Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Percy Chapman/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Percy Chapman

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am aiming at FAC. Chapman was a England cricket captain who rose to the absolute heights before coming to a rather tragic end. Any comments on prose niggles, or any parts impenetrable (or too detailed) for non-cricketers much appreciated.

Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Doing... I will try and leave a few comments in the next day or so. Peer reviews are very hard to obtain at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: As promised, some comments (at the moment limited to the first half of the article). I can't do a Constantine job on this, so it's mainly fairly small stuff. I think one of the general Constantine issues - excessive detail - is present to some extent, and you should look to trim where you can, particularly as in some important areas, information is missing.

Lead
Early life
  • The sentence "Chapman was steered towards University cricket and playing for the Gentlemen" is oddly placed here, when the lad hasn't even begun prep school. Such thoughts may have been a gleam in Chapman senior's eye, but "steering towards" at this stage is wildly premature.
  • Probably you should briefly say why finishing second in the school's batting averages attracted the attention of the "wider public". It was, of course, because in 1916 there was no first class cricket, and the sports papers used the public schools' matches as a substitute, with inter-school matches being lengthily reported. This point is made a little later on, in Note 2; perhaps the note should be amended and placed earlier.
    • This is not actually the reason, as the top public school attracted such attention before and after the war. I think Chapman would have been a celebrity even had his school career been in the 1920s as prolific schoolboys (such as Jardine) were pretty well known by the Establishment. The source does not say this explicitly enough for my liking, so I'll see what else I can find which says this. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
University
  • "in this final game" - add the words "of the university season"
  • People not much aware of how English cricket was (and to an extent still is) organised should be told that Minor Counties matches were not first class, but that Scarborough Festival matches were. Thus I would say: "Chapman played second-class Minor Counties cricket..." and "appeared in three end-of-season first-class games at the Scarborough Festival..."
  • Say "In 1921" rather han "The following season".
  • Cricket followers will know that using 30 players in a single Test series is extraordinary: non-followers will not, and will wonder why the information is there.
  • Do none of Chpman's biographers indicate what he studies at Cambridge, or whether he took his degree?
    • Oddly enough, no. I think players like Chapman joined the university purely on sporting merit and had little interest in study. And this seems to have been accepted, and even encouraged. So no-one cared about his academic career; I can't see that he would have done too well, personally! Sarastro1 (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MCC tour to Australia and New Zealand
  • Be clearer about the status of this team, inc. perhaps saying who captained it and who some of the other players were.
    • Added the captain, but I'm not too sure what would be gained by adding other players. Which ones should be included? None of them were particularly notable except Tich Freeman and their names would be meaningless even to most cricket followers. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The word "initially" is redundant
  • Why was his bowling expected to make an impact? He had little record of previous success.
Qualifying for Kent
Second tour to Australia
  • "Through aggressive cricket, he made several substantial scores but only passed fifty in the second innings of the third Test. In this innings, his first Test score over fifty, he scored 58 runs." This clunks a a bit; try and polish.
  • Who is "Noble"?
  • "The highlight came at the end of the tour when Chapman visited New Zealand and married Beet Lowry". Who was "Beet Lowry"? Was she really named "Beet"? Had they met previously, etc? A couple of lines of explanation are essential. You can find the answers to my questions in Chapman's ODNB entry.
  • "noting his debut" - his debut in what? He was a Test player and had played first class cricket for years. His belated first County Championship appearance hardly qualifies as a "debut" (however the source describes it).
Ashes series of 1926
  • You need to say why the final Test was "decisive"
  • On the question of Chapman's youth, ODNB says he was "the youngest to hold the position in test history" but this is untrus (see Monty Bowden) but he was at the time the youngest to captain England against Australia. Since then, Atherton has beaten this record.

More later Brianboulton (talk) 22:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged! Sarastro1 (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A second batch: Not quite through:

Aftermath
Tour of Australia
  • Add the dates of the tour to the section title
  • If you're looking for ways of cutting the prose, the first two sentences of this section add little and could easily be dropped.
  • " For the first Test, Chapman and the tour selection committee chose only three specialist bowlers to strengthen the team's batting" - this reads as though the bowlers were selected to strengthen the batting. To clarify your intended meaning I suggest: "For the first Test, to strengthen the team's batting, Chapman and the tour selection committee chose only three specialist bowlers"
  • Is it worth mentioning that the victory in the first Test was by the largest runs margin (675) in Test match history?
  • Rather than "sitting in the Ladies' Stand", it might be better (and more accurate) to say something like "socialising with guests in the Ladies' Stand".
  • England's victory in the third Test ensured that the series was won; the result of the fourth could not affect the series victory. You should also mention that the third Test victory ensured that the Ashes were retained.
  • Will non-cricketers, or modern cricket followers for that matter, understand why putting Larwood to bowl against Ironmonger was considered "unsporting"? It would be par for the course today. An explanatory footnote might help.
  • Presumably Jardine left the "field" rather than the "match"?
  • "Socially, Chapman enjoyed the tour; he attended many social gatherings..." Avoid the "socially ... social" repetition
  • "... and according to Bill Ferguson, the team scorer, he only saw Chapman annoyed once on the tour" - not quite right. Suggest replace "and with semicolon, then "Bill Ferguson, the team scorer, only saw Chapman annoyed once on the tour..."
Ashes series of 1930
Loss of captaincy
  • This heading is not accurate. He did not lose the captaincy at this point. He was dropped from the side for the final Australian Test so could obviously not lead in that match, but as you say elsewhere, he had already been appointed to lead the side to tour South Africa. I don't think a separate subsection is required, anyway; the previous heading is "Ashes series of 1930". which covers all events including the final Test of the series.
  • I have never heard of Leo McKinstry, but I believe he is writing what might properly described as crap. If the selectors were seriously concerned about inconsistent, risky batting, increased tactical shortcomings and above all else, drunkenness on the field of play, would they have chosen Chapman to captain the side in South Africa? I think not. I'm not saying the selectors didn't have some justifiable concerns about him, but dropping him for one match did not amount to a "sacking". They clearly wanted to keep him on. In he end his terrible form in the South African series left them no choice but to replace him.
    • I'm not sure about this. They were already getting twitchy, and had selected him for the SA tour some time before they "sacked" him; I can't find a more precise date. As the SA tour was still not too prestigious (many players missed this one), and the Ashes were so much more important, I'm not so sure that McKinstry is wrong. He uses some pretty good sources, and everything backs up the view that the selectors did not trust Chapman anymore. Warner did one of his patented about-turns on him that summer. If they had already chosen him for the tour, it was probably too late to change their minds so they kept him for one last hurrah. But I think had it just been that they dropped him with the intention of bringing him back, there would not have been such an outcry at the time, and in subsequent years. I suspect that was his career effectively over. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, maybe, but there seems a level of conjecture about this. The facts are that he was dropped for one match; had he led Englad to a triumphant series victory in South Africa, along with a couple of centuries, would they still have replaced him? Your guess is as good as mine. However, reading through again I can't really see much wrong with your account; I might use "replacement" instead of "sacking". Brianboulton (talk) 16:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Final tour
  • Again, why not a more informative section title? Maybe "South African tour 1930–31"
  • Chapman had nine consecutive wins as captain, not seven, and I don't think nine has ever been surpassed. You mention nine victories in his first nine games in the next sentence.
    • Tried to clarify this. The team won seven successive games, but lost the next when Chapman was not captain. Chapman's nine were not consecutive; after the Oval in 1926, he missed the SA tour of 26-27, then won the seven in a row, then missed the 29-30 tours before winning his last match in 1930. Do you think the note explains it enough, and do you think it needs a stronger ref? (It would be long and convoluted if it needed more, but it's not too hard). Sarastro1 (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A few concluding comments on the later sections

Kent captain
  • Lord Tennyson captained rather than "chose" the team which Chapman joined. And I think it was just to Jamaica, rather than a tour of the WI
  • "However, it is likely that the selectors never considered returning to him" would probably read better "However, it is unlikely that the selectors ever considered returning to him".
both done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Decline
  • Mention that his last first-class game (MCC v Ox. Univ) was in 1939
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Style and technique
  • This is not the best section heading. Much of the prose is concerned with Chapman's effectiveness as a captain, or with his fielding abilities concerning which "style and technique" are not really appropriate terms.
This tends to be the kind of heading used here. I've gone for "Technique and critical judgements" but may tweak further. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "adventurous" is too commonplace a word to require quotes
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe add a footnote explaining who the "Quidnuncs" were. (If my Latin serves me well it means "What now")
Erm... No-one really says anything about them! The best I can get is that they were an equivalent of the Oxford Harlequins. Which doesn't really clarify anything. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps "a club for former Cambridge cricket Blues"?
Good idea, done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Even so, his record as captain is at least as good as others who captained England during Chapman's career". A good deal better, I'd say, in terms of results certainly during his England career. Jardine's record was slightly better.
Beefed this up a little. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the second paragraph the word "captain" or "captaincy/captained" occurs very frequently. A slight prose revision could reduce the repetition.
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marriage and fame
  • Comma required after "...New Zealand in 1922–23"
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At the end of his tour of 1924–25..." → "At the end of the 1924–25 Australia tour..."
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who is/was Ivo Tennant?
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Later struggle
  • "After 1946, Chapman lived with the steward of West Hill Golf Club, Bernard Benson...": "lived with" has a slightly suspect flavour. Perhaps "shared a house with"?
Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That ends my comments. I still think that the article could be shaved a little, by removing less important stuff, without detriment. I can't go further than this very general statement, but I almost invariably find, when I have finished drafting an article, that I can reduce it by between 10 and 15 per cent with no quality loss. It can be a bit painful, removing stuff that represents considerable research, but in general I find it worthwhile. As it is, this is a very creditable article about an interesting figure in the cricket world who has, I think, been somewhat neglected in the copious cricket literature. I, certainly, knew little about him before reading this. Brianboulton (talk) 17:57, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at trimming further before heading to FAC. Thanks once more for the review. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Percy_Chapman/archive1&oldid=516206123"