Talk:Alastair Cook

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Alastair Cook was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
September 7, 2009 Peer review Reviewed
November 10, 2009 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee


Cook is self-evidently English, so shouldn't he be described as such in the lead? On the same point, is it normal to give an analysis of a person's ancestry in the lead paragraph? The main body of the article strikes me as the appropriate place for this kind of detail.

Someone's obviously keen to point out his Welsh ancestry - which is fine - but this is not so important as to be one of the very first things mentioned in the article, and to negate his being identified as English.

Furthermore, the wording of the "Early Life and Education" paragraph strikes me as unbalanced. It focuses on his Welsh ancestry ahead of his English ancestry (and these are 50:50, remember), citing his English father as a mitigating afterthought ("although") to his otherwise predominant Welshness. The facts of his life (born, raised and resident in England) suggest that the emphasis of this sentence should if anything be reversed.Shiresman (talk) 13:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean, it does seem pretty unbalanced. Bainseyy (talk) 18:32, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

In fact, I don't think the welsh ancestry is important at all. 85% of welsh people have English ancestry, it is not uncommon for people in England or wales to have mixed ancestry. It does not even say that his mother has welsh ancestry, she may just live in wales for all we know. I think the whole 'Welsh Ancestry' section should be removed. Bainseyy (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the England cricket team also covers Wales, so he could be purely Welsh and still play for England. Still, there is no particular reason to go into detail about that, it's not overly important. (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Does he really bowl "slow", i.e. less than 40mph? Our article on fast bowling says nobody bowls that slow in professional cricket. Have any Essex fans seen him in action? Lfh 11:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

His average is over 50 in tests at the moment according to the cricket yesterday, so presumably some things need updating, I have updated the lead. SGGH speak! 09:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Nom[edit]

It looks like this article was being prepared for a GA Nomination. What happened? Spiderone 17:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't really, I just took it on as a pet project to spruce it up because it was appalling before and only had 6 sources while I had some time with nothing to do and a hobby to invent. I've never taken an article to any kind of status before as I don't really know what it involves, I just improve them for the article's sake but if you want to nominate it or make the necessary improvements, feel free. Tony2Times (talk) 00:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
It's worth taking a look at the GA criteria as it can give you an idea of what to aim for in an article (although FA is the ideal, not every article can end up FA or GA). The important things when looking to take an article to GAN is to make sure it well referenced (which the article appears to be) and is broad in its coverage, ie: it includes all the main points of the subject. In a biography article such as this, something needs to be included on early life. This isn't always easy for cricketers as most of the coverage concentrates on their careers, but this article seems to do it well. Also important, is making sure it's well written. At GA level, this mainly means it's understandable and free from obvious gramatical errors.
It might be worth taking the article to GA as it can show what needs to be improved. For example, a reviewer who is unfamiliar with cricket would help you identify if jargon is used too much (a problem I suffer from when writing cricket related articles). Some jargon has to be used, as most people who read the article will be familiar with cricket, but its not always necessary and a fresh pair of eyes can help. Nev1 (talk) 00:46, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
May I also recommend a peer review? A lot of people there can help with the jargon. Spiderone 08:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Comments are here Spiderone 15:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wizardman 21:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Overall this is a very nice article, though I have found a few issues:

  • what does XI mean? First time I've seen that in a cricket article and since i don't knowmuch about the sport it left me confused.
Short for the teams 11 players. Often used in cricket circles. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 22:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
  • You use both Essex County Cricket Club and essex academy interchangeably. I'd stick with just the former to avoid confusion, or is the academy something different?
They are different. I linked to something which may help Spiderone 10:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • "Cook came under criticism throughout 2008 for a lack of centuries but replied with two in 2009, and 95 against Australia to help..." makes it sound like he had 95 centuries, which i'm pretty sure is nearly impossible despite my lack of cricket knowledge.
  • There's a lot of cites in the lead. If something is cited both in the lead and body, the cite can be removed in the lead. (saves a bit of kb room if nothing else)
 Done Spiderone 10:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • "Cook is also a keen musician." What is the 'also' referring to?
 Done Spiderone 10:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • When you're abbreviating and using acronyms, make sure to use the full name in the first mention (i.e. [1])
  • Numbers ten and under should be written out.
  • "His exploits in his single season gained him enough attention to be brought in as the opening batsmen for the MCC in 2005 season's opener against County Champions Warwickshire" Infobox says he started in 04; which is right?
  • "The season opener would not be Cook's only highlight for the year, as The Ashes approached Australia were touring the counties and in a two-day match which sadly did not count towards his first-class statistics, Cook scored a double century went on to take the first wicket of Justin Langer with a catch in the drawn match days after being awarded PCA Young Cricketer of the Year." This sentence is full of issues. First, avoid modifiers like "sadly" in an encyclopedia article. Second, the part 'as the ashes approached australia were touring the counties' doesn't make sense as worded though I think I know what you meant. Third, it can probably be split into two sentences, feels like a run on. Fourth. 'Cook scored a double entry went on to' feels like it's missing a word.
  • "The back to back Totesport/Pro40 champions saw Cook make only one appearance in that competition, scoring 81*,[34] before being relegated." What does the asterisk signify?
It means not out Spiderone 10:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Just reiterating that sentence enhancers like 'disappointing', 'impressive', 'sadly', etc. can't be used. I won't list each example, but they are definitely around.
  • Reference #16 (The clamour grows throughout the land: pick Cook now) is a deadlink. Either remove the url or, preferably, try to find a place online where it is.
 Done Spiderone 10:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Make sure punctuation comes before the ref tags rather than after.
  • ..."being one of only five Englishmen to hit as many centuries in 15 Tests and recorded another half century in the following innings to win his first Man of The Match award." This just isn't worded right.

(I will do 2007 onward after this is completed)

One thing that's iffy to me about the article is that it seems very stat-based. It's easy to fall into this kind of writing, but it does make it hard for a non-cricket fan to follow at times. The biggest general thing I can ask you to do on this article is find someone to give this a full copyedit. I'm not very good at finding the iffy comma placements and the like, yet I'm finding quite a few punctuation issues. As such, there's probably more to be found that I missed. I'll place this on hold and give you 5 days to complete all this. When done, I will review the second half of the article. If it doesn't get done I'll fail it. Wizardman 19:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

After thinking about it more, and looking at all the issues, I'm going to fail this. Don't be disappointed by it or anything, as this is a very nice article, just a lot of copyediting and structural tweaks are needed before it could be a GA. Just fix the issues I've noted and feel free to re-nominate, I could easily see it passing the second time through. Wizardman 20:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the attention but I had a feeling it'd have too many issues to go through. I'm not good at editing my own work and writing so much prose was no doubt gonna lead to some problems. Thanks anyways. Tony2Times (talk) 20:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Alastair-cook-1332164.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Alastair-cook-1332164.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

two captions[edit]

2 captions do not match the picture, suggest this should change. 1. Cook bowled his only Test over against South Africa at Lord's 2. Cook took the winning catch in the 2009 Ashes series. And the pictures of ashes urn is really necessary? LibStar (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit War[edit]

User:Englandcricketteam has been constantly reverting my edits: 1,2, 3. I believe the information he is adding is not fit for an encyclopedia and should be removed immediately. It is unreferenced and written like a story. If this is not sorted out I will file a report and have him banned for edit warring.Staglit (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

It takes two people to edit war. This article was several years out of set and I spent an awful lot of time getting it up to date. Therefore you can see how I may find it frustrating that you delete the entire section I have written. If you think you can make it better, by all accounts make edits if you think you can make it better. But please do not delete the entire section. Maybe if you told me what you thought was not good about it and I could try to make it better, but deleting the whole section is not constructive. Englandcricketteam (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Englandcricketteam: I would suggest that you read this article. It permits me to remove any unsourced information without getting punished. I know you work hard on everything you add to this and you should be proud. Unfortunately, it is commonly accepted on Wikipedia that there should be citations for Everything. Do not revert and removal of unsourced content as it is authorized. Please continue to edit Wikipedia, but be aware of the rules. I have gotten in trouble several times, and it just takes some learning to get them down. Staglit (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Malformed ref[edit]

I've just added a reference to the Guardian supporting the date of birth of his first child, replacing a Citation Needed tag. It's my first edit of Wikipedia and the ref looks malformed on the page (currently no 181). It looks to me just like the ref just before it. Can someone check what I've done and correct it? Thanks ghytred talk 13:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Alastair Cook. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)