Talk:Bob Willis/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 21:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, should only be a few knit-picks.

Early life - "He adopted his third name 'Dylan' by deed poll in honour of Bob Dylan, of whom he is a fan." Briefly mention who Dylan is. I know you have a link but it would probably be easier if you say that he is an "American singer-songwriter, musician, painter and poet." Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 21:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've put "American musician Bob Dylan", as including all those things I felt would be a bit much. SGGH ^ping! 22:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even better. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 22:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by: Peripitus (Talk) 03:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC) There is one thing that stands out. There lead seems to be written as a referenced introduction, rather than a summary of the article. While references in the lead are fine, they do tend to indicate that there is material there that is not covered later in the article. The 899 wickets, his ranking relative to Ian Botham, and possibly other things seem only covered in the lead. There is also significant material in the article that is not covered in the lead section. "Early Life" and "County Debut" do not seem to have made any impact on this section.[reply]

Everything in the lead needs to be in main body. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 06:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and a summary in reverse. Should be able to read the article or the lead separately. One a complete storey and one a summary - Peripitus (Talk) 07:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much of the early life would be relevant in the lead (as it's not the most critical thing about his life in terms of notability) but I will work to put the info in the lead which is missing from the article back in. I might ask User:Jhall1 to take a look, as he knows when and where the leading wicket taker trophy was passed. SGGH ^ping! 11:21, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a paragraph at the end of the "England captaincy" section (being the section that covers the end of his playing career) that will hopefully cover some of these points. The two references to issues of the Playfair Cricket Annual are to the table of highest Test wicket takers as at the end of his career (showing only Lillee ahead of him) and as it stands currently (showing Botham as the only England player ahead of him). I could equally well have referred to the corresponding issues of Wisden, but Playfair was closer to hand. JH (talk page) 18:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks mate. SGGH ^ping! 18:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The amount needed is really in some proportion to the proportions in the rest of the article.... roughlyish- Peripitus (Talk) 11:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Before I pass, why is "Willis'" and "Willis's" both used? Suggest "Willis'" is used. Aaroncrick (talk) 06:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The latter is the grammatically correct one, I suspect it's a typo. SGGH ^ping! 10:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]