Wikipedia:Peer review/David Gower/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

David Gower[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review
 Done SGGH ping! 10:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because eventually I'm looking for FAC, but in the mean time some images and a GAC, so I want to know how I am doing thus far.

Thanks, SGGH ping! 13:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to say that I don't think this article is anywhere near detailed enough for a guy who played in 117 Tests and was involved in power struggles etc. I don't know much about this period in English cricket but he was very controversial (allegedly). YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 07:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the article looks like it needs expanding. Perticualy the "Commentating and later life" section. BUC (talk) 07:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is still a work in progress. When I say I'm looking for FAC and GAC, I mean in many months time :) SGGH ping! 18:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Agree this needs some work before GAN or FAC, although what is here reads decently for the most part. My main problem is I know little about cricket and had trouble following a lot of the article - these probably point to a need to be aware of WP:PRC and WP:JARGON. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • Avoid words like currently as they can become out of date, so just in the lead is a former English cricketer who currently commentates for Sky Sports. needs to be changed - I would express it as is a former English cricketer who has been as commentator for Sky Sports since YEAR. (couldn't find the year in the article)
  • I would also qualify records like His 117 Test matches lies behind only Alec Stewart with 133 and Gooch, with 118. with the year (as of 2009)
  • I agree with the clarification needed tag - what is an S grade in History? Presumably a bad / failing grade?
  • Problem sentence With 18 centuries he is also joint 4th with fellow captain Michael Vaughan in the most hundreds scored by an England player[.] He played domestic cricket from 1975 until 1993,... MOS says numbers under ten should be spelled out, so "fourth" (not 4th), seems to be missing a period, and I know little about cricket, so I think it would make sense to at least wikilink centuries here and in the lead (scoring over 100 runs?)
  • I think headers should be consistent, so Domestic cricket and International cricket (or drop cricket?)
  • Here's a man who played 18 years and his domestic career is summed up in five paragraphs - his first game, in which the article says he made "little impression" gets almost all of the first paragraph. This seems to me to be a WP:WEIGHT issue (plus it was pretty much gibberish, again I know little about cricket)
  • I have no idea what numbers follwed by an asterisk like 102* or 144* mean - this needs a note or at least a link. I thought it was a typo the first time I saw it.
  • The photo of the tiger moth airplane left me mystified until several pragraphs later and should a) be closer to the incident in the text, and b) have a caption that provides some context / explanation - I orginally thought this was odd photo vandalism of some sort
  • The quote box on his reply on the Tiger Moth incident did not do much for me either. Why does this have to be set off in a box?
  • This needs a ref (direct quote): According to Michael Atherton in his autobiography, "Gooch was at the other end and as he walked off his face was thunderous". My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Spot the needless repetition Gower was a "most graceful"[31] left hand batsman and had a reputation for being aloof. Considered a graceful player, his languid style ...
  • There are a number of cricket player FAs - I would look at them as models.
  • I noticed a fair number of little typos reading through, but I read for comprehension, so can't point most out - needs a copyedit.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have addressed these, as I said earlier it is no where near FAC or even GAN, was just hoping the PR would give some early ideas. On the Atherton comment above, the citation seems to have fallen off somewhere, so I'll dig around for it. Cheers! SGGH ping! 22:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/David_Gower/archive1&oldid=1087823966"