Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lindsay Hassett with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 21:36, 20 October 2009 [1].

Lindsay Hassett with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948[edit]

Nominator(s): YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

Vice-captain of the Invincibles {{Invincibles Advert}} ... YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is ridiculously excessive. They should be arranged in a better format, because they are essentially meaningless right now. There's more cases of excessive footnotes, such as in the Role section. Is there any reason why 11 references are needed for two sentences? Majorly talk 13:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The sources are there to link to those matches in which he captained, as the usual summary source page for instance, doesn't have the option of adding a symbol to denote it. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But what of the 11 footnotes for two sentences? I think that's over the top. Can you not spread them out? Majorly talk 13:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The 11 are for the captaincy matches, the others are for his position, as Cricinfo's Statsguru summariser only works for Tests, for the rest, you have to add them up manually for all the matches. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: YellowMonkey, this is a great article and you've done a fantastic job on cricket articles, and popularity is not required for FAC, but do you realize that these individual player/team articles are seen by almost no one? Your great skill at writing the articles is unfortunately unnoticed and could be better used at articles read more often. [2][3][4][5][6]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.248.244.232 (talk • contribs)
  • And? If it meets WP:N (which the recent AfD suggests this article does) it's an acceptable article. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware that articles on old cricketers hardly get any reads, neither do articles about Vietnamese history. I don't really want to write about the latest fad cricketer, because in 10 years, once they retire, their reads will plummet as well, whereas these guys will remain highly remembered. Still this isn't costing me any more labour, because I finished work ages ago. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source comments Dabs fine.
  • Current ref 79 deadlinks [7]
  • Current ref 94 needs a publisher.
  • The Fingleton ref in the bibliography needs an ISBN.

RB88 (T) 08:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all, but Fingleton was from teh pre-ISBN age, so can't be helped YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 09:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note that ISBNs aren't required by the FA criteria nor do I think the MOS requires them (unless they've recently been added somewhere I haven't seen yet). Yes, ISBNs are nice, but they aren't required. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Was a uniformity issue. RB88 (T) 15:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ISBNs aren't available for all books, though. Even now, they aren't "required" for books, but most books carry them, but even in the 1980s, some books did not receive them. Prior to that, many books did not. I always look at ISBNs as nice extras, but not needed, and you can't request something that may or may not be available. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I got that. I simply saw all the other ones had it and asked for the remaining one to have it too for conformity. I assumed it would be available as I didn't know about ISBN history. RB88 (T) 15:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One of the fun exciting facts you'll learn about with source stuff! Ealdgyth - Talk 15:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the specific subject is not discussed in depth in sources. Article is primarily original research. Stifle (talk) 11:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, it is. Is there anything in there that is made up and not out of a book? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Sir, I doubt you would have read the books to know. Anyhow, we've already had this discussion. The article meets WP:N according to the recent AfD discussion. Aaroncrick (talk) 04:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The books discuss Lindsay Hassett, or the Australian cricket team, or the Australian cricket team in England in 1948, or perhaps cricket in England in 1948, but not the full combination. See WP:SYNTH. Stifle (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are no conclusions "not explicitly stated by any of the sources" or any new concepts. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 23:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I just read it for the first time and found it to be interesting and very well put together. OK, its not eveyone's cup of tea, but where is the original research? - every pertinent fact is properly cited and the article meets the N criteria per the recent AfD. Reviewers should assess on its merits and not some personal view regarding Notability. Hassett was the vice-captain and named Wisden cricketer of the year in 1949, largely entirely on tne back of his contribution in this series. –Moondyne 01:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also WCOTY is purely based on performance in the past year in England, therefore Hassett's work "with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948" YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support –

  • Remove space after "Hassett took 23 catches on the tour , the most by an Australia excluding wicket-keepers." Remove space before the comma and change to "Australian".
  • Early tour: "Australian then bowled out the hosts in the second innings for 89." One letter too many on the first word.
  • Third Test: Space after reference number 20.
  • Later matches: "Hassett enforced the follow on as Australia wen on to win by an innings and 374 runs." Little typo in there.
  • Role: "The wins over latter two were particularly convincing". Add "the" before "latter"?
  • "batting at No.7 and No. 10 respectively." Minor point, but make the number spacing consistent in regards to the periods.
  • The last paragraph of the lead and the last para here are exact duplicates. There should be at least some surface differences between the two. Giants2008 (17–14) 21:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You could have fixed all but the last point yourself, saving a lot of time. Is it really a good idea to type out "There's a space and it needs removing", or is it better to just remove it? I think the latter. Majorly talk 21:49, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I always approach FAC from the perspective of a reader who wants to read an informative, well-written article. If I see aspects of an article that negatively impact my reading experience, such as typos and spacing errors, I report them because it's not the reviewer's job to fix every such glitch in an article, although they certainly can if they choose to. It sometimes amazes me how many typos etc. I see in candidates, and it concerns me because they can indicate prose that is not of a professional standard. This is an unusual case in that they were the bulk of my comments, but it doesn't take that long to fix them and doing so makes for a stronger article. Giants2008 (17–14) 03:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A frequent side effect of this level of detail in reviews is that nominators learn to proofread their nominations before submitting them. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, Majorly, have a look at my review of the FAC Inner German border, above. Huge. But many of the points require content knowledge I didn't have, and in any case I wanted to ... um ... train a very good editor out of a few habits. Better that s/he fixed the glitches himself. Tony (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on criterion 3

  • File:WO Hassett.jpg - Since this image is hosted on Commons, it needs to be in the PD in both the US and the host country. Please add a tag explaining why it is PD in the US.
Removed it. There appears to be some issues with these AWM images, per other concurrent FACs YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check to see if this image meets the requirements for PD-1996? If not, we could probably use it as fair use on en.wiki. Awadewit (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think fair use is worth the trouble, it's just a portrait of him, and is purely decorative, more or less YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Looks good. Aaroncrick (talk) 09:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Lindsay_Hassett_with_the_Australian_cricket_team_in_England_in_1948/archive1&oldid=1138465772"