Talk:Somerset County Cricket Club in 2009/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

At a glance, looks good. Will begin full review in next day or two. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Lead
 * "The 2009 season saw Somerset County Cricket Club competing in four domestic competitions..." "saw" not usually the best word. How about "In the 2009 season, Somerset County Cricket Club competed in four domestic competitions..." Plus, another "saw" in the next sentence.
 * Done.


 * "finished narrow runners-up": could we be more precise?
 * Done – changed to "finished runners-up by one point"


 * "prompting their elimination": causing, rather than prompting?
 * Done – changed to "resulting in their elimination"

Background
 * "with Jos Buttler, Adam Dibble, Chris Jones and James Burke signing contracts with the county" Noun + verbing (i.e. James Burke signing...) is higly frowned upon at FAC in terms of prose. Not too bothered for GA, but worth changing IMO.
 * Done.

County Championship
 * Maybe attribute quote on Trescothick to Foot in the text, not just ref. Same for the weakness in bowling.
 * Done.


 * Maybe "effective spin bowler" as "quality spin bowler" suggests POV.
 * Done.


 * Could you give a brief narrative on the season, such as you get in the County Championship review in Wisden, which talks about good starts tailing off or how the position in the table fluctuated. Would only need a sentence or two.
 * Similar on the form of players; who made a good start, who was consistent, etc. Maybe something on selection, such as X replaced Y if the player was significant? Again, only a word or two to flesh out the picture a bit. The other sections do this, and the Championship stands out as a bit sparser.
 * Any mileage in giving average runs per wicket home and away? Or a stat too far?
 * Would be difficult to reference that actual stat, short of simply reffing the span of pages in Wisden. But probably would be a bit far.  I'll have a gander and see how worthwhile it looks!

Friends Provident Trophy
 * A few quotes need attribution in the text.
 * Done.

Natwest Pro 40
 * Seems a bit strange starting with last match then talking about the first game! Any way around this without losing the dramatic side?
 * This has been commented on before. I agree, but personally I can't work out how to rewrite it without losing the point to a large extent.  You are more than welcome to have a crack at working something out.  I've just become blind to alternatives now: I've looked at it that much!

Twenty20 Cup
 * More quotes.
 * Done.

General
 * No other issues I can see, prose is very good and all refs are good. Links and dablinks fine, images good.

Happy to pass once these issues checked. Nice work, and the tables look great. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Have started to respond to comments, will continue over the next couple of days when I have some more time. In general, how would you say the article is in terms of progressing onto FA?  Harrias  talk  21:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the Championship section a fair bit, let me know what you think. Pretty sure I've resolved the remainder of your issues with the article, have another look over it and let me know how else I can improve it!  Harrias  talk  16:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All good now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 25 September 2010 (UTC)