Wikipedia:Peer review/Harbhajan Singh/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Harbhajan Singh[edit]

The latest article improvement drive on {{CWC Advert}}, an effort by WP:CRIC to get FAs related to the 2007 Cricket World Cup. The process of formatting refs, is still in progress, and maybe bits about outside cricket activities need to be improved, but the chronology of Harbhajan is complete and the relevant information is there. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dweller's comments[edit]

First, congratulations for such an outstanding piece of work. You've worked so hard on this - without help from the collaborative as yet. I wondered if you'd communicated with our resident chart-maker, who's struggled to come up with a methodology for showing bowling performances, because of the idiosyncracies of the stats. I wondered if the PwC rating might be a way forward on this. Also, some stats in table form would be good. Re the copy - it's really good. A copyedit from ALoan is always a good idea once you're happy with it. I wondered about the naming of some of the section headings, but that's not even a minor gripe. All in all, well done and I'll try to post here with more specific stuff. --Dweller 16:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have given it a once-over, but it probably needs another pass. My main comment is that it is a bit dry, concentrating on the cricketing minutiae (his precise figures for each match, series, etc). I know, this is how cricket goes, but it would be nice to be a bit more, um, descriptive. I would not be too paranoid about eliminating redlinks, by the way: they encourage people to write articles. I have put some redlinks back - better to have a redlink for a subject that needs an article than remove the link. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I should also have mentioned that I have added a few comments in the text. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man's comments[edit]

Concur with Dweller, and here are some specifics I would suggest:

  1. Either deal with, or remove the red links to Sahara Cup & Punjab Cricket Association.
    Created the first and piped the second to Punjab cricket team. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Article lead may need expanding into three or four paragraphs, per WP:LEAD.
  3. I guess it's up to personal preference, but only one reference in the lead?
    Apparently from my first FA on Ian Thorpe, they aren't required if the summary info is expanded upon and sourced in the main body of the article. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. There has been tentative talk of basing modern cricket bio layouts on Paul Collingwood, I'm not convinced the current layout (i.e. headings) is perfect yet. I'd advise distinguishing clearly between his domestic and international careers.
    I didn't bother with this since he was only playing regularly for Punjab when he was out of the Indian team for an extended period pre-2001. Aside from that, he probably only plays the sporadic 2-3 games for Punjab each year and has only played one season for Surrey. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "...Playing in six matches, he took 18 wickets at an average of 22.5, ranking outside the top 20 in both measures..." - top 20 what?
    Fixed. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Seems clear that, for the non-cricket reader, ODI needs to be spelt out the first time it's used, e.g. in the lead in this case.
    Fixed. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]
  7. It's worth linking to bowling average in the body of the article since only average is used.
    Done, and for batting as well. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Stat-fest. I'm having similar issues with Adam Gilchrist in that, given the number of significant matches he's played in, his bowling stats are mentioned through, and it just feels like a statistic overload. As yet, I don't know how to solve it, but thought it worth mentioning since, for FA, this needs to appeal to all-comers.
    Yeah...cricket isn't as romanticised in the modern era, so we can't create diversions by describing unusual stuff anecdotes, eg in Stan McCabe. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]
  9. "As in the first instance, he hit the winning runs, a straight-driven six." - not sure I like the start of the sentence, and probably worth citing such a event.
    ""I forgot to {{cn}} that one but it is sourced now. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Batting scores - this is just a query - am I right in thinking we all refer to batting scores as runs/wickets except the antipodeans, and, if so, since this is not about an antipodean, batting scores should follow that principle? And are we happy with slash as delimiter rather than dash (or en- or em-dash, see WP:DASH although it's good for bedtime reading...!)
    Dunno. I'll test it out at FAC.
  11. "being forced to follow on..[31][33]" - one too many full-stops.
    Fixed. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Are there are worthwhile articles to link to in the "Indian cricket team in X in Y" style?
    I linked to them but didn't use {{main}}.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Citations needed - say no more.
    Done. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]
  14. "Chappell era" section is very long, consider breaking into two (or more) sub-sections, just to make it more aesthetically appealing.
    Managed one for 2006 TEst decline. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. If possible, needs some more images/graphs (as per Dweller) to break up the article, lots of text to wade through and the odd picture wouldn't go amiss. I know it's difficult though, so this one isn't so significant, but we should aim to make this accessible to all.
    I'll put in that controversial ad (FU pic) if necessary. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]
Can you do that? It needs at least one more pic and that pic would be a interesting one.--Thugchildz 21:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope some of that makes sense and helps. Good work, all the best. The Rambling Man 18:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete a few of the 'subsequent's. Tintin 10:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Harbhajan_Singh/archive1&oldid=192054715"