Talk:Eddie Illingworth/GA1

GA Review

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

My first concern was on the length (it barely touches 6kb of prose), but I put into perspective, since he only played 5 matches; it's like trying to get a baseball player who played in a utility role for a couple seasons to 6kb of prose; it's pretty difficult, so length for me is not an issue at all. Also, as you've touched on, there is virtually zero personal information. I'm lenient on this matter (other GA reviewers may auto-fail due to a lack of this), but I would like to see at least a little bit, if you can. Doesn't need to be detailed, just something. Anyway, for the article itself, here's a few things I found:

The infobox has his years as 1961-65, but the lead has 1962-64. I'm confused.
"One of the occasions in district cricket, he had been no-balled three times in one over." one over is a little jargony for the non-cricket expert. (or link over where it's first used, that could work)
The last paragraph in "no ball for throwing" for some reason I can't seem to follow at all.
"Despite this performance, Illingworth was overlooked for further state selection for over two years." Any info on what he did those two years?

I'll put this on hold, no timetable yet since I may find more. Wizardman 20:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, he played from the 61-62 season to the 64-65 season, but started in early 62 and ended in late 64. I hope the numbers in the infobox to reflect teh Australian summer clarify this. Fixed the overs. Tried to rework the paragraph to make it more amenable to non-cricket followers. Found a little bit more on the fourth point, by trawling the VCA website as it didn't show up in google. Found out that apart from playing he was also an administrator. No further information found on Fitzroy's website. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The second read through was a lot better. I definitely felt a lot more comfortable with the article, and now that my comments have been dealt with I will now pass the article. Good work. Wizardman 02:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]