Wikipedia:Peer review/List of bowlers who have taken over 300 wickets in Test cricket/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of bowlers who have taken over 300 wickets in Test cricket[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to go to FLC with the best version of this list. Look forward for your comments and suggestion.

Thanks, Zia Khan 23:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Cassianto[edit]

Seen your request on Sarastro's page, so thought I'd drop in.

  • "Taking over 300 wickets across a playing career is considered a significant achievement in Test cricket." -- Who considered this?
  • "Achieved" used in close succession. Could you think of another word?
  • "As of August 2013, Sri Lankan bowler Muttiah Muralitharan..." -- Definite article would be better.
  • Didn't get you? Zia Khan 14:52, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The definite article would be: "As of August 2013, the Sri Lankan bowler Muttiah Muralitharan..."
  • I think the second image looks awkwardly placed.
  • I don't think a full stop is required within the image caption.
  • A complete sentence should have a full-stop, I think?! Zia Khan 14:52, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave the technical stuff for someone a bit more technically minded. -- CassiantoTalk 11:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the comments. Zia Khan 14:52, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem, looks like a good little list this! -- CassiantoTalk 15:27, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Harrias[edit]

  • The flags are in breach of MOS:FLAG, which states that the name of the country should be provided alongside the flag.
  • The flags also mess up the sorting: the players should list alphabetically by surname.
  • The "tiebreak" criteria should be specified: why does Lillee appear ahead of Vaas?
  • The key is missing a number of the column titles, and some are labelled incorrectly: (Ave, Avg for example).
  • As the title of the table is "Bowlers who have taken.." I think the row scopes should be the bowler, not the number of wickets. Harrias talk 12:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The above concerns have been sufficiently addressed, I guess. Zia Khan 05:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Rejectwater[edit]

  • What is a wicket? Being able to understand this term is critical to being able to understand the article. I don't think a wikilink suffices. I really have no idea, and I doubt I'm the only one.
  • Many of the date ranges in the Period column are not formatted properly. See WP:YEAR.
  • "Ref(s)." should be "Ref(s)" (no period) and I imagine included in the key as well (there are several columns that have an unneccessary period after the column header).
  • Image alt text. See WP:ALT, especially the Bush/Blair and Queen Elizabeth examples. Rejectwater (talk) 23:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done, thanks for the review.Zia Khan 05:43, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program[edit]

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
  • Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.[?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

Thanks for the message! Zia Khan 02:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

-(tJosve05a (c) 23:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]