Jump to content

Talk:William Middleton Wallace/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Shudde (talk · contribs) 05:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hey mate. I've decided to review the article (been meaning to do some GA review for a while) and will hopefully start in the next day or so. But before I start a reminder on how I normally go about this: I'll usually read through the article starting immediately after the lead, and make comments as I go. These comments do not necessarily relate directly to the Good article criteria, but should in most cases. I believe that if I'm going to review an article, I may as well give any feedback I can, regardless of whether it relates to meeting the GA criteria. I read the lead last. Once I've finished reading through, I normally check the references and images (although sometimes I check these as I go). It is here that I'll normally spotcheck the references (to see that they verify the relevant statement) and also check for close-paraphrasing. If I find any problems with close paraphrasing I'll fail the article immediately—I'm not comfortable passing an article if there is evidence it contains a copyright violation. I hope to start adding comments soon. Cheers! -- Shudde talk 05:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks! FunkyCanute (talk) 10:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Main text

[edit]
  • Is he most commonly referred to as "Willie" in secondary sources? Otherwise this seems a little colloquial.
  • cricket, captaining the school team in 1911, as wicket-keeper -- you probably want to link cricket and wicket-keeper for those non-Anglophilic among the readership.
  • Link "fullback"
  • You say "United Kingdom" -- does this mean United Kingdom as we think of it today, or does it also include the Republic of Ireland? If the latter, I think you should reword it. Some people are very sensitive about Ireland being referred to as the UK, Britain, Great Britain etc, so if that's the case I'd recommend "Britain and Ireland" instead (just to avoid the whole problem, not because there is something intrinsically wrong or incorrect with what is written).
  • Technically, between 1912 and 1914, the UK included Ireland (rather than Northern Ireland, as today). The source say 'UK' and I believe he means England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. These were the 'Home Nations' (and for rugby purposes, are still referred to as such), as you know. I don't think the sensitivity is necessary. In any case, it is correct and that is more important than politics within an encyclopedia. FunkyCanute (talk) 10:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I know Ireland was part of the UK then, but I can assure you that some people will be offended at use of the term to describe Ireland. I don't think this is politics but rather being sensitive to people's strong views on the issue. Have a look at Talk:British and Irish Lions if you want a few examples of the strong feelings. It costs nothing to avoid using a contentious description. -- Shudde talk 04:43, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I'm aware that the renaming of the Lions caused a few people to stomp up and down. I remember it well at the time: it was mostly Brits who were upset. But we're not talking about Ireland here anyway, we're talking about a Scotsman. So, if he's the best fullback in the UK, it doesn't matter whether we're including Ireland or not. FunkyCanute (talk) 16:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "freshers' rugby match" -- this may be too colloquial or unfamiliar to some readers. I'm assuming you mean first-year students? Consider rewording.
  • He was selected to play for Scotland against England in 1913; and Wales, Ireland, and England in 1914. -- link the national teams where appropriate
  • Can more be said on his initial selection for Scotland?
  • Scotland's first Five Nations match of 1914 was on 7 February, played away to Wales at Cardiff. Scotland had not won in Cardiff since 1890 and Wales were favourites, having 'lost so unluckily'[4] against England. The match pitted Welsh forward strength against the swift threequarter line of the Scots. The first points came from a try for Scotland by W. A. Stewart, converted by Hamilton, giving the visitors a five-point lead after four minutes. These were the only points they scored. Wales then attacked repeatedly and Wallace was kept busy in defence. With a 7–5 lead at half time, the Welsh pressed their advantage and ended the game 24–5 winners. -- it may be good to link to some of the jargon in here. Also why is this match focused on?
  • The English were then playing with fourteen men after Cherry Pillman's leg was broken in a tackle. -- specify that injury replacements were not permitted
  • Triple Crown and the Calcutta Cup, as well as the Five Nations Championship -- link Triple Crown, Calcutta Cup and Five Nations
  • It was England's last international test on British soil before the First World War -- again with British. Maybe reword to say they played only once more before the war (against France I assume).
  • 11 of the 30 players went on to be killed in it -- this is a little ambiguous even though I know what you're trying to say. Maybe "11 of the 30 players from the match went on to be killed in it"
  • "was gazetted" -- I'm unsure what this means exactly (maybe it's British English I'm unfamiliar with)
  • "as an observer" -- what is an 'observer'?

Lead

[edit]
  • link "capped"
  • Consider linking the other national teams in the lead
  • Okay I see "gazetted" there now. So does this mean that his appointment was "announced"? That he was conscripted, or that he volunteered to serve?

Other comments

[edit]
  • Link fullback and Sainghin in the infobox
  • Generally avoid flags next to national teams in the infobox

Images

[edit]

-- I'll spot check references and close-paraphrase tomorrow. -- Shudde talk 06:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delay

[edit]

My apologies for the delay in progress. I've been caught up with a combination of heavy workload and Rugby World Cup activities. I'll make sure that I've dealt with all comments by the end of this week. FunkyCanute (talk) 13:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FunkyCanute: Not a problem. If you look at my editing history I've been too busy to edit much myself and was actually a little worried you'd be waiting for me. Take your time because I'm probably not going to be able to edit much in the next week. If you're happy to wait for me then I'm happy to wait for you. -- Shudde talk 05:48, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
FunkyCanute, Shudde, with the exception of a date correction by Catlemur, the article has not been edited since September 14, over seven weeks ago. If this nomination is not going to progress at all, it should probably be closed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:34, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I will respond to any outstanding points this weekend. Apologies. FunkyCanute (talk) 09:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've covered everything now. Anything outstanding, please advise. Many thanks. FunkyCanute (talk) 16:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shudde hasn't edited in sometime but everything does look done, so I'll step in and close this. Wizardman 16:16, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Middleton_Wallace/GA1&oldid=1137323971"