Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Geoffrey Boycott/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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 10:48, 16 May 2009 [1].

---

Geoffrey Boycott

Nominator(s): SGGH ^ping! 13:53, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

• Featured article candidates/Geoffrey Boycott/archive1

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel it has undergone a long period of improvement, with a number of users working on it, and that it has reached the level where an FAC can find the featured article within it. It is comprehensive article, well written, with hopefully few factual or citational errors, with images which are the only ones available as no free images exist or have been found despite months of looking. Hopefully whatever errors illuminated in this FAC can be solved to promote it over the final hurdle. Regards, SGGH ^ping! 13:53, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

• Comments -
• Newspapers titles in the references should be in italics. If you're using {{cite news}}, use the work field for the title of the paper, and the publisher field for the name of the actual company that publishes the paper

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Quick check, is this also true for newspaper articles found on webpages (e.g. telegraph online?) SGGH ^ping! 14:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

It depends on if they are reprints of published articles on their site or if they are works that never appeared in print. I tend to think if they are reprinting the printed article, then you treat it as a printed article with a convience link to the web site. If it never appeared in print but only on their website, it's more up in the air. (I never have this problem with medieval bishops, so it might be good to have suggestions from folks who actually have experience in this problem. I can see either way, honestly.) Ealdgyth - Talk 14:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I tend to format them the same. It's still the newspaper's output, whether it's online or in print, and the consistency in the display of the references far outweighs (for me, at least) the other factors. Steve ^{T • C} 15:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I think someone has gone through and done most of these, I shall have a look through a little later on and see if I can find the others that haven't been done so. SGGH ^ping! 12:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose: sorry, the article isn't ready for FAC. It needs a proper peer review and a full copyedit (it was peer-reviewed in March 2008, but has been much altered since). The following points arise from the lead alone:-

• "Illustrious" is POV and should be omitted

Has been replaced with "successful" or "prolific"

• "...established himself as one of England's finest opening batsmen." This needs to be specifically attributed, e.g. "...established himself, according to XYZ, as one of England's finest opening batsmen."

Will do so, however the number of people who have said so is large, so would it be best to leave the general assertion in the lead and leave it to be backed up by specific examples in the body? SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Will do. SGGH ^ping! 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• When did Boycott occupy the crease "for a number of days"? It might have seemed like that when watching him bat, but you'll be hard put to justify this comment.

He was one of the first batsmen to bat all 5 days of a Test match, it is mentioned in the main body but I can copy the cite up to the lead too. SGGH ^ping! 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• This sentence reads very awkwardly: "While less successful in One Day International matches, becoming the first ever wicket in that form of the game, Boycott went on to be a key feature of England's Test batting line up for many years." After major surgery it could become "Boycott went on to become a key feature of England's Test batting line up for many years, although he was less successful in One Day International (ODI) matches." The fact of his being the first wicket to fall in one-day international cricket is inconsequential, has nothing to do with his success or otherwise in this form of the game, and should be dropped.

Done so. SGGH ^ping! 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "...ending his career in 1982 with over 8,000 runs and an OBE." These two achievements should not be linked in this way.

Fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• ...and the "as well as" that follows is equally inappropriate. Boycott's Wisden accolade came near the beginning, not at the end, of his career

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• It also needs to be clear that he was one of Wisden's Five Cricketers of the Year in 1965, not "Wisden Cricketer of the Year"

Done so SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• ICC needs explaining

Will do. SGGH ^ping! 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "He followed", rather then "followed up"

Fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "In 1998 he faced allegations of assaulting his former girlfriend, Margaret Moore, of which he was later cleared; and in 2002 he was diagnosed with throat cancer for which he underwent successful radiation treatment and went into remission." Two many unrelated facts in one sentence (assault charge, acquittal, cancer, successful treatment, remission) linked by too many "ands". Split the sentence.

will do. SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Final sentence is ungrammatical as it stands. Suggest full stop after "praise", then "He is currently working..."

Will do. SGGH ^ping! 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• The image: a brave attempt to get a free image, and by no means a bad drawing, but is it sufficiently like Boycott? Personally, I wouldn't have recognised it outside the context of a Boycott article, but others may feel differently.

Unfortunately there are no free ones that I can find, I was hoping the FAC will get a concensus on this, as I couldn't get one elsewhere other than the project talk page, which was unsure. SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have looked through the rest of the article, and see many of the same sort of prose errors as identified in the lead. I don't think these issues can be fixed at FAC, and suggest that it is withdrawn and put into peer review. I will be happy to assist with it there. Brianboulton (talk) 20:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose. Agree with most of Brianboulton's points; further copyediting will be required before it's quite up to scratch, perhaps too much to expect to happen during the timeframe available at this FAC. On top of that, I'd point to a slight assumption of a certain level of cricketing knowledge in the reader; too few terms and rules are explained fully enough for the uninitiated. On the image issue, I think I'd recognise it as Boycott even if removed from the context of the article. But then again, I am a Yorkshireman, by gum. Steve ^{T • C} 21:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC) EDIT: Added oppose after a second read through. It's interesting enough, and not terribly written, so please don't take this the wrong way, but it might do good to have a third-party copyeditor take a look at it, as quite often the writer of an article is too familiar to the text to spot the areas that need attention. Should the nominator wish to tackle the copyedit, that's fair enough (lawks, you should see the face-twitch I get whenever I see on an article I've written an edit summary that says "copyedit"!), but I first recommend a read through of these redundancy exercises; the removal of removing unnecessary words and phrases is 90% of the copyediting work. Steve ^{T • C} 10:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I shall take a look. SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose – 1a. Brian's right about the prose. In addition to his suggested improvements, here are some more corrections needed later in the article:

• Early life: "He was rushed to hospital, nearly dying and ultimately lost his spleen." Should be either "nearly died" or "ultimately lost" to have consistent tenses.

Will fix SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "In March 1950, his father had a serious accident down the pit, being hit by empty coal tubs which damaged his spine." What pit? Does this involve mining?

Made clearer SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "where he played for the schools First XI and captained it at age 15." Apostrophe needed in "school's".

will fix SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Last sentence of the section has a faulty hyphen. It should be changed to an en dash or em dash (with no spacing).

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "His careful batting is thus reflected in his 22 centuries for England". Unneeded extra word.

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• "However, he was never vulnerable to one bowler in particular, Michael Holding being the most successful against him, dismissing him seven times, a statistic jointly held against Boycott by Gary Sobers and Dennis Lillee but with Holdin doing it in the fewest matches." Long, awkward run-on sentence.

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Next sentence is similarly awkward: "Peter Lever also spent an entire evening discussing with Boycott his vulnerability when playing the hook stroke, with which he was to get out on more than one occasion, with Arlott describing as a "compulsive" employer of the stroke." Also doesn't say what Arlott is describing.

Removed the Arlott reference, though kept the cite as he mentions the Lever incident. SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• County career: Faulty hyphen in the fourth sentence.

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Three straight sentences in the section start with He. There should be more variation in the writing.

Changed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I probably haven't spotted every problem in these sections, but what I did find shows that this isn't ready for featured status yet. Giants2008 (17-14) 00:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments about the section on playing style (skip those that are not actionable)

• "Arlott wrote that "his technique is based on a defence organised as near flawlessness as may be."[23] "Given the choice between Racquel Welch and a hundred at Lord's, I'd take the hundred every time" he remarked in 1981"

The second line should perhaps say Boycott instead of he.

Done so SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Peter Lever also spent an entire evening discussing with Boycott his vulnerability when playing the hook stroke, with which he was to get out on more than one occasion,[29] with Arlott describing as a "compulsive" employer of the stroke.[30]

"spent a complete evening" etc is not relevant

fixed SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

This line also stands out because every other line in the two paragraphs is about his defense, and this suddenly goes on to describe an attacking stroke.

• "often bowling while wearing his cap turned back-to-front so he could see."

If the Guardian interview is the only source about the cap part, please remove this phrase. Especially as Boycott is wrong about himself. The match mentioned is Australia v England. From 4:15 in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZZzJmt4phk you can see Boycott bowling and taking two wickets and never has his cap turned backwards. The other 1979 WC videos available are

England v NZ at 2:30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1owGKt3oFQ

England v WI at around 6:50 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W06F9jIjCIw&feature=related

and in none of them, his cap is turned the wrong way. Tintin 03:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have got other sources stating this, his biographer mentions it as well, I'll try to look into it and find the ref SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments2 That Guardian reference mentioned above (No.4) is now used for the friction with Trueman, Brearley etc, and for his parents. Neither of this is mentioned in the interview. For his stats, we should rather use a source like Cricinfo than this. I also have a complaint about Corridor of Uncertainty that I shall address seperately later. Tintin 11:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I shall add other citations for the guardian one, and find cricinfo cites to back up the stats assertions. SGGH ^ping! 12:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have cricinfo ref'd the stats that were previously cited just by the newspaper ones, hope I haven't missed any. SGGH ^ping! 12:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by the nominator A lot more work has been done on the prose, more comments would be appreciated. SGGH ^ping! 10:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.