Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harry Trott


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:07, 25 June 2008.

Harry Trott
Self-nomination I'm nominating this article for featured article because I feel it meets the Featured article criteria. The article is comprehensive and fully referenced and has been peer reviewed and copy-edited. Mattinbgn\talk 09:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Very good work, as always. Support. A few musings:
 * Lead
 * "indiscipline" - I don't think I've often heard this word, relative to the use of illdiscipline. Would the latter be preferable?
 * I think the words have a subtle difference. Illdiscipline to me seems to refer to specific instances of poor discipline, while indiscipline refers to a state of having no discipline, if that makes sense. Let me reflect on this one and find some good dictionary definitions -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The best definition I could find was "lack of discipline" Now changed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "first of a line of" - Is that intended to be "in a line"?
 * ''reworded, more precise and (i hope) more elegant now. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "quick to pick up a weakness in an opponent" - "in opponents"?
 * changed -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "After he was discharged, he eventually returned to cricket, eventually playing" - possibly try to avoid using eventually twice in quick succession like that.
 * reworded -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Early life and career
 * "Born in Collingwood, an inner suburb of Melbourne, Trott was the third of eight children born to" - is the double use of "born" avoidable?
 * A very minor reword has removed the second use of the word, while retaining the meaning. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "junior cricket with the local Capulet club" - is there a link for Capulet club? I must confess, I don't know what it means :|
 * It is just the name of his junior cricket club without any further significance as far as I can tell. (Their big rivals were of course the Montagues :-)) I was trying to avoid using the word "cricket" too often. I can make this clearer if you think it will assist. Given that it has left you confused  about my meaning it may be worth doing. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Some more on the Capulets from a horribly formatted article here "In 1884 Northcote Star was vying for a first sporting trophy for Darebin in the final of the Armfield Brothers Cup. The match was against a Collingwood based club ‘Capulet’ and in a sign of the times took a month of Saturdays and two venues to complete due to poor weather. Despite a spirited bowling effort in Capulet’s second innings, Northcote Star narrowly lost the match and would wait until 1890 for its first trophy" -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:48, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "His chances for inclusion in the Australian squad for the forthcoming tour of England were enhanced when a number of leading players made themselves unavailable" - were they connected, or for various illness/injury/commitements etc.?
 * "innings.[11]At" - needs a space.
 * ''Fixed, thanks. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "a change to the leg before wicket (LBW) law that would aid bowlers of Trott's style seemed imminent" - this begs for a half-sentence explanation of what it was :)
 * Will take a look at this one to see what I can do -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Test cricket
 * You never actually state that he was selected - it skips from his chances to the first day at Lord's. Maybe worth clarifying to avoid ambiguity.
 * given a minor reword, could possibly do with some more however. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Was being a complete and utter failure "inauspicious", or would it better described as "uninfluential" or similar? Maybe the media didn't get all stabbety-stab with people who scored <5runs and did nothing else back then :)
 * ''I like "inauspicious"; "uninfluential" seems a little bland. I don't think as much was expected of debutants then. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Link Cambridge University?
 * I tossed and turned over linking Cambridge University Cricket Club and decided not to as it was the "Past and Present" team rather than the university that Trott played. I didn't think about linking the university itself. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe add a comma after Past and Present for sentence flow (or non-flow).
 * added, thanks -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I just noticed, inconsistent capitalisation of "The Ashes" (ie. "t" or "T") exists between the lead and this section. There's actually inconsistency within this section itself :|
 * Seeking guidance from WP:CRIC on the correct form. I should have picked up the inconsistency, however -- Mattinbgn\talk 04:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Consensus seems to be The Ashes, now all consistent. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "England's score reached 60 when their first two batsmen were dismissed" - would "before" be clearer than "when"?
 * Agreed and changed -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "England, regardless, still won the match by an innings" - worth including "and X runs"?
 * added -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Might be worth linking "run out".
 * linked -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "from [England]"[47]" - full stop missing.
 * added -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "and the former captain" - implies there's only one former captain, maybe worth considering removing the "the".
 * removed -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

That's up to the "Captain of Australia" section done. Will try to do the rest tomorrow or Thursday. Daniel (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ''Thanks for the comments to date. There are still a few I am working on and will respond to later. -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments Overall very nicely written. I will defer to editors that understand cricket to ensure that the cricket terminology, etc., is proper.

This article is close. Most of what I found are nitpicks. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the review. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:16, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You're certainly welcome. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Disambiguate Charles Turner and Seizure. Gary King ( talk ) 15:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Both now disambiguated. Thanks. -- Mattinbgn\talk 21:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes http://www.cricketarchive.com/index.html a reliable source?
 * CricketArchive is a site dedicated to cricket statistics and records. One of its general editors is Philip Bailey who has been described as taking "this abtruse branch of science to levels that in other fields win Nobel Prizes" (Wisden 2004, p.9)  by Matthew Engel, the editor of Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. For the purposes that it is used for here&mdash;scorecards and averages&mdash;it is as reliable as any other published source on the topic. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Likewise http://www.brightoncemetery.com/HistoricInterments/150Names/trottg.htm?
 * ''Um, not much really. This is an unofficial site and probably does not meet WP:RS. I will need to reconsider its use. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have asked for advice on the source at Reliable sources/Noticeboard. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * On reflection, the cemetery site used the Australian Dictionary of Biography as the source for its claims. As a result it is possible to use the ADB article to support the same facts, and this is what I have done. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Otherwise sources look good. Links all checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments - Another strong cricket article. What else is new? Here are my nit-picks.
 * Spelling in second paragraph: "two Test".
 * Fixed, thanks. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comma after Victoria?
 * agreed and added. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Early life and career: In New Year's day 1886, is day usually capitalized in British English? It usually is in American English.
 * Now capitalised :-) -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a link for century in the next section. I'd move it here, since I got lost with double century and half-century.
 * now moved. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Current reference 6 is not after punctuation. Since a comma isn't needed, move it to the end of its sentence.
 * moved -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Test cricket, First tours of England: Unneeded George Giffen link here. There is already one in the previous section.
 * There was about four instances linked! Now removed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Australian revival and Wisden cricketer of the year: Unneeded The Ashes link.
 * Removed -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "He scored 63 and 70 not out in a winning team." I don't understand team in this context and think "winning effort" would be better.
 * I agree, now changed -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The Trott brothers: Two run out links in section. Someone asked about this earlier; maybe they missed an existing link.
 * No I think I added the link to the earlier use but didn't remember to remove the link from the later use. Now fixed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd review more, but Sir Donald is calling from wherever he is for a look. There seem to be some duplicate links later in the article, so watch out for those. Giants2008 (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, it has certainly improved the article. -- Mattinbgn\talk 10:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - Apparently everyone else is at Donald Bradman too. With that in mind, I'm back after some quick cleaning of the article yesterday. These are the rest of my comments.
 * In Captain of Australia and "A national institution", I see two instances of "9 wickets". The cutoff for written numbers is typically 10, although editors have differing opinions on this.
 * agreed and done -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Last paragraph of "A national institution": "twelve test players". Number issue again.
 * I would like to keep this as it is. The full phrase is "one of twelve Test players"  and I think it is better to remain consistent inside the phrase and "one of 12 Test players" does not scan well to me. From MOSNUM: "Within a context or a list, style should be consistent (either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs)" -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Legacy sub-section is quite stubby. Can this be expanded or moved?
 * It is an awkward section to fit anywhere, but I have moved it to the "Personal Life" section, although it could probably fit just as well under the "personality" heading. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good otherwise. Giants2008 (talk) 22:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for the review and your support. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * "Although Trott was a versatile batsman, spin bowler and outstanding fielder, "... it is as a captain that he is best remembered, an understanding judge of human nature"" - I'm not the biggest fan of quoting stuff like that (in the lead, at least)... surely you can discuss how he was best as a captain in your own words.
 * I could, I guess I was trying to avoid demonstrating POV. Plus, I really love the wording of that quote; especially right up front.  Let me ponder on this one -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "His slow leg spin bowling was often able to deceive batsmen through subtle variations of pace and flight, but allowed opposition batsmen to score quickly." - a bit confusing... first part says it was great, second part implies (at least to the uninitiated) that he sucked...
 * That is almost exactly what it means. He was good at taking wickets but he was also easy to score runs from. Not so much inconsistent as willing to allow batsman an opportunity to try and score from him in the hope of making a mistake. Think of it as like a football player with lots of attacking skills but poor defence.  Trott was not a champion cricketer by any means, he was a good one but not one of the greats.  His leadership was the most remarkable thing about him. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "and in total he toured England four times;" - I think you can remove the "in total he"
 * ''yep, good pick up. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "praised as a "national institution" and his team as having "done more for the federation of Australian hearts than all the big delegates put together"" - says who? (That's partly why I dislike quoting in the lead... saying who you quote makes it take up too much space...)
 * The quote is attributed in the "A national institution" section (to a newspaper editor). Let me think if I can include the concept in the lead without the quote and without clumsy attribution. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "After he was discharged, eventually he returned to cricket" - redundancies (after/eventually)
 * Not really. He did not immediately return to cricket but waited until he had been sent to Bendigo and had been there for some time. Perhaps, "After he was discharged, in time he returned to cricket" Your thoughts?'' -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

That's the lead done... some general comments;
 * "Trott was an outstanding fielder, usually at point" (image caption) - kinda POV... the image doesn't really show "outstanding" fielding...
 * No, it shows a fat man trying to catch a ball, but I can't write that :-) It is a photo of Trott fielding and he was a excellent fielder at point, at least in his younger years. What I have picked up is that the fielding claim, mentioned in the lead as well, is not included in the "Playing Style" section and is therefore not cited. Will fix. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Image caption in "A national institution" section could do with more...
 * I hate writing captions, especially writing one for a bloke just standing there! Had a go, let me know what you think. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

All sources seem OK. I'll try to get to the rest of the prose some time soon - ping me if I try and weasel out of it! ;-) giggy (O) 11:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your comments. Thanks for taking the time to review. look forward to the remainder. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 12:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.