Talk:Colin McCool with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Specific concerns
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * A couple of rough spots and some information in the lede that isn't reflected in the body of the article
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lede says "Although he started his Test career strongly..." but the first paragraph of Background says "McColl played in three Tests without much success...." which contradicts the lead.
 * ''Clarified


 * Background section, third paragraph... "...closest that Australia came to defeat." In the whole series of matches? wouldn't the draws be closer?
 * Yes the whole tour, so reworded that. For the draws, not necessarily. In cricket, you can't just score more runs than the other team, you have to dismiss the other team twice (unless they make a declaration and forfeiture), in other words you have to score more runs and knock them out twice. In a lot of draws, both sides' batsmen may have been more comfortable and never looked like being knocked over within the playing time limit, hence a draw/stalemate may not necessarily be perilous. In the case of the Yorkshire match, the pitch was very poor and behaved erratically with the ball bouncing inconsistently so most of the batsmen were already out in half the allotted playing time. Australia only needed 60 runs to win but whad lost six batsmen when they had only made 31 runs (effectively seven down with one guy injured) and only the weaker batsmen (specialist bowlers) left to play as the strong batsmen bat first. With a lot of playing time left (more than a day), one side was going to win; either Yorkshire knocking over the three more Australian batsman, or Australia would scrape out the last 29 runs.  YellowMonkey  ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! '') 00:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Suggest linking "duck" at the first occurance, not where it currently is .. in the sixth paragraph of background.
 * Seventh paragraph of background. Should it be "...as Australia scored 400 in another drawn match."? I'm not sure about cricket terminology or I'd have fixed it myself.
 * Suggest changing "First Test" to "Test matches" as the section covers all the tests.
 * A number of short one and two sentence paragraphs that might be combined. They give the prose a choppy feel.
 * Is Gentlemen of England (Later matches section) a club? (I asked this before, I think... so many cricket articles... )
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done the other ones  YellowMonkey  ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! '') 00:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)