Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry Trott/archive1

Harry Trott

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I plan to take this article to FAC in the not-too-distant future. Any advice on prose, referencing, MoS issues or any other matter would be welcome.

Thanks, Mattinbgn\talk 06:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments from
 * Current ref 11 is just a blad link right now, needs title, publisher and last access date at least.
 * Same for ref 38
 * Same for ref 42
 * Otherwise the sources look good. You said you wished to go to FA with this, and I've checked over the sources like I would have at FAC. I did not read the prose or do any checking of the prose. 22:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * All fixed. Thank you very much. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree with Ealdgyth's comments - I found the article to be quite well done and have some fairly picky sugestions (I am also no expert on cricket):
 * In Australia is "State" capitalized usually? eventually playing first-class cricket again for his State,
 * No it isn't, except in the formal "State of Victoria" - now fixed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * As noted, I do not know cricket - but this sentence seems odd to me (innings of 54 - 54 what?): His innings of 54 included a memorable hit over the leg side boundary from the bowling of leading Test all-rounder George Giffen, ...
 * Agreed, reworded for clarity. Please let me know if this is still confusing. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * missing words? 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.[10]
 * I must have been asleep - now added. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * seems like jargon (lbw)  change to the lbw law that would aid bowlers ... perhaps spell out lbw? See WP:JARGON
 * I agree, this is specific cricket jargon. While it was linked it should be spelled out on first use. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * one too many and? recording a duck in the first innings[,] and making three runs in the second, and he did not bowl.[13]
 * Good pickup, now removed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * extra period "29.20."? Trott scored 146 runs in the series at an average of 29.20. and in all first-class matches he scored 1269 runs.[31][32]
 * Very keen eyes! - additional full stop :-) now removed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * the tourists?? Playing for Victoria against the tourists, the Trott brothers claimed twelve wickets and ...
 * Cricket jargon for "Visiting cricket team, especially where the team is playing a series of matches away from home over a long(ish) period. Reworded for clarity.  Please let me know if it is still distracting. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * List so I think it should be a colon here (not a semicolon) The team included a number of first-time tourists; Clem Hill, Joe Darling,...
 * ''Colon added


 * Why the asterisk in  scoring 305 runs in the second innings, K. S. Ranjitsinhji making 154*.?
 * Seems way overlinked, for example K. S. Ranjitsinhji is linked twice in two paragraphs or Wisdens twice in one paragraph in "Style and personality" section. This would be a problem at FAC
 * FAC with cricket articles always seems to be a balance between linking jargon where appropriate and not overlinking. The two examples you have found are clear cut examples of overlinking and have been fixed; there are some other items that may be overlinked such as "run", "wicket", "average" etc. This is to save the reader from having to remember where the term was linked first should they wish to find out what the term means.  However, your point is noted and I will have another run through the article and see what links can be removed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Lead says he was in hospital "he was committed to a psychiatric hospital for over 400 days." but Illness and recovery section says "Trott was discharged after spending 400 days at Kew Asylum." Which is it?
 * Will need to consult my source. The 400 days seems a little exact though. -- Mattinbgn\talk


 * When did he start working for the Post Office? Perhaps add this so we know his employer earlier?
 * I will check my source, I would think at a guess it would have been as a boy of around 15. I think that the Post Office would have been his only employer.  He was a man of modest birth and education; that is part of the attraction of his story. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I doubt most Americans would know stone as a unit of weight - perhaps weighed 11 stone (70 kg / 154 lb)
 * While stone was linked, I agree it does not hurt to cater for the vast majority of first language English speakers :-) - now added. -- Mattinbgn\talk


 * Images are supposed to all be set to thumb width per WP:MOS, although wide images like team pictures can have their widths set.
 * ''I agree in principle, however the two images where I have set a size are very small. If no preference has been set (the case for most casual readers) the images are very difficult to make out.  Setting a fixed size for these two images is my compromise solution.  No doubt there will be more discussion at FAC (there was when Hugh Trumble was listed)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, all great stuff. Will start addressing these as soon as possible. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Addressed some, there are a few I need to return to my sources to address. Jargon-busting was exactly what I was looking for so thanks again.  Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 01:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * One more thought - as noted I am not a cricket person and despite the efforts of people I know who are to educate me, I still do not understand it very well. It seems one of the distinctive things about him is his bowling style - could a sentence or two be added early on to make that clearer? I am tempted to make a sticky wicket joke here, but will restrain myself. Too late! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)