Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Maurice Leyland/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 Ian Rose 10:01, 9 November 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Maurice Leyland[edit]

Maurice Leyland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Sarastro1 (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Leyland was a Yorkshire cricketer in the 1920s and 1930s. A rather unglamorous, but very well-loved figure, he was at his best against the toughest opponents. Atypically for a Yorkshire cricket from this period (no comments on this please, Mr Riley!), he was a cheerful and humorous chap. I've been working on this article since January, and since March it has been a GA. It received an excellent PR from Tintin1107, Crisco 1492, Tim riley, Cassianto, Sahara4u, Giants2008 and Brianboulton. Any further comments are gratefully received. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – All my comments were addressed at the peer review, and I am very happy to pledge my support. Another fantastic effort by the nominator, himself a flawless player in the field of cricket articles (pun, me, never!). -- CassiantoTalk 19:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your earlier comments, your kind words and your support. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Once again Sarastro1 conjures a thoroughly satisfying, highly readable article from the facts of a cricketer's life and career. Such a thing could so easily be a dull list of facts and statistics, but, as with Sarastro's earlier subjects, the reader gets a real sense of the man and his deeds. The prose is a pleasure, the research and referencing top-notch, the images well chosen and the balance and proportions of the article judicious. The article was in fine shape at PR and is even finer now. This is plainly of FA quality IMO. – Tim riley (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the kind words, your help at the PR, and your support. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - my comments were addressed to my satisfaction at the PR. Another great article on someone whom I'd have never heard of otherwise. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:40, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work at PR, and for your support. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – The story I have to tell is the same as the prior reviewers. I commented (briefly) at the PR, was impressed with the article when I read it, and firmly believe that it meets the standards. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:06, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support. Sarastro1 (talk) 10:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK (PD-Australia, PD-1996). Souces and known authors provided.

  • File:Leyland_batting.tiff - removed journal link to Wiki-article, as it was dead on Commons and not strictly necessary (not sure, where the link was supposed to lead to) - OK. GermanJoe (talk) 11:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the image check. That link came from the Trove site, which has it's own reference-for-wikipedia thing, and I was too lazy to change it! Sarastro1 (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – This article has gotten a very good PR, and I think this is now one of the best article at Wikipedia. Great effort from Sarastro1! Zia Khan 22:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the above supports. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Doesn't the lead, the first paragraph especially, get bogged down by figures—runs, averages and years? Also, I think any reader who's here for the stats heads straight for the infobox, where he can get them more succinctly. So these may be pointless here.
  • I've cut some stats from the first paragraph. Cut back on some of the years, but I feel they are necessary to tell the story. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even after I feel that there are too many specific years. For eg: "debut in 1920, and appeared intermittently in 1921 and 1922" → "debut in 1920, and appeared intermittently over the next couple of years" and so on.
  • Infobox: "Bowling style: Slow left-arm orthodox." Huh?
  • This came up at PR, but the main sources (Cricinfo and Cricketarchive) give this as his style. I'd prefer to leave it, as he did bowl that style as well. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention that he was a leftie.
  • "He scored over 1,000" → needs to connect with previous. "He returned to form..." for eg.
  • "batting well under pressure... thrived when the team depended upon him"—same thing? Then club aesthetic... to the first sentence itself.
  • "registered at birth as Morris Leyland,[notes 1]"—not a fan of this. Morris is used literally nowhere in the article. I think you remove both text and note, just have the note's text as a sentence in Early life and career.
  • Fair enough. No reason that this should not work, so adopted it. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should promote the sub-sections to full section status (and get rid of "Test match cricketer").
  • I actually prefer it with the subsections, as it makes it organisationally neater and I hate long TOCs with nothing to break them up. But maybe that's just me. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Later life to before Style. Then you keep the historical sections together, and end on a positive note.
  • I'm sure there was a reason for the order I used, but can't remember it now, so swapped them around. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Word overuse: "effective" in Style. "described how he faced an over from O'Reilly, as described"
  • Paras that need splitting: Peak 1 and 4; Style 3.
  • Add pics of people who pop up frequently—O'Reilly for eg.
  • O'Reilly is the obvious one, but despite its presence in a FA, and its location of Commons, I have grave doubts that the image of O'Reilly in our article is really PD. Similar for anyone else whose name crops up a few times. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but enjoyed taking wickets"—A pointless sentence; who wouldn't enjoy picking up a wicket?!—User:Indopug (who has locked himself out of his account 122.164.232.131 (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, "Almacack".122.164.232.131 (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I think I've either changed or responded to all of them. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review A couple of very small points:

  • "Online edition" repeated in Ref 1
  • Ref 97 (Peebles) needs a page number

Otherwise, all sources look of reliable quality and correctly formatted. Brianboulton (talk) 22:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the source review. Sarastro1 (talk) 00:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I had plenty to say at the peer review, and my points were adequately answered. The only additional suggestion I have now is that you could avoid repeating the word "played" in the first line of the lead by saying that "he appeared for Yorkshire". Up to you. This is a cricketing biography of a standard that we have come to expect, and I am more than happy to support its promotion. Brianboulton (talk) 22:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your help at the PR and your support. I switched the second "played" for "appeared". Sarastro1 (talk) 23:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (having stumbled here from my FAC). Appropriately sized intro sect per WP:LEAD. Good use of images throughout. Appropriate organizational structure, progresses nicely in chronological format for the reader. I like the style of presentation used for citations and references. As a side note I must remark that I am quite impressed at the level of participation and number of those involved both here at the FAC and previously at the article's Peer Review! FAC nominator, you must share your secrets on how you get such valuable input from other high-quality contributors! ;) Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 03:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your support. I find begging, grovelling and pestering work wonders when looking for quality reviews! Sarastro1 (talk) 22:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're welcome, and thanks, I'll take that into consideration in the future, — Cirt (talk) 04:42, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – My, this article is well organized and structured as well as researched and comprehensive. Excellent work my friend. JoeMeas (talk) 07:04, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Final comments from Indopug
  • "each English season between 1923 and 1939" the exact years aren't important IMO. Change to "16/17 consecutive seasons"?
  • Infobox: avoid all confusion and contradiction by making it the broader "Left arm spin"?
  • "In first-class cricket, he represented Yorkshire"--technically only county cricket right? In FCC he represented both Eng and Yorkshire. (Unless this is standard usage)
  • I would say it's OK as it is, as it's generally taken to mean below Test level. Even cricketers aren't quite that pedantic! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did he die in Scotton (infobox) or Knaresborough (Later life)?
  • Scotton is more Knaresborough than Harrogate, so I've tweaked it. They are both the same place. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pics: Cardus? You could add another quote in the caption then . . .
  • Bibliography: book titles have inconsistent capitalisation?
  • I see what you mean. I think I got them, and removed the horribly long subtitle from the Bodyline book. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He hit two sixes in one over"--amazing that this was once a notable achievement. (made me recall the awful just-concluded Ind v Aus series).
  • Ah yes, the days before bats were like railway sleepers and the boundary was a mis-hit away... Sarastro1 (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

122.164.155.143 (talk) 14:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And support Not often you see "expostulated" right next to "tha must remember that Ah'm playing for me place in team". Well done.122.164.155.143 (talk) 14:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments and support. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2013 (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/Maurice_Leyland/archive1&oldid=1079645268"