Talk:Edward Stanley (cricketer)

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Sportsfan77777 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Edward Stanley (cricketer)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sportsfan77777 (talk · contribs) 08:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply


Hopefully, the World Cup has taught me enough about cricket to review this article. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Lead

edit
  • Is it fair to say his appearance was unsuccessful just because he didn't bowl or score? Maybe "inconsequential" instead?

Life and career

edit

County cricket appearance

edit
  • Newspaper reports on the first day's play either listed ten players, omitting Fowler, or included him as 'absent'. <<<=== Add that they left off or were unaware of Stanley.
  • Despite these reports however <<<=== "however" is redundant
  • Stanley was posted to Manchester at the time as a Captain in the 2nd Regiment of Foot. Stanley was qualified to play for Somerset on the basis of his birth in the county, and did come out to bat in the first innings, but had to retire hurt after being hit by the second delivery he faced. <<<=== Split it as the following so that the first sentence describes the lead-up and the second describes the match: Stanley was posted to Manchester at the time as a Captain in the 2nd Regiment of Foot and was qualified to play for Somerset on the basis of his birth in the county. He did come out to bat in the first innings, but had to retire hurt after being hit by the second delivery he faced.
  • You should mention that he batted at number eleven in the first innings, before mentioning it for the second.
  • Somerset lost the match by ten wickets. <<<=== I always wonder this about cricket in general, but is it worth also mentioning the score and/or how many balls were left?
    • It's impossible to say how many balls were left as this wasn't a limited over contest. Listing the full score for each of the four innings would seem a bit too in depth for a player's article in my opinion. Harrias talk 17:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Overall

edit
  • I don't have access to the sources, so I'll assume they suffice.
  • No dab links.

Prose looks solid. Just a few minor things. Placing on hold. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 09:16, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Oh, completely forgot about this after the initial talk page notifications. Will take a look at cleaning it up over the weekend! Harrias talk 14:22, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Sportsfan77777: Okay, I've taken a look, and hopefully all sorted now. Harrias talk 17:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Looks good, passing! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:57, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply