Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of South Africa Test cricketers who have taken five wickets on debut/archive1


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

The list was promoted by SchroCat 20:35, 1 March 2015.

List of South Africa Test cricketers who have taken five wickets on debut

 * Nominator(s): &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 07:05, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Lugnuts created the basic article. I expanded the lead and tidied the list up a bit. Look forward to your comments &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 07:05, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks Vensatry. Looks in great shape and as the same standard of the Pakistan article. I'll look for any obvious problems and fix them as needed.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * The lead states "The five-wicket hauls have come against six different opponents, more frequently against England: 14 times." That's unsourced and the Pakistan article lists the number of times against the other teams too.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Added a ref. Since the SAF list is more than double the size of Pakistan, we need not list the frequency against every single opponent. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 08:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment
 * , could you please tweak "with X (number) of them being". I find it so repetitive. Also, don't you think that the sixth line of the last para is long? I think it needs to be reworded into into separate shorter sentences. -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 13:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what's being repetitive here. Could you please be more specific? As for the second one, it's a parallel construction and I cannot think of an alternative at the moment. Thanks for the comments. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 18:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In the first paragraph, I can find three instances of it: "with 22 of them being South African players", "with fourteen of them coming against England", and "with six of them coming from the Newlands.." It's not a major concern, but it gets a little bit monotonous to read. I don't know if it can be reworded, but I feel it should be tweaked for a better prose. As far as the second one is concerned, I agree. -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 18:53, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, are you referring to the preposition? &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 19:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Umm, yep. -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 19:40, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay now? &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 08:03, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Perfect! Support — FrankBoy  (Buzz) 10:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Support. It looks great after the improvements suggested above, and it is well-referenced. --Carioca (talk) 21:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments
 * "the" is needed before "Top 100 Bowling performances of all time".
 * Note 1: First word of "First class cricket" shouldn't be capitalized. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:04, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Fixed both. Thanks for the comments. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 08:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Anything left? &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 17:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Just the one above that I've responded to, I think. Harrias talk 13:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support, looks good, thanks. Any chance you could take a look at Featured list candidates/List of tied Twenty20 Internationals/archive1? Harrias talk 16:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Support – with two minor comments: Otherwise nothing but praise for a fine piece of work.  Tim riley  talk    08:05, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "A five-wicket haul on debut is regarded as a notable achievement by critics" is theoretically ambiguous and could be made fireproof if reordered as "A five-wicket haul on debut is regarded by critics as a notable achievement."
 * Good catch! &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 16:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In the first para we have both "22" and "twenty-two" – either is fine, but we should be consistent.
 * Fixed. Thanks for the comments &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 16:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Support sorry, I forgot to come back and add this. Good work.  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * – SchroCat (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


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