Talk:Percy Fender/GA1

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

Reviewer: Secret (talk · contribs) 05:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Note I'll be reviewing this article, along with four others within the next day or two. Thanks Secret account 05:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok reviewing the article, you might want a second review from a cricket editor as well, as most of what I know about cricket is reading your articles :). Long article so it's going to take a bit.

Lead...


 * "But although a valuable player, he made a greater impact as a captain of Surrey County Cricket Club". Was he the only captain while playing, if he was it should be explained?
 * Rephrased to "the captain", my mistake. Hopefully this clears it up. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * After his war service in the Royal Flying Corps was cut short by illness, and "his cricket halted by injury", He played cricket after, the sentence sounds like he career was cut short by an injury, so it needs to be better clarified.
 * Took some of this out as it is not needed in the lead. Hopefully this is better. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "unavailability of other amateurs." Was that because of World War I?
 * Sort of. A bit too big of a topic to include here, and there is no specific reason associated with Surrey in 1920 that could be included here. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "He was so successful that he was appointed permanently the following year." Sounds like a word is missing.
 * Added "in the role". Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he also contributed with attacking batting and varied, imaginative bowling." I'm lost in the meaning here, not really knowledgeable in cricket.
 * Tried to make it less flowery. Varied bowling means that he used lots of different kinds of delivery, but there's no real way to make it less cricket-speak!
 * "From 1921, his form meant..." His form? Again lost in the meaning.
 * Shorthand for "how well he was playing". Quite common in BritEng sport. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Early life...

I'll finish the review first thing tomorrow, as I need to go to bed early. Thanks Secret account 03:49, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Any reason why his uncles convinced him to become a right handed batter. It seems like a important career decision so a explanation would be nice.
 * Not known; it was a throw-away anecdote from Fender. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he reached the school first team in 1908". Shouldn't reached be reworded to made or joined, reached sounds awkward here.
 * This is the BritEng equivalent of "made the team", and suggests that he moved up from the second team. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "in the side for three years". Again I'm reading this from someone who doesn't know much about cricket, wikilink or better wording for "in the side" would be nice.
 * Reworded to "in the team"; I could go further to "kept his place in the team", but this sounds quite clunky and I'd prefer it like this if possible. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "although he had been selected, as he was no long considered to be a schoolboy" as is redundant, long = longer.
 * Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Continuing... sorry for the delay, got extremely busy, and its a very long article and I want to give as detailed of a review as possible. Secret account 04:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * "he still came top of the batting averages" does it mean he still led the team? seems like some word is missing
 * This is the cricket/BrEng equivalent of "led the team in..." It means that he had the highest batting average in the team. The phrasing is correct. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "too many risks when batting" what risks?
 * Hmm. Not sure here of the best way forward. This is a little cricket-speaky, meaning he played too many risky shots which might have caused him to be out. But I'm struggling to find an elegant way to put that in plainer English. I think it would be better understood, even by non-cricketers, over here, but I'm not sure the defensive mindset which could lead to such a comment by coached is really present in, for example, baseball. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he attracted the interest of the county and..." The county team? Or the actual county representing the team? Confused
 * I've reworded this slightly. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Following the 1910 cricket season, Fender worked in a paper mill in Horwich, Lancashire, to experience paper manufacturing at first hand." Why paper manufacturing? Was his family involved in the business? Unclear
 * Oops, I think this got lost somewhere. Yes, his father's business, clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "performed the same roles as other workers" as other workers < as the other workers
 * Actually, I don't think this is necessary or an improvement. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Did the injury impact his playing career?
 * Very slightly; there is one actual instance mentioned later in the article, but otherwise, more of a general ache that does not particularly merit a mention here. The only other way it impacted was in the stance he took when fielding in the slips, but my personal view is that it is too obscure for this article. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he was frequently dismissed cheaply" Confused. Also it doesn't seem his season was much of a failure if he scored 1,000 runs for the first time? I don't know cricket so I don't know if 1,000 runs is good or just average.
 * Added link for dismissed (it means he was out without scoring too many runs). The 1,000 runs thing is a bit funny. He was really good in the early season, but pretty crap in the second half. SO he got to 1,000 mainly through his early season efforts. And in those days, you could get to 1,000 with a very low batting average of around 23-25 (probably equivalent to a rough baseball average of .200-.250 at a rough guess). So while it was a mark of respectability, it was not actually that great an achievement. But to do it while also taking 100 wickets was pretty impressive actually. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "By 1914, Fender was working for a firm of paper manufacturers and stationers, of which his father was managing director." So there is a family connection, it should be mentioned earlier, probably in early life the information about his father occupation.
 * Agree, and added. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "...provided funds and lyrics for some musical shows." Were any of his shows successful?
 * Good question. Unfortunately the source does not specify any shows, and speaks in general terms. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Army doctors were unsure what exactly was wrong with Fender and he remained in their care until 1918." Does that mean he was hospitalized the entire time. The next sentence said he played some cricket in 1917 which is confusing if he was really sick. Unclear here the meaning.
 * I'm afraid the source does not make it much clearer than this. I assume that he was regularly seeing them but was not actually hospitalised. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Fender attempted to gain a place at Caius College, Cambridge...." So a college turned him down because Fender was a injured cricket player who wanted to focus on academics, or was it that he attempted to join their squad if they had one? That's sounds just strange.
 * I've added a little clarification; strange as it sounds, they only wanted him to play cricket and did not want him to concentrate on studies. Very different times! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I presume Wilkinson was unavailable because he was participating in the Olympics.
 * I think that is a fair assumption, but the sources do not make this link. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "and after a brief run under Wilkinson's captaincy, the side continued to perform well." It sounds like the team did well under Wilkinson when he came back here, yet the next few sentences mentions his captaincy was a disaster, reword or remove that sentence.
 * Tried to clear this up. Fender led at first, Wilkinson took over for a few games (without any problems) then disappeared again and Fender took charge. It was only when Wilkinson later returned again that results collapsed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "tried to involve the whole team." In what?
 * Added "decision making". Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "In one match, he declared when his team were still trailing the opposing team, an unusual strategy at the time." Lost in the meaning.
 * Reworded. Hopefully clearer to non-cricketers. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Finishing the review.


 * "During the MCC tour of Australia, England lost the Test series 5–0, losing every match." The last part "Losing every match" seems redundant here as it states they lost 5-0, which i presume its the 5 matches, unless there's cricket terminology that I'm confused here.
 * I think we need to specify both, as Test series can (rarely) be more than 5 games, and the possibility of a draw means that it is not always possible to rely on the series result. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "However, Wilfred Rhodes was not as sure,[55] and may not have been consulted at all." Confused here, if he wasn't so sure about it, it seems like he was consulted.
 * There is a (frankly, convoluted!) explanation, but it's not directly relevant, so I've cut this. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "However, tours at the time often left many amateurs out of pocket." I presume its the British way of stating they were short of money.
 * Yes, I can change if necessary, but I think it's a great little expression! And it suggests that they made a loss on the tour: they were given expenses but these did not really cover the required lifestyle. But I've no sympathy as many "amateurs" received more "expenses" than the professionals received in wages. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "The game was drawn, affected by rain and overshadowed by controversial incidents" What controversial incidents? Also why did Douglas got replaced so sudden.
 * I think this ventures outside the scope of this article. The controversial incidents were quite involved, and concern some possibly sharp practice and some intricacies of cricket laws. Douglas was dropped after losing the first three games, and for having lost eight in a row (!), but I'm not sure we need too much about this here. I suspect all this may disappear when/if I aim for FA. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he was late for the start of play, having been not out overnight" How can someone be not out overnight, or that's a cricket slang, confused.
 * Erm... No easy way to explain this. I've added a link to not out, although it was linked earlier, which may help. At the end of a day's play, there are usually two not out batsmen (although sometimes one, and sometimes none as the innings has concluded at the end of the day!); the two men who are batting at the time that play stops for the day. They resume their innings the next day, but are described as being "not out overnight". Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Why Fender picked a lob bowler on his team, that sounds like an interesting decision considering Trevor Molony was the last pure lob bowler to play cricket.
 * The source is vague, and remarks that there was a family connection with lobs (some of his uncles were lob bowlers when it was a little more common), but nothing else specifically about Molony. Best guess is that he liked to do slightly off-the-wall things, and this was no different. In the end, his wicket-keeper persuaded him that he should drop Molony, as he was concerned for his own safety as the batsmen wildly tried to hit what they saw as very easy deliveries. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Back to "In his personal life, Fender became a familiar figure in clubs and the theatre. He became friends with Jack Hulbert, and provided funds and lyrics for some musical shows" Should it be better for that information to be moved to "personal life", seems misplaced as that section, as well as most of the following section talks about his cricket career.
 * I think in this case, it is better out of position. It directly relates to his early years in cricket, and connects to his attempts to persuade his father that business and sport could mix: he was having a lot of fun mixing the two. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Not everyone in the MCC team got on well, but the team won the Test series 2–1." Doesn't go to further detail, did they not get along with Fender or Mann, as that sentence is a bit abrupt.
 * Doesn't actually concern Fender, so cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "he later described it as one of his best bowling spells." In the series or in his career?
 * Career. Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Lord Harris was furious and summoned Fender to admonish him when he next played at Lord's." So Harris summoned Fender for him to admonish Harris? Reword
 * Reworded. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "engagement was leaked by the press during the second Test." Why might that "soured his relationship with Lord's", I presume its some kind of moral standards.
 * A bit too tricky to explain fully, but it was not "done" in the Establishment to allow the press to report such things. This is as far as the source allows. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Any reason why Gibson suggested why Fender and Carr was the "only two realistic candidates by that time", especially that he was writing about the controversy many decades later.
 * Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Fender was statistically less effective for most of his remaining career." And then it goes on with his average of 31.96 being the best in five years, holding some kind of wicket record, and he had his two best batting seasons, which doesn't sound like "statistically less effective". Can you clarify further as I'm lost here.
 * I think I was being a bit harsh, so I removed this comment. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Bradman, particularly determined to succeed against Fender following his criticism, scored 252 against Surrey, including Fender" I presume it was an exhibition game.
 * No, the touring international teams played most of the counties in first-class matches during their tours. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "moving across the front of their stumps while batting," confused
 * I'm not quite sure I can simplify this. Some batsmen, when batting, stepped across their stumps to allow them to play the ball on the leg side; in other words, moved across their stumps. This made it harder for the bowler to get them out, as they blocked their stumps and could not be bowled. This was very controversial, and England bowlers effectively began bowling at the batsman instead of the stumps. This was called Bodyline, but this is all tied up in some very obscure history involving lbw, off theory, leg theory and Bodyline. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Consequently, was sacked in January 1932 and replaced with Jardine" Consequently, Fender was sacked or he was sacked,
 * Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "He also recorded several prodigious hits, including one which sent the ball 132 yards out of the Oval." Prodigious hits? Confused
 * Clarified. This just means a big shot. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Australian critics did not think he spun the ball enough to be a success in Australia" Well enough? Or just didn't spun it enough times
 * Cricket speak, and not really easily translatable. In effect, he did not make the ball rotate fast enough when he released it; the pitches in Australia were hard and the ball rarely turned after it was delivered; it just carried on in a straight line, making it easy to play. Only bowlers who really spun the ball hard could make it deviate from the straight. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Originally a fast-medium bowler, Fender later reverted to this style when Surrey were short of bowlers during his captaincy." Which style, if it's full toss or long hop, "occasionally" in the previous sentence becomes redundant as he started using them more often. Confused.
 * Bad phrasing; reworded now and hopefully better. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "his bowling was expensive at times." Costly to the team?
 * Yes, sort of. It means he conceded a lot of runs; I've clarified this hopefully. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * My schedule has unexpectedly got busier lately, I'm going to try to finish this review in the morning, I haven't forgotten sorry about that. I did a quick glance and I'm wondering if Fender made noteworthy achievements as a county council member for London, his political career is only two sentences, and wasn't like he represented a very small area. Secret account 06:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing mentioned in the sources. To be honest, county councillor was not (and is not) really a big deal. He was not a notable politician. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for the lengthiness of the review, I all of a sudden went from unemployed to working two jobs, day and night plus school and my health issues, leaving me little time for anything else. I'll pass the review now as it was nearly complete, and hopefully I'll find the time to comment later in a FAC. Secret account 04:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)