Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hedley Verity/archive1


 * 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 Ian Rose 15:39, 26 April 2012.

Hedley Verity

 * Nominator(s): Sarastro1 (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it is as comprehensive as it can possibly be. Verity was an English cricketer between the wars who recorded some incredible achievements but still managed to be sniffed at by critics. However, later writing about him has become a little hagiographical. He was killed in the war in 1943 and so became one of cricket's tragedies. I have been picking away at this article for some time now; it is currently a GA and has received a peer review. All comments welcome. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Comment - looks promising, some quibbles to start off:
 * "slow left-arm" or "slow-left-arm"? The lead makes use of both.
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Never someone who spun the ball sharply, he achieved success through determination and accuracy." The two clauses here are too unrelated for my taste to be conjoined in one sentence like that. Also, "achieved success through determination and accuracy" seems a bit too laudatory...
 * Both done, I think. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Verity was born in Leeds and from an early age, wished to play cricket for Yorkshire." I'm not too familiar with British English style rules, but the overall sentence structure with the comma seems awkward to me.
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I made some tweaks but (for the same reason as above) am not sure if they were helpful -- feel free to revert.
 * All seems fine, thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's it for the lead, reads quite well  Auree   ★ ★  02:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Few more while I have time:
 * "where his batting became more productive than his bowling" the use of "productive" here sounds a bit off to my AmE ears... not sure how to fix it, though.
 * I think "effective" might be better, but I'm a little wary of overusing this word. I think productive works, more-or-less. --Sarastro1 (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "team-mates" is the hyphen here correct?
 * I think so. The Oxford English Dictionary hyphenates, but I think it is a matter of preference. --Sarastro1 (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "At this time, Verity decided to change his bowling style. Wilfred Rhodes, Yorkshire's main spinner since 1898, was considering retirement. While attending the Yorkshire nets, it was suggested to Verity by Rhodes and Hirst that he was more likely to achieve selection if he switched to spin bowling, as there was less competition for places among spinners." Can you fix this up a bit to improve the flow?
 * Had a go. Better? --Sarastro1 (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Very much so, thanks  Auree   ★ ★  00:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Made a few tweaks here and there.  Auree   ★ ★  23:22, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good, thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 00:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments – I've looked at everything before Second tour to Australia, and what I've seen looks good so far. I only have a few minor points to bring up; hopefully I can read the last half of the article over the weekend.
 * Not sure if "left out the English team" would have "of" in British English or not, but it's worth bringing up.
 * Yes, it was a typo. Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * World record: "and this remains, as of 2012, the best analysis recorded in first-class cricket." Is "analysis" really the best term for what is basically a statistic or figure? I rather like "figure" for this, personally.
 * Analysis is the correct terminology for bowling figures: i.e. he had a bowling analysis of 10 for 10. I've added a link. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Tour of India: Is it Sind or Sindh for the team name, or can it be both? This article and the article on the club differ.
 * I noticed this myself. However, the sources used say "Sind", so I have gone with that. I suspect there has been a change of spelling since Verity's day. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "referring to Verity. Verity...". Try not to have words repeat from one sentence to another like this. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:38, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Second tour of Australia: "Nevertheless, took 202 wickets at 15.67...". Something's missing after the comma. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 02:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support – I found this to be well-written and can't complain about a lack of comprehensiveness. The cricket bios have been among the best sports-related articles to come through FAC in the years I've been involved here, and this is another fine one. I think that all of the criteria are comfortably met. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 00:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support and comments. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Sources look okay, a few nitpicks:
 * Ref 12: title could be more consistent with that of the article
 * Not really; there is no need to specify that it comes from Wisden as the ref already gives that. Also, to leave it as "Hedley Verity" does risk confusion with the similarly named article which is his obituary. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking something like "Cricketer of the Year – 1932: Hedley Verity" or "Cricketer of the Year (1932): Hedley Verity", but it's more-so a personal preference and not too big of a deal.  Auree   ★ ★  22:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in whether locations are given for books or not
 * I assume you mean with Wisden? Done. Were there any others? --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * ESPNCricinfo: nitpicky, but I think it's stylised as "ESPNcricinfo"
 * You are correct! Well spotted, and fixed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 78, 115, 128, 160: author?
 * Ref 78, 128 and 160 done. Ref 115 had an author but 117 didn't. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't need designations such as Ltd., Inc., etc (ref 105 and bibliography)
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 107: missing info in title?
 * Not quite sure what you mean. If you mean Wisden, see above. If you mean "Second Cornhill Test", I would prefer to keep it consistent with the other Wisden titles for Test matches. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 120, 123, 133, 142: links take me nowhere, not even to subscription required page
 * All fixed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Watch out for doubled periods (ref 158 and henceforth)
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 180: "bowlers who dismissed Bradman" or "bowlers dismissed by Bradman"?
 * Correct as it is: who dismissed Bradman. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ref 189: check formatting.  Auree   ★ ★  18:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This ref (which I did not insert) seems to use a template with which I am unfamiliar; what is the specific problem? --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The template produces a formatting style that is inconsistent with the formatting used in the rest of the article. I'd suggest re-formatting it the way you did for other newspaper articles, using the cite news template.  Auree   ★ ★  22:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, done now. I had to make up a title of sorts, as there doesn't seem to be one that would be appropriate. Better? --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Images are unproblematic, captions are fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments : I agree with the above comment that cricketer biographies are among the better sport-related articles in Wikipedia. A slight concern is that these articles tend towards considerable length; 8500 words is about right for a world statesman but may be a bit much for a sportsman. I think the reason for this is that just about every detail of every cricketer's profesional life is recorded and is largely online, and the temptation is to use it all. However, even with that slight bleat I agree that this is well done and very readable. I have made several minor edits in my reading through, and have a few outstanding points:-
 * I think the "Professional cricketer" heading should be changed to "League professional". After all, he remained a professional cricketer for the rest of his career.
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd say a batting average of 5.25 would be considered rather worse than "poor" for any player, let alone a league professional! (Even Monty Panesar's career batting average is around 8.5)
 * Good point, removed the comment. (Although Chris Martin's is worse: around 3!) --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "...culminating in an unsuccessful trial at Warwickshire." A trial with what team and in what match?
 * Specified for the county, but it was not a trial match. He simply bowled in the nets, which was common practice for triallists at the time to weed out the lesser players. Ironic really. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Clumsy formation with the doubled "batting": "Verity's main contributions to the match came from his batting: batting defensively..."
 * Fixed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "In all first-class games in Australia, he took 44 wickets at 15.86..." If these figures include the Test he played in New Zealand, the wording needs to be changed.
 * No, it was just for Australia. Tried to clarify this. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Overlong sentence for splitting: "He was left out of the final game in favour of Charles Marriott, who took 11 wickets in his only Test,[7] but in other games against the tourists, Verity took 14 wickets in a match for Yorkshire, on a slow pitch probably prepared to negate the bowling of Learie Constantine,[8] and 10 wickets for H. D. G. Leveson-Gower's team at the Scarborough Festival."
 * Cut this back to fix. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "the manoeuvres to remove Jardine as captain": to what does this refer?
 * Not sure it is relevant, so removed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The Dunkirk evacuation anecdote seems out of place, and without wishing to be cynical, I have a few doubts...Personally, I would delete it.
 * Unfortunately, you are probably right! Removed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * It may be worth pointing out that the Test against countries other than Australia were generally 3-day affairs.
 * I wasn't too sure where to put it, so I added a note to the South Africa series result, as it was directly relevant here (although not to Verity). --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Gubby" is a nickname and shouldn't be used in formal prose without explanation. On first mention he should be called G.O. "Gubby" Allen, and thereafter just "Allen"
 * Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You should explain why "The final match of the series at The Oval was to be played to a finish, no matter how long it took." Australia had already retained the Ashes.
 * There was an obscure playing condition that if neither side had won the series by the final match, it would be a timeless Test. Found a ref for this and added it. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Another over-long sentence that needs to be split: "However, Charlie Barnett, who played in the series but disliked Hammond,[154] believed that Hammond's poor tactical use of Verity cost England potential victories in the second and fourth Tests,[155] and both he and Bill Bowes later contrasted Hammond's deployment of Verity at Headingley with the tactics successfully employed by Yorkshire." Brianboulton (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Cut this back. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and helpful comments. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine; I've upgraded to support. But isn't the lead image rather large for a headshot? Compare Bradman, Headly, Collingwood etc. Brianboulton (talk) 10:47, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and I've made the lead image smaller. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:36, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments: beginning a read through, I don't know a lot about Cricket so I can't comment much on that aspect, but it seems very well written.
 * I would have put a comma after "clubs" in this sentence:"His first season was not a success, but after moving clubs he began to make a name for himself." and after "and" and "training" here "Verity joined the Green Howards in 1939, and after training he was posted overseas to India", do you agree?
 * Hope you don't mind if I chime in here, Mark, but I also used to be dubious about this when I first started reviewing articles written in BrE. I think this is one of the more subtle stylistic differences between AmE and BrE, in that the former places a comma after a temporal clause while the latter doesn't. Cheers,  Auree   ★ ★  05:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * While a comma there would be justified, I think the preference in BrE is to omit it, and I personally think it is better without. However, my commas tend to be inconsistent, so please point out if I am not following my own rules! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note Hylian, this is real tricky--Sarastro, I don't mind going without, but I saw a few "temporal commas" earlier "In 1931, he was chosen to play for England" & "In 1921, Verity made his debut for Rawdon" so I thought you wanted them. But I have no objection either way. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I was afraid I might have changed my mind half-way through like that! So, on balance, I've put a comma here! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I think with comparable quantities like "seven times in his 10 seasons with the club" you aren't supposed to switch figures and words, or am I mistaken here? (WP:NUMERAL)
 * I think it is a moot point if the quantities of "championships" and "seasons" is comparable. But I have no real preference and have changed this one. Are there any others I missed? (I would prefer to leave examples such as bowling figures as they are: two (wickets) for 100 (runs). This is standard practice in cricket writing.) Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, if it's standard practice that's fine. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I added in some commas, feel free to revert if I added too many.
 * Looks fine; there are one or two I may have left out, but nothing that worries me! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Do we need the third comma here? "Between them, Verity and Bowes took 352 wickets in the season,[43] and Verity took 162 wickets at an average of 13.88,[30] to finish second in the national bowling averages."
 * No, gone now. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "The MCC was responsible for the administration of English cricket," Should this be "was" or "were" here?
 * Changed to "were". Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "England won the match, using Bodyline tactics" Should "Bodyline" be capitalized here?
 * The sources usually capitalise it. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Verity was hit in the chest and had to be left behind" Hit with a bullet, I presume?
 * I'm not actually sure!! All the sources I have simply say "hit in the chest". It could have been shrapnel, and I suspect no-one is really sure of the details. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, understandable. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "The last order he gave was "Keep going"." Should "Keep" be capitalized here? Mark Arsten (talk) 23:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Not too sure; I suspect either case could be argued, but you are probably right and I've used lower case. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the helpful comments are review so far. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * There are a few repeated wikilinks in the body, but that's understandable for such a long article.
 * They're probably deliberate. I hope. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Verity took eight wickets in the drawn game and scored 55 not out, his maiden Test fifty." & " he hit 10 fours and his second fifty runs came in just over an hour" Why do you spell out fifty here?
 * "Fifty" is cricket-speak for any score between 50 and 99; by using figures, there is a risk of confusing a score of 50-99 with an exact score of 50. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "an MCC team was selected to tour India and play Tests there" another "MCC was".
 * The MCC always confuses me like this. Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You have names of seasons written down a few, might want to be careful with that when switching hemispheres.
 * Bad habit. I've fixed most, and the ones I left (mainly for variety or want of a non-clumsy phrase) I clarified as "English winter". Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "In the first match, England scored 658 and according to Wisden, the new England captain Wally Hammond, decided to keep Verity in reserve in the expectation of making Australia follow-on" Do you need the third comma here?
 * No. Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "As Hutton's innings began to assume epic proportions, Verity stayed with Hutton throughout the intervals, helping him to maintain concentration." Maybe replace the second "Hutton" with "him"?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support I'm satisfied with the responses to my previous comments, and only have a couple more small things to note. I'm confident this is FA quality, the nominator has shown very impressive attention to detail on such a long article. It's a bit jarring to read so much about a sport that I understand so little of, but I'm assuming he's got the technical details about things like "not outs" and "follow ons" correct. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I always appreciate non-cricketers reading an article like this. Thanks for your careful reading, support and helpful comments. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Support I contributed at the peer review and see that the comments here have only served to improve the article further. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Delegate note -- Good support here, Sarastro -- while I skim through the article myself, can you just remind me when/where you last had a spotcheck of sources at FAC? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Last spotcheck here in September. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Tks, 'twill serve. Probably be due for another on your next nom -- have to keep everyone on their toes... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.