Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gubby Allen/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose 08:49, 25 May 2014 [1].
Gubby Allen[edit]
This article is about a rather unpleasant cricketing despot and former England captain. His name may be familiar to cricket followers for various reasons (especially those of a certain vintage) and I hope this article summarises his length career accurately and fairly. It is currently a GA and had an excellent PR. Any further comments or suggestions gratefully received. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support – We have here on the one hand a nasty piece of work, viz Sir George Allen, and on the other hand a very fine piece of work indeed, viz this article. It is comprehensive, well and widely-sourced and referenced, in first rate prose, and is magnificently (I am tempted to say, miraculously) impartial. I had my say at the peer review, and on a re-reading for the present review found nothing else to remark on except to give my hearty applause. – Tim riley talk 19:52, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Image review
- Zip. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. I got no comments on your images. Placement is good, copyright is good, and your captions are correctly punctuated. Thank you for spoiling me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose and images. Good work, solid article, perfectly fits the definition of neutrality (a reader should not be able to determine the view of the article's author(s)). I don't see anything more that I can add to this article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support—had my say at the PR and it looks ready for FA in my book. Very well done Sarastro! —Cliftonian (talk) 10:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I can only really echo what others have said; I, too, was a peer reviewer, I made all my comments there, and they were speedily and properly attended to. I still have private reservations about the use of the nickname in the article's title, without any indication that "Gubby" was not his real name, but I accept the reasoning (Cricinfo heads its article "Sir Gubby Allen", which strikes me as truly absurd). I'm sure that Allen cared a lot about cricket; unfortunately he was too blinkered and too stupid to realise that his efforts to shield cricket from the ramifications of the modern world did the game, and England's standing within it, much harm. This is another high class cricket article from the Sarastro stable, and I am consistently impressed by the meticulous research that makes these articles so valuable. Brianboulton (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sources review:
- No spotchecks done
- All links working
- All sources appear of appropriate quality and reliability
- Ref 43 requires "pp" not "p"
- Ref 214: Clarify the nature of this source. If it is a chapter of Quelch's book, this needs to be specifically stated.
No other sources issues. Brianboulton (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Another peer reviewer here who liked what he saw a lot. This is another classic in the Wikipedia cricket collection, and I'm happy to support it. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.