Talk:1744 English cricket season/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The C of E (talk · contribs) 13:57, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:57, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The C of E, and thank you for taking this on. Please let me know if you have any questions and I'll do what I can to assist. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:BOLD, shouldn't "The 1744 cricket season" be bold? Done.
"was pivotal", WP:PEACOCK. Sentence reworded.
The first sentence in The Laws of Cricket is quite long and should be broken up. Done – split into two sentences.
Same point as above for the last sentence in the section. Done – split into two sentences.
For the length of the pitch and weight of the ball, is there a MOS:UNIT conversion? I'm dubious about converting yards to metric as cricket is universally a yardage game like football and American football, per MOS:CONVERSIONS. Have provided grams equivalent for ounces.
Is there a WP:IC for the claim of the "earliest known surviving match scorecards". ~~Have added a cn tag for the present as this must be referred to third parties~~. Have been advised by one of my contacts that Bowen (twice) confirms the two matches in 1744 as the earliest known surviving scores – have removed cn tag and added these two sources.
Prince Frederick of Wales is linked twice and then linked again in Earliest known scorecards, WP:OLINK. Done.
For the Dukes of Richmond and Cumberland, we do need to be consistent on if we include their names along with their titles given Lord John Sackville has his name in full. Agreed. Have given names in full on first use.
"greatest cricket match ever known", which paper said that? I've got scans of Ian Maun's book for 1744 and he mentions the London Daily Advertiser as primary source.
What's the relevance of John Major? You might want to include that he was PM so people know he is important. Mentioned his book and that he is a former prime minister (book is listed in bibliography – it's very well written, actually).
OLINK again on Richmond. Done.
What happened in the crowd disorder, what did the crowd do? No details, I'm afraid. Maun quotes the primary source newspaper which said: "It was observed that there was great Disorder, so that it was with Difficulty the match was played out". Matches in those days were subject to heavy gambling and riots were frequent.
In the list, I see we have links for the early Kent and Surrey teams, is there one for Sussex too? A bit of inconsistency there with linkage of three county teams and England. I think I've rectified it now.
For ACS, Altham, Haygarth, McCann, Major and Waghorn's Dawn, missing ISBNs. Apologies, this was an oversight by me as I'm normally very keen on isbns and source details. Some of the older books like Haygarth and Waghorn had no isbn originally but they have been reissued and I've given the reissue isbns. Altham has not been reissued so the only modern identifier is its Amazon ASIN. The ACS handbook was for members only and did not qualify for an isbn.
Likewise, further reading also need ISBNs. As above – all three have isbns now included.
- @No Great Shaker: In all, a good read and just needs a few tweaks and it will be there. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 04:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, The C of E. These are all good points and I will attend to them. Could you please leave with me a couple of days, though, as I'm short of time today and tomorrow. Hopefully, will get back to you Wednesday. Thanks again and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:49, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, The C of E. I've addressed the points as far as I can for the moment. I can't answer the earliest known scorecard question as I have only limited access to sources myself. I've had to rely on contacts in the publishing world for help. I've sent emails out to these guys and hopefully one of them will be able to source the scorecards. The ACS guide (online) indicates that these were the earliest but it isn't emphatic enough, really. Hope to clarify this soon. Please have a look at the rest and see if it is all okay. Glad to help with any additional queries. Best wishes and thanks again for the review. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have just received email which confirms Bowen as source (twice) for the earliest surviving match scores. All points now addressed. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted now. Well done @No Great Shaker:. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again, The C of E. I'm much obliged although credit must go to the earlier editors who did all the sourcing. I only moved things around and tidied up, though fortunately I had outside help with the key sources, especially the scanned pages from the Iain Maun book. Unless you can think of something suitable, I'm inclined to leave this out of DYK as I don't really think there is anything that would make a good hook – rules, scorecards and crowd trouble are the obvious subjects but I doubt if many readers would find them especially interesting. Thanks again and I hope all goes well for you. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]