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

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]