Talk:The Boat Race 1883/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 16:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Boat Race

Similar problem to other articles - explain who the Blues are, and also link the 1877 "dead heat" race (hopefully which will eventually be an FA and definitely worth linking)
Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Woodgate also briefly coached the Light Blues" - do we know when?
The same year. Noted. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
" three times in quick succession the occupant differed" - maybe "switched" instead of "differed"
I think I'll go with "was replaced" as "switched" sounds dreadfully American..... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh don't get me started, I spent an hour at work today with a Windows 8.1 installation that just would not switch the keyboard out of US English and put it on UK. Anyway, I digress.... Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"The race featured two non-British participants:" - shouldn't that be a semicolon instead of a colon?
I think a colon is just dandy. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since that Terry-Thomasesque turn of phrase brought a grin, I'll let it stay. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Commencing at 5.39pm, the start of the race descended into chaos: darkness was falling" - might be easier to say "The race started at 5.39pm but descended into chaos due to darkness falling" (then put the next bit in a separate sentence)
Rephrased a little bit. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"from the starter Searle, who had fulfilled that position since the 1840 race" - I think the "who had fulfilled...." is better suited in "Background" rather than here, where the participants are described
Rejigged. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's it - on hold. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
C'est ca, thanks again. I appreciate all the reviews and appreciate someone who genuinely cares about improving the encyclopaedic content of Wikipedia. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now if I didn't know any better, I'd swear that was a disguised dig at some other editor who doesn't do as much article work as we would like ..... anyway, passed. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]