Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry Lee (cricketer)/archive1

Harry Lee (cricketer)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because having got the article promoted to good status, I am looking for comments and thoughts on how to improve the article to featured standard.


 * Good article review
 * MilHist A-class review

Thanks,  Harrias  talk 17:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I have not found time to give a full review of the article. I have carried out a few minor copyedits in the lead and "Early life" sections, and have identified a few concerns:-
 * Early career
 * "Lee joined the MCC bowling staff in 1913..." You need to clarify that this did not affect his eligibility to play for Middlesex
 * It does seem extraordinary that he was given his county cap in 1913 after so few appearances and hardly any performances of note; I wonder what the story was, here. I'm also a bit confused by the fact that, in 1914, his first-class appearances "almost doubled". As you say he made 3 appearances in 1913, "almost doubled" presumably means five, but the last paragraph of the section indicates many more appearances than that in 1914.
 * First World War
 * It is not clear to me why, in an article on a professional cricketer, so much detail is given of his very brief (15 months) military career (or why this short span requires its own infobox). Lee's military service was honourable but in no way different from that of millions who served in the First World War, and does not really warrant more than a single short paragraph, I would have thought. Indeed, the whole connection with the MilHist project looks somewhat misplaced to me.

There is also the issue discussed on my talkpage, where I indicated that at least one of the county histories ought to be consulted. All in all, the article looks fairly well written, but I would advise another copyedit before taking it further. For example, phrasing such as "The Indian team did not have Test status, which was not attained until 1932" could definitely be improved.

My time is limited, but if I am able to revisit I will do so. Brianboulton (talk) 12:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)