Talk:Jasprit Bumrah/GA1

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

Nominator: 06:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Richard Nevell (talk · contribs) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article over the next few days. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking on the review. VK   wiki100  02:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The prose is mostly fine, but there are some uses of jargon. For example ‘death bowling’ should be linked at the very least and perhaps include an explanatory note in brackets for readers who aren’t familiar with the term. For the average cricket article the audience would be primarily cricket fans but Bumrah has the kind of profile where people who are less familiar with the sport may be reading, making it more important to try to explain the more niche terms. On the manual of style, MOS:CONTRACTIONS encourages us not to use contractions, ‘did not’ instead of ‘didn’t’. That is the only one I have spotted in the article. The specific cricket style advice (which is an essay rather than a guideline) suggests the One Day International should be unhyphenated; it is currently hyphenated in the lead. Otherwise there are no issues with MOS.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * ESPNcricinfo is one of the major sources for the article, which is reasonable since they are one of the leading news venues for cricket.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * (a) In terms of broad coverage, the article does have some significant gaps. With a sports biography it is easy to overload the page with information because of how much coverage there is on a match-by-match basis. That isn’t the case here, but there are some key omissions. I have listed some below this template. Also, it is worth noting the results of series, for example with the 2016 T20 World Cup; if this gets too detailed, prioritise the major ones. (b) In terms of focus, the level of detail fluctuates. More often than not, the article sticks to summary style, but sometimes there is more detail than needed. For example, in the description of the 2023 World Cup it seems that most matches that Bumrah played in are mentioned. As an alternative, a summary of his overall performance (joint fourth-highest wicket-taker in the tournament) and the team's performance (runner-up) would be enough. For a player who only featured in one World Cup, or a small number of international matches, more information would be fine, but a lot has happened in Bumrah's career already and there is going to be more to cover. To fit it in without the page becoming too long, the article needs to stick to a summary style.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * The article is stable. Over the long term, the article should change and become significantly different as Bumrah's career progresses. That isn't a barrier to becoming a Good Article, but does mean that in a few years the article may need to be revisited.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, this is a promising article and a lot of time and effort has clearly gone into it already. Thank you for the effort you've put into covering an important topic. At under 4,000 words I was encouraged that the article is a manageable size. It is very easy for sports articles to grow and grow! However, I think there are some important events that need to be included which currently aren’t. I have placed the article on hold in case the issues can be resolved in a reasonable time frame.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall, this is a promising article and a lot of time and effort has clearly gone into it already. Thank you for the effort you've put into covering an important topic. At under 4,000 words I was encouraged that the article is a manageable size. It is very easy for sports articles to grow and grow! However, I think there are some important events that need to be included which currently aren’t. I have placed the article on hold in case the issues can be resolved in a reasonable time frame.

Events to include

 * Where an injury has resulted in Bumrah missing a match or series, it should be mentioned. For example, Bumrah missed the South African cricket team in India in 2019–20 with a stress fracture of the lower back.
 * When mentioning the 2020 IPL, the article should explain that it was rearranged due to Covid.
 * The Indian cricket team in Australia in 2020–21 is only mentioned in terms of the 55* that Bumrah scored in a match against Australia A. The article misses out that Bumrah played in the first three Tests before missing the last one due to injury and was subjected to racist abuse by the crowd at Sydney.
 * Only the final match of the Indian cricket team in England in 2021 is mentioned in relation to Bumrah’s batting against Stuart Broad. Bumrah was player of the series. As the series began in 2021 and concluded a year later, it would be worth explaining that the final match was rearranged due to Covid.
 * The 2021 Test final should be mentioned.
 * Bumrah underwent back surgery in March 2023.
 * He captained India against Ireland in the 2023 T20I series on his injury comeback.
 * The bowling style section doesn’t mention Bumrah’s use of swing or reverse swing bowling. This 2021 analysis from Ben Jones of Cricviz notes that it is not Bumrah’s main attribute but gives some useful context. And this Cricviz piece from the year before mentions the seam movement that Bumrah can get.
 * Jarrod Kimber’s analysis of Bumrah might be worth using as a reference. It would be a little unconventional to use a YouTube video as a reference, but Kimber is an established cricket writer and analyst and his videos are well researched.
 * The same section mentions that Bumrah often bowls in death overs, but not that he often opens the bowling.

Could also mention

 * Bumrah bowled with Malinga at MI and the pair were effective together.
 * It’s possibly worth mentioning that Bumrah was included in Forbes’ India Celebrity Rich List in 2018.

Summary style issues

 * The International Cricket Council (ICC) named him as one of the five exciting talents making their Cricket World Cup debut: while this is correct, I think it's a level of detail that isn't needed.
 * Similarly to the above, you can probably cut the sentence about the opening match of the campaign being his 50th ODI. The fact that he was the second-fastest India player to 100 wickets gives the reader an orientation in the progression of time, especially if you add that it was in his 57th match.
 * On 6 July 2019, in the match against Sri Lanka, Bumrah took his 100th wicket in ODIs and became the second-fastest Indian to do so after his teammate, Mohammed Shami, who is currently the fastest Indian to 100 ODI wickets: the bit after the final comma can be trimmed.
 * Mentioning that Bumrah charges for brand endorsements is fine, but I’m not sure that we need to mention specific companies.

POV
Mostly a case of some light editing needed rather than anything egregious.
 * Bumrah grabbed instant limelight during his IPL debut
 * Legendary Australian fast bowler Dennis Lillee
 * Bumrah carved himself a reputation for possessing an uncanny ability to hit the block hole: Perhaps this could be modified so that there is a quote from someone saying how good Bumrah is at hitting the block hole.
 * There are a couple of uses of ‘just’ and ‘only’ which would be worth looking at. Eg: in Bumrah conceded just 14 runs, took two wickets ‘just’ suggests that this is a low figure but it depends on context - how many deliveries this was from and the match context - which would probably take up too many words to explain and take us away from a summary style.

Richard Nevell (talk) 17:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the thorough review. I will make edits wherever necessary, as suggested by you. VK   wiki100  09:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have made some changes as per your suggestions. You can check the article now and let me know if there's anything else I can do. VK   wiki100  07:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your work on this, Vkwiki100. I've checked the article again and in doing so have made some copy edits. They are mostly small, but I changed the details around the social media followers. The Instagram followers had been updated but not the overall number of followers. To balance that out I've used the old figure and noted in the text when that relates to.
 * The article now covers the major aspects of the topic and I am happy that this now passes GA. Congratulations, and best of luck keeping it up to date! Richard Nevell (talk) 20:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)