| Rate
|
Attribute
|
Review Comment
|
| 1. Well-written:
|
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
|
Can you not use his first name (in sentences) instead of last name to avoid confusion? His father appears to have the same first and last name as well.
- Given that, as you say, they also had the same first name, I don't think that would make it any clearer. There is only one sentence about his father, and I think it is reasonably clear which that is. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Ha, I got confused while reading the bit about his brothers. Ignore this one, it's better to leave this as it is.
If "gentleman" is a technical term link it appropriately, else add a foot note.
"His best performance for Somerset during that time was against Kent, against whom he claimed six first innings' wickets". Consider rephrasing the last part of the sentence, something like " ... was against Kent; he claimed six wickets in Kent's first innings.
Link second-class cricket appropriately, if possible.
- Sadly there is no relevant article. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"a performance bettered for the university only nine times" – Doesn't sound great. Also, it should be noted that he didn't set a record straight away by taking 13 wickets; it was the third-best when he did so.
- The article doesn't claim that it is a record. But I've changed it to "the tenth best bowling performance for the university." Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Later in the summer he claimed eight wickets against Lancashire, ..." – This sentence is extremely long.
- I disagree, and WP:GANOT suggests it's fine for GA. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- As far as I can see it's an essay. Does it talk about length of sentences in GAs?
When you say "expensively", it may not be clear to non-cricket buffs unless it's linked.
"before Roe himself caught the professional off" – The use of the word "professional" is abrupt here. Again, non-cricket buffs would wonder what a professional cricketer is. You could simply use the name instead.
|
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
|
"Cambridge won the match by seven wickets, thanks primarily to brothers Charles and George Studd." – "thanks primarily to" reads pretty much like an editorial.
- Removed the bit about the Studd brothers, which wasn't really relevant to the article. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 2. Verifiable with no original research:
|
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
|
|
|
|
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
|
|
|
|
2c. it contains no original research.
|
In the sentences "In the University match against Oxford, Ramsay was largely ineffective," and " His batting was less effective" you need sources to back up the "ineffective" part.
- I'm torn on this. I guess it is sort of OR, but taking two wickets in a match is ineffective. I've changed it to "had little success" which is more factual, given he had just two successes. I have reworded the second instance. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
|
| 3. Broad in its coverage:
|
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
|
|
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
|
|
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
|
|
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
|
|
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
|
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
|
|
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
|
Caption and ALT text needed for the infobox image
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions suggests that captions aren't needed for infobox images, while alt text isn't a requirement for GA, though I've added it. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Since the image doesn't have the year of publication, the caption isn't really necessary.
|
|
|
7. Overall assessment.
|
- I've read the whole article. I'll put this article on hold for now. Happy to pass this one once the issues are fixed. —Vensatry (ping) 19:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Vensatry: Thanks for the review, I think I have responded to each of your points. Harrias talk 15:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
|
