| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
Another Yorkshire cricketer, and quite a volatile one (they seem to have this in common...) This article is currently a GA, and I would like to take it to FAC. My main concerns are that it is not too stats heavy or too dull and that it is comprehensible to the non-specialist, as well as the usual prose issues. Also, a lack of sources has caused one or two problems in writing it. I'm fairly sure that the sourcing and comprehensiveness are up to scratch, but more eyes would help. Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 23:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comments by Bradley0110
This was a very informative read with good prose and summary. A few things I noticed:
- "In 1919, they recommended Waddington to the Yorkshire committee, probably after seeing him take part in cricket matches in the army." Does Howe use "probably"? If so I think it ought to be noted within the text as right now it looks like editorialising.
- Howe states: "it is thought that" they did this, which suggests that the opinion is not his, but is more of a story associated with him. I would be reluctant to ascribe the opinion to Howe on this evidence, and I do not personally see this as too much of an issue; particularly in history FACs, when there is probable but not certain fact, "probably" is used. Feel free to argue! --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- The Style and personality section refers to Neville Cardus and Anthony Woodhouse without stating who they are and why their opinions matter. I assume they're cricket writers like Jim Kilburn?
- Yes, done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- MCC is alternately styled "MCC" and "M.C.C." It should be consistent.
- Thanks, I thought I had them all. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- "[...] although his love of fast cars brought him trouble from the police at times." Do Howe or Woodhouse elaborate on what the "trouble" was? Arrests? Fines?
- Unfortunately not. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- "After a long illness[...]" Any indication of what the illness was?
- Again, no. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- A lot of sentences run together even when different clauses are expressing different topics, which can be particularly confusing in the Style section, e.g. "His run-up began from the on side of the wicket, and he ran behind the umpire before bowling the ball from the corner of the bowling crease, creating a sharp angle for the batsman to face, sometimes using short pitched bowling with a ring of leg side fielders."
- Fixed this one. I suspect it may be a copy-edit side effect! Could you note down any others that you find? It would be a big help as I doubt I'd spot them. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Some more comments will follow tomorrow. Apologies for having this tagged as "doing" for two days. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Not a problem. I'd rather a delayed review that is helpful! Thanks for the work so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)