Talk:Will Palmer (cricketer)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 18:53, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Links

Prose

Lede

• (born late 1736 and christened 9 January 1737; died February 1790 and buried 8 February 1790) w - that's ridiculous info. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  The source isn't definite on the dates of birth and death but has got the baptism and burial dates from Coulsdon parish records. 9 January 1737 was actually a Julian calendar date. I've made amendments. BoJó | talk UTC 23:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• He has been definitely recorded - definitely? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Done. BoJó | talk UTC 23:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

General

• All those dates in the lede aren't in the body Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  The death details are at the end but I've added a bit about birth and baptism. BoJó | talk UTC 23:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• "given man". - this should be linked/explained rather than quoting. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Have provided a link to the cricket project glossary and a brief explanation. BoJó | talk UTC 23:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• but none of the primary sources mention Hampshire at all, - I get that these are difficult to deal with for conflicting sources, but this almost reads just like the inner workings of the editor. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  I've omitted that clause. Can you check the sentence again and see if it looks better now. BoJó | talk UTC 23:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• A song was written which named all the England players in one quatrain: - written by whom? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Unknown. I've added that it was a Kent supporter. BoJó | talk UTC 23:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• scored 52*, a - can we say "not out" in prose? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Done. BoJó | talk UTC 23:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Palmer, for batting well esteemed - does this need to be a quotebox? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Not for one line. I've included it in the sentence. BoJó | talk UTC 23:08, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Needing 28 to win, England lost one wicket. Palmer did not bat. - this doesn't explain if they won or lost. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Changed to say they won by 9 wickets. BoJó | talk UTC 23:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• The match on 26 August ended in another Surrey victory by six wickets. Hambledon scored 103 and 51; Surrey replied with 131 (Palmer 16) and 24/4 (Palmer 6). - a few times we are talking about matches he was in, rather than how he did in matches. It should say he scored 16 and 6 runs in the match. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Good point. I agree. I've taken out all the brackets containing his scores to raise his profile, as it were. BoJó | talk UTC 23:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Palmer disappeared from the sources after 1776 except for one final reference in 1784 - more about inner workings. Just say what the sources say. I'd prefer to say "undocumented". Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Done. That is better. BoJó | talk UTC 23:11, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Ref one isn't used in the article at all. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Sorry, I omitted it. Have included it now. BoJó | talk UTC 23:11, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Review meta comments

• I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:53, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again, Lee. Please let me know of anything I can help with. All the best. BoJó | talk UTC 20:54, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, Lee. I've addressed all the points but can you look at them again and make sure they're okay? Please let me know if you need more done. Thanks again and all the best. BoJó | talk UTC 23:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thank you for the review, Lee. Very helpful again and much appreciated. All the best. BoJó | talk UTC 11:59, 1 November 2022 (UTC)