Template:Did you know nominations/Claire Taylor

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 ^talk 12:18, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Claire Taylor

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Claire Taylor (pictured) was the first woman to be named as a Wisden Cricketer of the Year?

• Reviewed: Pentax X-5

Created/expanded by Harrias (talk). Self nom at 20:57, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• I will review.NearTheZoo (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• Length (kinda massive expansion), date checks out. Off-line source for hook accepted AGF. Checked the image with TinyEye reverse image search. --Soman (talk) 21:32, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
• (I noted that I would review, but in the meantime another review came in. I'll go ahead and add mine as well, for an additional opinion, especially since I make some separate observations.) Expansion long enough, date of expansion good, article interesting and well-referenced, and hook referenced (in sentence after the actual statement is made). My only reservation is that the article crosses the line of NPOV here and there, such as in the statement that Taylor "continued her good form" -- and a good deal of it (in my opinion) is much too detailed for an encyclopedic article: for example, in sections where the article notes step-by-step actions during a game, it is more like a journalistic report of a sports event than an encyclopedia article. However, although I would recommend that the nominator or one of the contributors go through the article with a fine-tooth comb to make it more encyclopedic, in my opinion it is good enough for this DYK. If someone else would like to take a look and offer a second opinion, that would be great -- but in the meantime, I am recommending approval for the DYK. NearTheZoo (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)