor. This read a bit clumsy, can it be altered?
  • From the Host ground for touring section: In 1897, the ground played host to a touring besides the Australians for the first time, when the Gentlemen of Philadelphia played against Oxford University. Needs fixing.
  • From the Host ground for touring section: gated first-class matches at the ground continued unabated and included the first visit of the Indians to Oxford. "Indians" is too informal.
  • From the Host ground for touring section: Although the First World War bought an end to first-class cricket between 1914 and 1919. Could it say suspended, halted or similar instead of brought to an end?
  • From the Host ground for touring section: The 1950s saw first visits to the ground by both the touring West Indians in 1950, and the touring South Africans in 1955. Prefer formal name for the West Indian and South African national teams.
    • @Desertarun: I'm guessing to mean West Indians → West Indies? The typical nomenclature for tour matches is to refer to the team either as "the touring Indians" or, where it's not possible to add "ians" to the name, to call the touring team "Ireland XI". I think formal names are only used when the team is playing another international team on the tour, i.e. in a Test match etc. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Is there anything meaningful to say about the home club side? (Christ Church Cricket Club).
  • Paragraph three of the Host ground for touring section is quite long and could be split.
  • The pavilion is pictured but nothing seems to be said about it in the text. Any reason for this?
  • Could the section headers be changed? They don't feel intuitive. For example one reads "Host ground for touring sides" and the one after reads "Later use" - but there are touring sides in the later use section too.

Well-written

edit

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct:

  • Addressed above.

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

  • Addressed above.

Verifiable with no original research

edit

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

  • Look fine.

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

  • All in place.

(c) it contains no original research:

  • None detected by my read through.

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism:

  • Earwig says no violations likely.


Broad in its coverage

edit

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic:

  • The coverage is broad, this is a provincial ground and covers everything that can be said.

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

  • Stays focussed throughout.

Neutral

edit
  • Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  • Looks fine. Not a controversial topic.


Stable

edit
  • Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  • Its stable. Not a controversial topic.


Illustrated

edit

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

  • Three pics, 2 are 4.0 and one is public domain.


(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

  • They're relevant and interesting.


Overall

edit
  1. Well-written  
  2. Verifiable with no original research  
  3. Broad in its coverage  
  4. Neutral  
  5. Stable  
  6. Illustrated  
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Christ_Church_Ground/GA1&oldid=1167927067"