Talk:Bobby Peel

	Bobby Peel is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 12, 2017.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 23, 2014 Good article nominee Listed March 5, 2014 Peer review Reviewed March 12, 2014 Featured article candidate Promoted A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 12, 2020. Current status: Featured article

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). Cricket Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Cricket To-do list: edit history watch purge Article assessment Check Category:Unassessed cricket articles for class and Category:Unknown-importance cricket articles for importance: see Assessment Department for details Verifiability Update fair and unfair play, fast bowling, first-class cricket, googly, innings, leg break, limited overs cricket, not out, Pakistan Cricket Board, spin bowling, underarm bowling, wicket, and other fundamental articles classified by the WikiProject as high-importance so that they meet WP:Verifiability policy standards Cleanup There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format) Infoboxes Add infoboxes to the player articles found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/requested infoboxes Cricket people Create articles about 19th century players who are listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/19th century players Create biographies about Bangladeshi players from the task force redlink list Check the listing of key bios at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Key biographies and improve these to at least B-class. Create batting/bowling graphs for cricketers who have excelled in international cricket. Create articles for redlinks present here and here Cricket teams & countries Domestic cricket coverage is needed for Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe; Create articles from redlinks and improve existing articles in List of current first-class cricket teams; National cricket teams; Under-19 national cricket teams Create articles about cricket in these missing countries Create or expand articles on international tours from items in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/summary of international tour articles Create a link as such on Template:Cr-Aus/doc for Cricket Australia XI Images Add pictures (and remove template from address requests) in these Category:Wikipedia requested images of cricket people Add pictures for grounds missing photos from here On this day in cricket Expand the anniversary coverage for Portal:Cricket at Portal:Cricket/Anniversaries Umpires Expand ICC International umpire panel; ICC Elite referee panel; ICC Associates and Affiliates umpire panel Women Expand Women's cricket, Women's Test cricket and articles about women's cricket generally especially biographies and tours Update A number of lists need to be updated, can be found in Template:International cricketers and Template:National cricket captains Regularly updating cricketers' career stats. Other Export all cricket terms present in List of cricket terms to Wiktionary

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bobby Peel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sahara4u (talk · contribs) 02:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...,and was highly regarded by critics." → and was highly regarded by cricket critics.

• I think it is fairly self-evident that they would be cricket critics, and I'm not too fond of the alliteration. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "..and was highly regarded by critics." → well-known

• It seems I mixed up the text. I meant well known should be "well-known". —Zia Khan 14:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Well-known and highly regarded are not the same thing; he was highly regarded. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Link "drawn"

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "At the time, the Yorkshire team was generally inconsistent." In which aspect? They were not playing frequently or else?

• Tried to clarify. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...not usually composed exclusively of the best cricketers in England." → Needs inline citation.

• It is cited at the end of the next sentence; not every sentence needs a citation if they are covered by the next ref. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The previous English tour Australia..." → The previous English tour of Australia ...

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Critics considered..." again "Cricket critics considered..."

• See above. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...match figures of 11 for 68." match-figures?

• I've never seen it hyphenated anywhere else. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...158 runs in his second innings, his maiden first-class hundred." At that time?!

• You can only have one maiden hundred; your first will always be your first. It is still his maiden hundred 125 years later. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• At the end of the season, Hawke ended the careers of several players; the Yorkshire president told the committee that the "demon drink" was to blame.[44]" I think this sentence is unrelated to the para?

• Why? It is about the same season, and relates to the team's underachievement. And it links to Peate's and Peel's dismissals. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Link to Melbourne Cricket Club

• Linked earlier on first mention. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "After having five teeth extracted,[60]..." why?

• No source says. Presumably decay. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• ...the fifth day's play, Australia had scored 113 for two,..." We know that Test matches were of 6 days at that time, but most of our reader don't know this, I guess.

• Actually, in Australia they were timeless and had no limit. Not sure it is worth specifying this, particularly as English Tests were 3-day games. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• You may link "pair"

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Link "duck" at the first instance

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...and 168 runs at 18.67, placing him sixth in the batting averages.[78]" → ...and scored 168 runs at 18.67, placing him sixth in the batting averages.[78]

• The whole sentence reads "Peel ended the series with 27 wickets at 26.70, second in the averages behind Tom Richardson, and 168 runs at 18.67, placing him sixth in the batting averages." We don't need "scored" as it makes sense without. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "... to be eighth in the averages,..." → "to be" is redundant

• No, the sentence doesn't make sense without it. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Against Warwickshire, he scored 210 not out, the highest first-class score of his career,..." in an innings?

• Tweaked. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The first para ends up with 1904 and the following para starts in 1898?

• Took out the 1904 part as I'm not sure how important it is. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Wilfred Rhodes → Rhodes

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• His main rival as a spinner and for a place in the England team was Johnny Briggs; Peel bowled faster, which made him harder to hit,[3] Archie MacLaren, who captained England towards the end of Peel's career and was a team-mate and captain of Briggs, described Peel as "the cleverest bowler of my time". → a very long sentence

• Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "He batted in the middle order,[84] including when he played for England, when he most often batted at number six,[17] and often effective when other batsmen had failed.[3]" no need of "when he"

• Reorganised this a bit. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• All the images should have a proper ALT text.

• Unless I'm missing something, they all have alt text already. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A well-written article! I'll put this one on hold, and will be back to this as the above concerns resolve. —Zia Khan 02:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that should be everything. Thanks for the review. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• You may link ESPNcricinfo and CricketArchive in the references. —Zia Khan 14:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not sure I see the point. Other sources aren't linked in the references, and I don't think it's common practice. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see Wikipedia:Good article criteria and WP:GACN)

1. Well-written.

   a (clear and concise prose which doesn't violate copyright laws, grammar and spelling are correct): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, and fiction:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (well referenced): b (citations to reliable sources): c (Wikipedia:No original research):

3. Broad in its coverage.

   a (covers major aspects): b (well focused):

4. Neutral .

   Fair representation, no bias:

5. Stable.

   No edit wars nor disputed contents:

6. Illustrated appropriately by images.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Conclusion: Good work with the article. Keep it up! —Zia Khan 21:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

   Pass/Fail: