Wikipedia:Peer review/Jack Hobbs/archive1

Jack Hobbs
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I've been working at it for what seems like a very long time, and would like to take it to FAC. As usual, looking to see if there is anything prosey or jargony that needs sorting, and how accessible it is to non-cricketers. It's a bit of a monster in terms of length, but he was one of the major figures in cricket, and one of the most influential/revered ever. So I think the length is justified, but if there is any obvious padding, please let me know.

Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Comments from Crisco 1492
 * You've said that he retired from international cricket in 1930 three times in the lede.
 * The lead was a bit messy, so I've reworked it. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hobbs was born in Cambridge on 16 December 1882, the eldest of 12 children born to John Cooper Hobbs, a slater, and his wife Flora Matilda Berry. - Born-born
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * an apprentice gas fitter, - relation to cricket?
 * Not too sure of the point here; it was his first job and would have been his career but for cricket, so I think it is worth including. If you mean the dodgy "but" in the sentence, I've replaced it. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Asking as you noted that he mostly worked for the school's cricket team. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * assistant professional?
 * Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Tom Hayward - Link at first use outside the lede
 * Unless I'm going mad, the first instance is already linked. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * A lot of sentences starting "he" in #First-class cricketer
 * Not quite sure I'm seeing this. Could you be more specific? Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Batting order (cricket)#Opening batsmen - You've linked this several times in the body
 * I make it that I link twice, but think it is justified. One refers to an opening batsman, the other an opening partnership. Although both link to the same article, they are different ideas so I think a link is needed. (I also realised that there were a few other duplicate links. These are fixed apart from "cover" which again I think needs linking twice.) Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * the pair were dissimilar in style - How?
 * Hmmm. That would get quite technical, and is to do with footwork and approach. I feel it may bog down the section, and only make the point to show that Hobbs did not just copy Hayward blindly. I'd prefer to leave this, but will add something if you think it really needs it. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * A footnote, perhaps? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, tried that, although it's a little more technical than I would like. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * After his marriage - to whom?
 * Took this out of that section. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

That's it for today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments so far, and the prompt response! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * After England lost the game, he was chosen for the second Test; Jones missed the match. - He was chosen but didn't show?
 * Clumsy phrasing. He was injured, so reworded. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * and missed his wife, - If you've removed "after his marriage above" this is coming as a bit of a surprise
 * Aarrrgh, his damned wife again!!! Had a bit of a think and took it out; the same point is made in the personal life section, where it is a better fit rather than an afterthought. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * unsuccessful here means low scoring?
 * Yes, but I'd prefer not to explicitly say so if it can be avoided. I think it is fairly clear. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't see a link to Leveson-Gower (H. D. G. Leveson Gower, right?) anywhere in the text
 * My mistake, probably lost in a copy-edit. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * selected Wilfred Rhodes to open the batting with him. - I was reading this as "selected Wilfred Rhodes to open the batting with Leveson-Gower." for most of the paragraph; may need clarification
 * Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Years before the war - Years before the First World War?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * the MCC sent a strong team to South Africa. Against a South African team - repetition
 * Fixed; is it clear now that the opposition was South Africa? I prefer to check! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

(Style and technique)
 * it seemed that he could predict what the bowler would do. - according to?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * and 98 of his centuries and 26,411 of his runs (at an average of 58.62) in first-class cricket after reaching the age of 40. - Missing a verb
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * the all-time World XI - ????
 * Better now?
 * Yes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Legacy feels like a hagiography. Any serious criticism, at all?
 * To be honest, no! I've been as negative as I can. Literally no-one has a bad word to say, and McKinstry spends 400+pages trying to dig up scandal. Unsuccessfully. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The wife is back (permission to take his wife along) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I need to keep her here as it is specifically about this tour. I've named her as Ada; is this enough? I'd really like to keep her in the personal life section. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Images:
 * File:Hobbs batting in 1922.tiff - Fine
 * File:Hobbs in Australia 1928 Version 1.tiff
 * File:Hobbs signing autographs.tiff fine
 * File:StateLibQld 1 233104 Autographed photograph of the English batsmen, Jack Hobbs and Herbert Sutcliffe, 1928 Cropped.jpg - needs a US copyright tag
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * File:Jack Hobbs in 1906.tiff - Fine
 * File:Hobbs and Hayward.tiff - Fine
 * File:Parker's Piece, Cambridge - geograph.org.uk - 876342.jpg
 * File:Hobbs in Australia in 1928 Version 2.jpg - Fine
 * For consideration: Tiffs generally don't render very well on Wiki. Any chance of getting these as jpegs? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It mainly comes about from how I get the images. I'm not sure if there is much I can do, at least not easily. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think resaving in Photoshop or similar would work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll have a go before FAC. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * When you first start including wages and whatnot, would it be possible to give a rough modern-day value?
 * I'm not a huge fan of doing this, to be honest. But if others request it as well, I will add something. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * they practically became an "English institution". - Why "practically"?
 * My interpretation (meaning "almost", but I'm gathering it doesn't translate in that way in US Eng!) of a bit of hyperbole from McKinstry. But I just checked, and he doesn't qualify this description, so cut the word. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I got that, but it seems odd wording for an encyclopedia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The ill-will towards Hobbs as a professional seems to be coming out of nowhere for someone without a background in cricket and England's class system. Any chance of a footnote? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, added note. Does that cover it? Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That helps, yes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Link Kent
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Rest of England - Any links?
 * Not that would apply here. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * As everything depended on the final game - Is this game notable?
 * Yes; it was for many years one of the most famous ever played. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case a redlink would be appropriate (especially if you can dig up the sources!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * But Hobbs and Sutcliffe survived - sentence beginning with "but"
 * As I think I say below, I have no real problem with this, and I think it's perfectly acceptable. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Otherwise that looks to be it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the help! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll need several goes at this. First go: More anon. Tim riley (talk) 06:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comments from Tim riley
 * Lead
 * "Hobbs wished to pursue a career in cricket from an early age" – perhaps "Hobbs wished from an early age to pursue a career in cricket", which is not quite the same thing.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "Following the death of his father, he successfully applied to join Surrey" – this reads as though there is a connection between the two events
 * The connection exists, but is too convoluted for the lead, and so cut the start of the sentence. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "remains in 2012" – presumably still remains in 2013: might as well add the year on
 * Oops, missed that one. Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Childhood and early cricket
 * "in order to supplement" – just "to supplement"?
 * "Upon leaving school" – "On leaving school"?
 * Both done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hobbs later scored his maiden first-class century against them" – a pleasing revenge, but I question its relevance at this point in the narrative
 * I placed it there to avoid having to reiterate the point when he scored the hundred, when it would rather bog down the narrative. But I'm happy to move it if you think that would be better. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps leave it as is and see what people think at FAC? Tim riley (talk) 21:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Surrey cricketer
 * "but according to Hobbs' biographer" – perhaps "his biographer" would flow better
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * First-class cricketer
 * "over-awed by Hayward" – The OED does not admit the hyphen; only "overawed" is listed.
 * Stupid hyphens; never quite get the right! Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "After his marriage" – like Crisco, above, I wondered "to whom?" at this point.
 * Cut this now as it doesn't have much relevance. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * First appearances
 * First para – I think you need to make it clear for non-experts that it was the pre-test state matches he was not selected for.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Dominance in South Africa
 * "batted down the batting order but steadily improved his batting until he became an opening batsman" – a lot of batting in this sentence. Perhaps "batted down the order but steadily improved, becoming an opening batsman".
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Much obliged so far, thanks. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * A great pleasure; I'm particularly enjoying the article. I shall be busy most of tomorrow, and will look forward to resuming my innings on Thursday. Meanwhile, may I suggest that you go through the article and replace "Hobbs" with "he", "him" or "his" wherever you think the sense of the prose is not compromised by replacing the name with a pronoun? Having too many recurrent mentions of a subject's name breaks the flow of the prose; we are all prone to it, but it's harder to spot it in one's own prose than in others'. Tim riley (talk) 21:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

End of part two. More to come. I'm enjoying this. Tim riley (talk) 22:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Resuming:
 * Success against Australia
 * "the unsuccessful "Triangular Tournament" – I think you should either explain why "unsuccessful" or remove the word. (Probably the latter, I feel – brevity and all that – but you must be the judge, natch.)
 * Cut it. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Years before the war
 * "placing him second in the national averages" – do we need to know who was first?
 * The only problem: would we then have to say who was ahead of him on other occasions? I'm inclined to leave it out. (For the record, it was Phil Mead, one of the more boring, uninspiring and slightly unlikable professional superstars from this period.) Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "were declared County Champions" – sounds as though this was a decision of a panel of judges rather than a statistical fact
 * Funnily enough, it was a panel decision. I've added something to clarify. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * First World War
 * Touch of tabloid phrasing with "between Yorkshire president Lord Hawke, who": perhaps "between the Yorkshire president, Lord Hawke, who"
 * Agreed, done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Resumption of cricket
 * "Hobbs was awarded a five-year contract" – by Surrey? Worth specifying, I think.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * A small matter, but I think the old adage "prefer good English to bad Latin" applies to "£400 per year", when "£400 a year" would do the job. There's another one later, too.
 * A couple of earlier ones too, fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "However, Sandham" – does the "however" add anything here?
 * Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Second para is an example of the excessive number of mentions of Hobbs's name I mentioned above: I think it would flow much more smoothly with a few pronouns instead of his name.
 * Better? Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "reach the landmark after Grace and Hayward" – I think this is the first mention of Grace, in which case a "W G" and a blue link would be in order.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Partnership with Sutcliffe
 * "with Yorkshire's Herbert Sutcliffe" – you have blue linked Yorkshire here, but I'd move the link to the first mention of the club, next to Lord Hawke. (Actually, as a Lancastrian, I wouldn't link to Yorkshire at all, but I digress.)
 * Oh dear, and I had such respect for you until you said that. Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "the highest for any pair of opening batsmen" – is this the highest average for English openers or for those of all Test sides?
 * All teams. Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Following their success in the trial match, the selectors named Hobbs and Sutcliffe in" – to avoid ambiguity I think I'd redraw this as "Following their success in the trial match, Hobbs and Sutcliffe were selected for"
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "they may have won the series" – they "might" or "could" have won the series?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "he finished second in the batting averages … Critics believed he remained the best batsman in England" – you will have gathered that I am no expert on cricket (though keen on it) so you'll excuse what I fear is almost certainly a stupid question, viz, if he was the the best batsman in England why did he repeatedly come second in the batting averages?
 * Vagaries of cricket at the time. With a good run of scores and a few not outs, anyone could come top (then or now), but more so as someone who had only played a handful of matches was more likely to have a higher average than a batsman like Hobbs who had played up to 40 games. Some very odd people came top of the batting averages. For this reason amongst others, critics were less bothered by averages in Hobbs' day, and judged on the number of runs, the quality of their scoring, and who they came against. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * End of career
 * "the matches were, or should have had, first-class status" – perhaps "the matches had, or should have had, first-class status" or "the matches were, or should have been, of first-class status"
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "to pass the record total of Grace" – perhaps worth making it clear that Grace scored his total for the Gentlemen?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

That's all from me. The article is long, but I honestly didn't notice its length while I was reading it. I think loud and sustained applause is called for. – Tim riley (talk) 11:23, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Last lot from Tim
 * Style and technique
 * "critics judged him to be the best batsman in the world" – this is the seventh incidence of the phrase "best batsman" and it begins to outwear its welcome. Having said that, I can't think of any better phrase. I mention the point and leave it for your consideration.
 * Tried some more variety. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "E. W. Swanton described him" – I think a date here would add weight.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Neville Cardus suggested that Hobbs was the first batsman to adopt a technique to consistently succeed against googly bowlers..." – Three points here: first, I'm not sure about "suggested"; such a tentative action doesn't sound like Cardus; secondly, "adopt" seems not quite right, and I wonder if "develop" would be more accurate; thirdly, though the superstition about splitting an infinitive is silly, many otherwise sensible people still hold it, and I find it best to avoid splitting if it is possible to do so without twisting the prose into knots.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hobbs moved the focus of batting from aesthetic off side shots to leg side play more suited to swing and googly bowling" – the equivalent sentence in a music article might read, "A theme can be expressed on the simple tetrachord of Mercury or on the more elaborate disdiapason, with the familiar four tetrachords and the redundant note." That is to say, only an expert could make head or tail of it. But there are times when one has to be brutal and decide that only the technical expression will suffice, and the layman must cope, and if this is one such, then so be it. You may like to ponder.
 * Hmm. I think I'll leave it for now as there is no obvious way to make it more accessible without either dumbing down too much or making the prose rather cumbersome and contrived. But I'll certainly ponder. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hobbs frequently was out deliberately soon after reaching a century" – you've told us this before.
 * I wonder if we might need it twice; the first time was when he began to do it, but this is more about his general batting and how many of his centuries were "thrown away". But if it's a problem, it can go. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "R. C. Robertson-Glasgow suggests" – trouble with tenses: you have "Cardus suggested" earlier, but for Robertson-Glasgow (who is just as dead) you maintain the present tense.
 * I tend to tie myself in knots over this. Went for past tense. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "on occasion, Hobbs targeted the main bowling threats from the opposition." – I'm not sure what this means. Isn't that what all batsmen try to do?
 * Not always; some of them try to avoid the best bowlers. And Hobbs tended to attack the leading threat to hit him out of the attack. I've tried to clarify, but is there a better way? Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Cardus suggested that" – Sir Neville being suggestive again
 * Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "and 98 of his centuries and 26,411 of his runs (at an average of 58.62) in first-class cricket after reaching the age of 40" – are you missing "he scored" or suchlike at the start of this bit?
 * Got this above, I think. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "negatively impact on" – sounds like management-speak for "harm" or "detract from"
 * Good grief, what was I doing??? Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "these would often be followed by very sharp fielding which often produced a run out" – two "oftens" in one sentence
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Another idiot question: didn't Gents-v-Players matches count as first class? If they didn't, your sentence is fine, but if they did it reads a bit oddly.
 * Yes, that was a bit of a mess. Fiddled around with it now. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reputation and legacy
 * You make no mention of Wisden's "Five Cricketers of the 20th Century", in which Hobbs was the only English player of the five. Up to you, naturally, but I was surprised by the omission.
 * Er... "More recently, Hobbs was selected in 2000 as a Wisden Cricketer of the Century"! But I've beefed this up (and realised it was unreferenced too). Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "In comparison with other batsmen" – is this phrase needed here?
 * Nope. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "remains the fifth" – remained, in 2013, the fifth? WP:DATED
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Family life
 * "in a prosperous area of London" – you might name it, perhaps
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "was extremely popular and the players famous" – that construction works only if both nouns are singular; for the plural "players" you need "were" in front of it.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "ghostwritten books" – you offer us a wide range of options during the article: "ghost writer", "ghost-written" and "ghostwritten". Best to standardise for consistency. I see the WP article is "ghostwriter", and I'd be inclined to follow suit here. The blue link to that article ought to come at first mention, I think, in the second para of "End of career".
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "to private school" – "to a private school" or "to private schools"?
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "died on 21 December 1963" – it's usual (and I think helpful to the reader) to add "at the age of…"
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review and kind words. I think I've got or responded to everything now. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Cassianto
I don't follow cricket, so please bare with me. This looks like a very interesting article and it drew me in from the lede alone. Due to the length, I will make a few visits, so here is the first batch. Please consider these comments, but no insistence my end to impliment.
 * Childhood and early cricket
 * "Hobbs was raised in a poor, run-down area of the town..." -- What town? Cambridge is a city and is the only place mentioned before this claim.
 * Oh dear. Thanks for that one, fixed! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs' father, a lover of cricket, changed his career to become a professional cricketer..." -- So is this Jacks grandfather, or is this John? I would use the full name of whoever it is to avoid confusion on this mention.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Why have we got a piped link for "Cambridgeshire" when the link takes us to the Cricket Club? I am not familiar with the sport so find the club being named after its geographical location somewhat strange. Would using the full linked title really be that much of a problem?
 * The only problem with this is that it would result in every county team being named (e.g.) Surrey County Cricket Club, which becomes quite cumbersome after a while. The convention in cricket articles is to link in this way, as the teams are literally named after the counties. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine, thanks. --  Cassianto Talk   19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Francis Hutt, a former friend and colleague of his father contacted Essex County Cricket Club to request a trial for Hobbs. That county never replied..." -- This looks like a semi-colon could be used instead of the full stop as the second sentence reads like a continuation of the first.
 * My only worry there would be an overlong sentence, as we would have a dash and a semi-colon. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, yes I see what you mean. I only mentioned it as I am not a fan of short sentences. --   Cassianto Talk   19:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Surrey cricketer
 * "...on a basic wage during the season of 30 shillings per week" -- made clunky by the "during the season". I would just say  "...on a basic wage of 30 shillings per week."
 * Unfortunately necessary as his pay dropped to 1 shilling in the winter. This is in the note, but I think we need that "during the season", unless anyone has a more elegant solution. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Do we really need to link football?
 * I would say no, but whenever I don't, someone says it needs linking to avoid confusion with the rugby, american and australian varieties. And I like a quiet life, so I link it. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool, either way you can't win I suppose. --   Cassianto Talk   19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * " "Club and Ground" Eleven" -- Why is Club and Ground in inverts?  also Eleven has a capitalisation, why is that? If this is the name of a team, I would drop the inverts.
 * OK, done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * First class cricketer
 * "But a combination of fatigue from continuous cricket and the pressure of first-class cricket adversely affected his form, and he struggled for the remainder of the season even as the county tried various measures to help him" -- I'm not convinced that starting a sentence with a conjunction is a good thing.
 * Personally, I've no problem with it, and much prefer it to "however" at the start of a sentence. But I'll change if others think it needs it (see what I did there?!). Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha, very good! --  Cassianto Talk   19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * " In all first-class cricket in the season, Hobbs..." -- Is this worded correctly?
 * No! It's inelegant at best, so I reworded. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Surrey averages, and eighth in the national averages" -- Repetition of "averages".
 * I'm not sure this is avoidable. The "averages" are the name of the lists of batsmen, ordered by batting average, and there are county averages and national averages. If anyone has a solution, I'm happy to tweak, but I can't see one. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "He was one of only three men to pass 2,000 runs; he was second to Hayward in the Surrey averages, and eighth nationally." Possibly? --  Cassianto Talk   19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Better! Thanks. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * First appearances
 * "Hobbs made his Test debut on 1 January 1908 at Melbourne." -- Again, Melbourne would suggest to me Melbourne the place and not the cricket ground. I had to click off to check if it was the cricket ground and not just Melbourne.
 * Changed to the cricket ground. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * " Hobbs was homesick for much of the tour,and missed his wife..." -- When did he get married? This is the first mention of this.
 * As above, this is a bang-head-against-wall issue. Taken it out now. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I guessed this was down to the separate "Personal life" section, and was meant to delete it for that reason. My personal preference is to have everything chronological order, but no grief if you choose differently, either is good I hear. --   Cassianto Talk   19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, and it is always invaluable to have the eyes of non-cricketers. Much obliged! Sarastro1 (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Second lot
 * Dominance in South Africa
 * "The cricketing conditions were challenging: matches were played on matting pitches unfamiliar to English players..." -- I am wanting to say The cricketing conditions were challenging: matches were played on matting pitches which were unfamiliar to English players, or even putting a comma after pitches would do I think.
 * Went for the comma. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Success against Australia
 * "The 1912 season was unusually wet, which resulted some very difficult pitches for batting." -- "The 1912 season was unusually wet, which resulted in some very difficult pitches for batting."
 * "Why do we use inverts for Triangular Tournament?
 * Both these done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "As the first two games between England and Australia were drawn, the final match between these teams was designated as the deciding match for the tournament." -- Remove redundancy: "As the first two games between England and Australia were drawn, the final match was designated as the deciding match for the tournament."
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Years before the war
 * "In the winter of 1913–14, the MCC sent a strong team to South Africa. Against a South African team lacking effective players..." Slight repetition of South Africa. I know they are in separate sentences, but I am sure we can avoid it somehow?
 * Got this one somewhere above. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * First World War
 * "...to play in the league in 1916. He continued to play for Idle in 1916..." Do we need to be reminded of the year so soon?
 * I think the second one is more necessary, so cut the first. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Resumption of cricket
 * "Hobbs finished second in the national batting averages for 1922..." -- There is a heavy use of his name, where I think pronouns would do. This will need going through at some point and skimming.
 * I think this is another after-effect of heavy trimming. I've de-Hobbsed this section, and, as Tim suggests above, will look for more instances of this throughout. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I am just as guilty. --  Cassianto Talk   22:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Partnership with Sutcliffe
 * " the highest for any pair of opening batsmen as of 2013."[notes 7][181][77] -- check for ref order.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...and won the match by an innings." -- Is the plural correct? Excuse my lack of knowledge.
 * Yes, it is correct in cricket. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "the wives of professionals were not usually permitted to tour" -- "the wives of professionals were not usually permitted on tour"
 * In cricket speak, either would work correctly. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Peak of popularity
 * Could we link "Liberal"? It may help explain his political allegiance.
 * Linked. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Unlikely I know, but "this remains a Surrey first wicket record in 2013", may get forgotten about in 2014, 2015, 2016, etc.., leaving the reader to assume otherwise in those years. I would use "As of 2013, ...."
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "During the fourth Test, he assumed the captaincy when the England captain, Arthur Carr withdrew from the match owing to illness" -- redundency of "England captain". I think one could assume Carr was the captain from the captaincy mention.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Final Tests
 * "Scoring his hundred at the age of 46 years 82 days, he remains in 2013." -- Again here. Is there a likelihood that this could be beaten?
 * Although unlikely, there is nothing to prevent this. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * End of career
 * "Hobbs openly criticised the English tactics, in newspaper columns and in a book." -- Obvious question, which book? Is one he had written?
 * Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "He did not play every game, and the Surrey committee allowed him to choose which matches to play, and more centuries later in the season took him to 196 in his career by the end of the season..." Repetition of season. In fact, the entire sentence look like it could do with being reworded: "He did not play every game, and the Surrey committee allowed him to choose which matches to play. More centuries followed later that season, which took him to 196 in his career, fuelling anticipation that he would reach 200 centuries." (Possibly).
 * Adopted this wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...February 1935, he announced his retirement. There were many tributes and a public dinner was held in his honour in 1935". Could we dismiss the second 1935?
 * Yes, done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Style and technique
 * "For much of Hobbs career," -- "For much of Hobbs' career,"
 * Some kind soul got this one for me. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "This was the time when the public regarded him with the most respect and affection, and 98 of his centuries and 26,411 of his runs (at an average of 58.62) in first-class cricket after reaching the age of 40." -- This doesn't make sense to me. Is this worded correctly? (I'm thinking the second half of the sentence).
 * My mistake; corrected above. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Family life
 * "Hobbs married Ada Ellen Gates, a Cambridge cobbler's daughter, on 26 September 1906. The pair first met in 1900 at an evening church service held in St Matthew's, Cambridge. The relationship was slowed by Hobbs' shyness and devotion to cricket, but the pair eventually wed at the church in which they met." -- For me, the chronology is out here, and has some slight repetition. First they marry, then he meets her, then they get married again.
 * The only way to prevent this is to cut the first mention of the marriage, but then it sounds like a mystery: who is this woman he meets?? I think I prefer the current wording, but will ponder a bit, and certainly change it if others comment. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * How about: "In 1900, Hobbs met Ada Ellen Gates, a cobbler's daughter, at an evening church service held in St Matthew's, Cambridge. The relationship was slowed by Hobbs' shyness and devotion to cricket, but the pair eventually wed on 26 September 1906 at the church in which they met." --  Cassianto Talk   21:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Adopted this wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "The pair remained very close for the rest of their lives." -- Is the adverb necessary? Also, I would say that this is redundant information, seeing as they remained married. This would only have some relevance if they separated and then remained close.
 * Cut the adverb. On the closeness, I think there were many cases at the time (and perhaps still are...) where married couples were not really close. Hobbs and his wife were unusually so, I think. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK -- Cassianto Talk   21:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs so disliked being separated from his wife..." -- Again, adverb is unnecessary I think.
 * Without it, the remaining sentence does not make sense, and would require recasting in a rather cumbersome "to the extent that" form.

Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. -- Cassianto Talk   21:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...although not as poor as he had been during his childhood, the family were not initially financially comfortable." Is this before the offspring, or with them? Also, the second half reads a bit awkwardly. I would say "initially, the family were financially uncomfortable."
 * During the children, if you like! It was a gradual thing with the 1913 date sort of crucial. I reworded the first part to avoid some repetition. I think the second part is OK: financially uncomfortable does not sound quite right to me, whereas "not comfortable" reads better when referring to finances. But I may be wrong, and will change if others agree with you. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs wages increased..." -- "Hobbs' wages increased..."
 * The same kind person got this one. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "After several years of moving from one property to another, Hobbs was able to buy his own house in 1913, in a prosperous area of London." -- pronoun here I think.
 * OK. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "By the middle of the 1920s, cricket in England was extremely popular and the players were famous" maybe?
 * Got this one above. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Check that "ghostwritten" is not written earlier (it is in Style and technique). Link on first mention.
 * Got this above. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Retirement and final years
 * "Following his retirement from cricket in 1934, Hobbs continued to work as a journalist, first with Jack Ingham then with Jimmy Bolton as ghostwriters." -- Who were ghost writers, Ingham and Bolton or Ingham, Bolton and Hobbs?
 * Clarified I think. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs served in the Home Guard." -- Do we know where?
 * Added. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...and his wife moved to live in Hove." -- Redundency in moved to live. Either one or the other I think.
 * Yup. Got this one. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Ada's health continued to deteriorate, and the couple spent some time in South Africa to assist her." -- I may have missed something, but why would moving to South Africa assist her with her health? Was she living in South Africa seperatly to Hobbs? Or, did they move to South Africa to help with her recuperation?
 * Recuperation. Clarified this now (this was quite common at the time, I think). Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "She died in March 1963. Hobbs' health began to fail shortly afterwards and he died on 21 December 1963." -- "She died in March 1963. Hobbs' health began to fail shortly afterwards and died the same year on 21 December ."
 * This would read that his health died the same year! Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * ha, what about adding "he" before died? -- Cassianto Talk   21:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I actually think the repetition is justified here as he is the focus of the article and I think we should give the date in full. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * That's it. A really engaging article, and one I would be happy to support should you take to FAC (which I'm sure you will!) Thanks for taking the time to write this.  It has educated me a lot about a sport I knew nothing about previously.  --   Cassianto Talk   21:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Again, much obliged. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat (talk)
 * I'll be along shortly for full comments, but in the meantime, footnotes 75, 78, 269 and 299 have one p. where there should be a pp. Pip pip! - SchroCat (talk) 12:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, good eyesight! Sarastro1 (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments –
 * Peak of popularity: "He ended his season an innings of 266...". Should have "with" before "an".
 * I see several places where references follow em dashes. I've seen them go directly before the dashes in the past; did the MoS change recently? Giants2008  ( Talk ) 00:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Both done. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note 3: Typo in "constrast". That's about all I saw in the rest of the article. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 17:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: With the wealth of comment you have received, I have held back thus far, but have begun reading and will post comments over the next few days. Here are a few to be getting on with:
 * Footnote: "Some sources credit Hobbs with 61,237 runs and 197 centuries" - cite at least one. They tend to be older sources, before the last couple of centuries were "discovered".
 * Actually, the centuries have always lurked, and even Hobbs expressed an opinion on their status when some apparently suggested they were first-class. Source added. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "His partnership with Sutcliffe remains in 2013 the most effective in Test history." The word "effective" is rather subjective; maybe "prolific" would be more factual? And are you certain about all Test history, rather than English Test history?
 * Prolific would be wrong as it would imply most runs; theirs is the best in terms of average for any Test opening pair. Clarified as average partnership, and yes it is for all Test history. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...he did not stand out as a cricketer: no coaches or teams approached him..." Puzzling. He must have been playing for someone - who was it? For which team did he score his first century?
 * I think it would clarify things if, instead of "At the time, he did not stand out as a cricketer..." you said: "He played for various local clubs, although he did not initially stand out as a cricketer..." Brianboulton (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, took your wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Surely, one or other of Hobbs's many biographies gives details (date, exact score, etc) of this first century? Incidentally, the scoring of this century is recorded twice in your text.
 * These two points hopefully addressed. At the time Hobbs basically played for any team which would give him a game. Ironically, his first 100 came when two of "his" teams played each other. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I am unclear what is meant when you say he "represented Cambridge". What was the nature of this team? Was there a representative cricket team for the city? I see later in the paragraph a reference to "Cambrigeshire"; is this the same as "Cambridge"?
 * Two different teams; this was a kind of representative city XI which only played this one game. I've tried to clarify. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs' father, having helped to arrange his appearance in the match, died from pneumonia a week later." This is inappropriate linking of unrelated events. Better: "Hobbs' father, who had helped to arrange his appearance in the match, died from pneumonia a week later."
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

More will follow. Brianboulton (talk) 11:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * One final point on the "Childhood and early cricket" section: "...he was invited to play as an amateur for Cambridgeshire, albeit with little success" suggests that he refused the invitation rather than that he played with little success. Thus: "he was invited to play as an amateur for Cambridgeshire, albeit although he achieved little success".
 * Reworded. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Reading on. Brianboulton (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

More: – not nearly done, though (it's a long article)
 * Surrey cricketer


 * "To achieve qualification, he moved to London." Since you've just said that, to qualify, he needed to live in Surrey, this may confuse some readers.
 * Tried to clarify, but may have made it worse! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "His sudden improvement brought about his return to the Cambridgeshire team..." This reads as though he had left Surrey. I would say: "His sudden improvement brought about a temporary return to the Cambridgeshire team, for which he remained qualified by birth. His batting was praised..." etc
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Test match cricketer


 * "...sea-sickness, a condition which afflicted him throughout his life" – presumably only on sea voyages?
 * Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "He played just twice" is a bit misleading. "He played in only two of the early matches..." etc
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Jones was injured and did not play" – in fact, Jones didn't play in any of the first three matches of the series.
 * Took Jones out of this part altogether. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Dominance in South Africa


 * "Rhodes, a defensively-minded batsman who excelled at taking quick runs" sounds contradictory. Would "quick singles" be clearer?
 * I considered this, but went for runs as he did not just have to run one; he could have run a quick two! But on reflection, I take your point about the confusion and went for singles. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Success against Australia


 * "...after bowling Australia out for 184 in the first innings, the visiting team faced a target of 219 to win in the fourth innings." That won't make any sense to the less cricket-minded, and the "fourth innings" may puzzle many. How about: "after bowling Australia out for 184 and taking a first-innings lead of 81, the visiting team eventually faced a  target of 219 to win."
 * Took this wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Ranji Hordern": You know my feelings about this use of cricketers' nicknames as though they were actual names. I don't care if that is how they are talked of in pavilion bars or in cricket magazines. This is an encyclopedia, and has different standards; cricketers should not be an exception. Not that Wikipedia's cricket articles are consistent: we don't have "Beefy Botham", "Father Marriott", "Stork Hendry", "Tiger O'Reilly", etc, and I personally got rid of the ludicrous "Dodger (sic) Whysall". The correct course is to give Hordern his proper name, with the nickname appended if you wish, e.g. "H.V. 'Ranji' Hordern". And then to change the name of the Hordern article (which I am quite prepared to do myself)
 * OK, changed to this. I haven't touched the Hordern article yet, though. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have moved the title to "H.V. Hordern" and left a rationale on the talk page. Brianboulton (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to leave it there for the moment Brianboulton (talk) 23:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Next instalment
 * Years before the war


 * "...and critics believed him to be at his peak. As the war began, Hobbs reputation was at its peak;" The repetitive phrasing should be avoided.
 * "McKinstry notes that..." is hardly appropriate wording; he can't "note" that Hobbs had dazzled in a way that he was never to do again – that is a strong statement of opinion.
 * Both done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * First World War


 * Clarify in what season Hobbs averaged 36.63.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs never publicly commented on the matter, but was instrumental in recruiting Frank Woolley to play in the league". Not sure that the connection between these two statements warrants the "but" conjunction.
 * It is there as the only indication of Hobbs' opinion on the controversy. The source would allow this to be more explicit if you think it needs to be. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Resumption of cricket


 * Although I don't suggest you give a present-day value for Hobbs's £400 salary (I'd much rather you didn't), it might be worth mentioning, if the information is available, how this figure compared with the average professional cricketer's salary at that time.
 * The best I can do is what I found about Constantine; he earned £500 in 1929 but that was in the northern leagues. I have nothing equivalent for the south, or for county cricketers. I believe (and can source) that the football maximum wage in the 30s was £386, but would it be synthesis to include this? Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think the Constantine or footballer comparisons are particularly useful. I note from my Larwood article that Harold started at 30s a week in 1924 - but he was a rookie. I see you have discussed Hobbs's income and middle-class lifestyle further on, so maybe enough said for the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 19:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Best avoid over-the-top adjectives, e.g. "extremely"
 * Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Johnny Douglas? This looks particularly unapt, given "C.A.G. Russell" later in the paragraph. Why lose the opportunity to parade Douglas's splendid initials?
 * OK, added his (admittedly fantastic) initials. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "very effectively" should be just "effectively", for neutral tone. Watch for other examples of this
 * Got this one. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Partnership with Sutcliffe


 * "Having signed a new contract worth £440 a season,] Hobbs' form recovered in 1924..." The return to form was surely not a consequence of signing the new contract; the statements should be separated.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Hobbs also established an opening partnership with Yorkshire's Herbert Sutcliffe" is followed closely by "Over the following six years they established an extremely effective partnership", which is somewhat repetitive. Also (as earlier), I advise against "extremely".
 * Reworked this a little. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Peak of popularity


 * "extremely" again
 * Changed to "particularly" as I think we need to distinguish that his form was good even by his own standards. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Passing comment. I have never understood why equalling Grace's record was treated as a matter of such great moment, while passing it seems almost to have gone unnoticed.
 * No I don't know either. Different times, I suspect. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You don't "stand as a Liberal MP", you stand as a "Liberal parliamentary candidate".
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Why is "final game" redlinked?
 * Requested by Crisco above, on the grounds that it was a notable match. I'm not bothered either way. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks odd, and incomprehensible to the casual reader. I can't imagine what article will serve the link – "Notable final cricket matches"? I don't think so. I don't think this link will survive FAC scrutiny. Brianboulton (talk) 19:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "played to a finish with time no object" – are the last four words necessary?
 * Probably not. Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "enormously"? Not neutral.
 * Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "positioning him first" is ugly noun-verbing. Suggest rephrase.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "he played in the last two of three Tests played against the West Indies, playing their first Test series"; needs attention
 * Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Final Tests


 * "the other selectors declined." The transitive form of the verb needs an object, e.g. "declined his suggestion".
 * It might be useful to note that Hobbs played only intermittently in 1933, hence his relatively low aggregate.
 * Both done. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Not much more – will try and finish tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 13:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Last bits Style
 * First para could lose a bit - Patrick Murphy quote says nothing not fully covered by the others.
 * Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "His pad-play was controversial: it removed any possibility of dismissal but was regarded by cricket authorities as negative and unsporting." Hmmm, perhaps some cricket authorities? (and I'm not completely sure who you mean by "cricket authorities". Experts on the game? Administrators?)
 * Added "some", but left "authorities" as it really does mean a mixture of everyone: press, coaches (well, the Eton type of coach) and the MCC chaps. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "He played every type of shot so effectively that he did not have a "signature" shot like other batsmen, and he selected his strokes very effectively" - repetition
 * Tweaked. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Too many "captains" (seven) in the short final paragraph
 * Tweaked. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reputation and legacy


 * The first sentence is pretty much the same as the opening of the previous section. Maybe begin: "Hobbs was twice selected..."
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "In 1963, Neville Cardus chose him as one of the best six cricketers of the previous century..." The "past 100 years", otherwise there is ambiguity.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I would say "one of five Wisden cricketers of the 20th century", and drop the caps. The 20th century bit is important
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "his achievement in showing that professionals could bat as well as amateurs" - not his achievement alone, surely? There were plenty of good professional batsmen - Hayward, for example - whose record exceeded that of most amateurs.
 * Clarified this a little. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Haigh also suggests that Hobbs, through his example and demeanour, raised the respect in which professional cricketers were held" is followed later with "Wisden described him in 2000: "More than anyone else, he lifted the status and dignity of the English professional cricketer." – which is more or less the same thing.
 * Cut Haigh's version. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Personal life


 * "The pair remained close for the rest of their lives". Not necessary to say this; it is implied by the surrounding text
 * Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "In 1946, Hobbs became the first professional to be elected to the Surrey committee, but he and his wife moved to Hove..." when did thy move? The implication of the "but" is that the move stymied Hobbs's committee duties. Is that the case?
 * No; not too sure what I was thinking, so changed. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Master's Club" should perhaps be in quotes.
 * Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "...a group of Hobbs' friends who met regularly to toast Hobbs. Hobbs remained active..." Two much Hobbs in a short stretch of prose.
 * Tweaked. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hobbs had an unusually long career at the top, so a longish article is to be expected. I didn't find many instances of overdetailing (I've mentioned the odd case in my comments); there may be a few opportunities to trim the prose, but I don't see this as a serious issue. A well-constructed article about an important figure in the game. Let me know when it goes to FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 19:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the help. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)