User talk:Sarastro1/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

D'Olly

I really like how this draft is shaping up—well done so far! I just have one thing you may want to look at:

• "Oborne argues that the MCC establishment, without favouring apartheid, wished to maintain traditional links with South Africa, and saw it as part of their role to maintain white South Africa"

I've changed this sentence around a bit in copy-editing, but the issue remains. I don't quite understand what is being said here. Are we saying the MCC felt some kind of responsibility to South African whites, or are we saying that it felt it had to maintain "white South Africa" as in that it had to help maintain apartheid? The latter seems unlikely as we have said in the same sentence that they didn't favour apartheid. I would look at clarifying this. Thanks, and I hope you're well. I'm going to go through and put some pictures in the draft here and there, I hope you don't mind. —Cliftonian (talk) 19:53, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

RE

Hello and thank you for your comments on the Law school of Beirut nomination page. I think i have covered most of the points; if you think there's more to do please let me know. I am sorry it took me so long to reply but I was so busy. thanks again -Elias Z 15:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

FA congratulations

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Maurice Leyland to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,324 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. Bencherlite^Talk 11:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of George Dewhurst (cricketer)

The article George Dewhurst (cricketer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:George Dewhurst (cricketer) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 13:22, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Clifford Roach

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Clifford Roach you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vensatry -- Vensatry (talk) 16:41, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

"The Unnatural" FAN

I have completely combed over the episode's page, mostly looking to weed out redundancies. I have made the following changes. Do you think it looks any better?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much...

... for your kind note. I am, I fear, an inveterate potterer and don't have the concentration to tackle GAs and FAs: I much admire those like you who do, and I seem to spend as much time reading as writing these days. Johnlp (talk) 21:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 20 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the D'Oliveira affair page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Clifford Roach

The article Clifford Roach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Clifford Roach for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vensatry -- Vensatry (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

FW Lillywhite

FWL played when scores were low. You can't compare his figures with Verity and you can't compare Verity with Swann in all reality because they played different games. Since the helmet, scoring has increased dramatically plus one day cricket has increased player's aptitude for run stealing and quick scoring. Lillywhite's figures represent the mark laid down from 1820-1864. I guess if you allow all the odds matches and what have you his average would be about 7. I think Grundy had an average for of 3 for the AEE in odds matches one year. What we need to remeber is that the career averages of Pilch, Felix etc were remarkable and WG's the equivalent of the impact of Babe Ruth on Baseball.CDTPP (talk) 16:23, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Dolly

I don't know if there's a source but ex-players at Worcester(I was a member for several years) were pretty clear it was Insole and Cowdrey who didn't want Dolly because it would rock the boat and Cowdrey and Dolly had not really got on in the West Indies. You may be aware that MCC was not popular with his fellow cricketers. The selection of Tommy Cartwright was especially risible as, fine bowler as he was, his 'fitness' was suspect. He rarely held up for 2 tests in a row. I wonder what Pollock, Richards et al would have made of his Tommy trundlers on SA wickets.CDTPP (talk) 10:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Florence Fuller, with apologies

Hello Sarastro. First of all thank you for your reviewing of this article. Unfortunately (and fortunately), I just discovered the most substantial published work on Fuller, having failed to identify it on several previous literature searches. It has led to these significant revisions of the article. Given the changes (which do only affect two sections, if that helps), I wonder if you would take another look and comment if necessary? Apologies. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:57, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for revisiting! hamiltonstone (talk) 22:40, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

"all things" Peer Review

First off, let me say that you have already do so much to help out The X-Files project, but I was wondering if you would at all have time to look over "all things". I recently performed a self-copy edit to cut down on redundancies like you have suggested before. Is there any chance you could peak over it? Thanks, and no rush/pressure; as I've said, you have already helped out so much!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bobby Peel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Morley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

A-Class

I am trying to nominate Æthelstan for A-Class, but I am obviously doing something wrong. I have added the MILHist banner and A-Class=current, and the instructions say that I should get a 'currently undergoing' link in the template, but there is no link. Can you advise? Thanks. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks but I already tried clicking show. Is there something wrong with my syntax at Talk:Æthelstan? Dudley Miles (talk) 19:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Ah I did not notice that second show against additional information. Thanks. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Cordingley

No, I'm very much in favour of these links and AC was clearly a cricketer with Yorkshire connections. He was a Yorkshire Cricketer as was, for example DA Pullen(Notts) MJ Smedley(Notts). This fc thing is somebody's red herring(CDTPPP) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.57.250.8 (talk) 11:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Peer review request

Hey Sarastro. You have a talent for sport biographies, so I was wondering if you could have a look at Arthur Gould (rugby union) and contribute to the peer review here? I'm looking at bringing it to FAC at some point, and would really appreciate any comments you have. There has already been some great feedback, but want to make extra sure it's ready for FAC, so your help would be great. Thanks. – Shudde ^talk 09:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. It's not urgent, so whenever you have the time would be great! -- Shudde ^talk 01:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hi, I'm not sure if you work on cities. Can you review this nomination, only to improve the prose, when you get time. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 10:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings

	Christmas greetings for 2013 and best wishes for 2014. Peace on earth and goodwill to all May you take pleasure in all you do and find success and happiness
	Brianboulton (talk) 21:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
	May 2013 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals! All the best Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 20:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Waddington 1920

I'm not around much this week until Tuesday probably (and uncertain even after that), but here at least is 1920. Wisden's punctuation is, as ever, individual, but I've reproduced it faithfully... even at the points where I'd much like to throw an extra comma or two in. Three chunks from the one article; single ref at the end.

"At one time during the season it was very unlikely that Yorkshire would carry off the Championship. Indeed the weakness of the bowling on hard wickets seemed to put such a distinction out of the question. Losing the Whit-Monday match with Lancashire at Old Trafford was a great blow and things looked very black when on the 28th of June, at Sheffield, Yorkshire went down before Notts. Soon after this, however, a great and welcome change came over the fortunes of the eleven...

"The marked improvement in Yorkshire cricket began when in the first week of July, Waddington, the new left-handed bowler, was introduced to the team. A right-handed fast bowler of real class was still lacking but Waddington's presence made an enormous difference to the bowling strength of the side. Rhodes and Waddington, with E. R. Wilson, for a few weeks, and Robinson to help them, carried the eleven from success to success, Rhodes bowling in a form he has not equalled for years...

"Waddington did such brilliant work in his first season that great things may reasonably be expected of him. Bowling left-hand, medium pace inclining to fast, he has a delivery that seems part of himself—free from any suggestion of labour or undue effort. His length last season was uniformly good and there was always plenty of life in the ball off the ground. Some of those who watched him in match after match thought that he made a mistake at times in trying to bowl a little too fast. Be that as it may the fact remains that he had a first season of exceptional promise. Without him Yorkshire would certainly not have won the Championship."

Waddington in Wisden 1927

"In view of their wonderful achievements of recent years, Yorkshire may well accept with equanimity whatever the immediate future may have in store for them, yet there is no gain-saying the fact that in the latter part of last summer their attack lost something of the special excellence which had characterised it in the previous summer. Macaulay had his big days, it is true, but the wickets fell fifty short of his aggregate for the previous season. Kilner—called upon for a good deal of work outside the county team—took fewer wickets and these at a bigger cost than in 1925, and there was a similar deterioration in the records of Waddington and Robinson... Likely enough Macaulay, Kilner and Waddington will again find their best form and obviously Robinson is not yet done with..."

Waddington in Wisden 1928

"The decrease in the effectiveness of the attack... could not very well be gainsaid. Macaulay, it is true, took nearly as many wickets as in 1926, but Rhodes, Kilner and Waddington each met with a smaller measure of success, and in all three of these instances the average cost was appreciably higher than it had been in the preceding summer... (I)n the case of Waddington in place of 70 wickets for something under 23 runs each, there were only 43 to show, and these at nearly 30 runs apiece... Waddington's work was only occasionally worthy of his reputation."

Waddington (fleetingly) in Wisden 1929

"...(T)he County Committee had decided not to re-engage Waddington who, if doing little in 1927, had previously borne a considerable part in the Yorkshire attack. ...for the moment the Yorkshire attack is far below the average of past years."

Old Ebor

Looks good. I've made a couple of very minor alterations. JH (talk page) 22:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I have left a few comments/suggestions on the article's talk page. Brianboulton (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I should get to this in the next few days or so. Cassianto^Talk 21:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Jim Thome

Hi Sarastro1; I was just rereading the FAC from Jim Thome in which you commented last May (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jim Thome/archive1), and realized there were less issues from the FAC than I thought, and was thinking of giving it another go. Many of your comments were prose concerns, and I believe I addressed most if not all, as well as some jargon, and while I have read through the article several times, much of the jargon has assimilated into the way I talk, think, and write, so there seems to be a good chance some is still there. I am not asking for a full-fledged copyedit, but what lingering concerns would you have on the article before I submit it for another FAC? Thanks. Go Phightins! 20:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I am mostly finished addressing your comments with this. When you get a chance, would you mind reading/commenting on the rest? Thanks. Go Phightins! 18:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Waddington peer review

Watcha, I can't find the PR for Abe. When was you thinking of initiating it? Cassianto^Talk 18:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Request

My current FAC Nancy Mitford needs a sources review. An editor has raised a couple of issues related to sourcing, to which I have responded, but it doesn't amount to a sources review. If you can find time for this I would be very grateful. Brianboulton (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of D'Oliveira affair

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article D'Oliveira affair you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 14:41, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Peel

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bobby Peel you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sahara4u -- Sahara4u (talk) 02:31, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Peel

The article Bobby Peel you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Bobby Peel for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sahara4u -- Sahara4u (talk) 02:51, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, promoted the article to a GA status. Regards, —Zia Khan 21:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bobby Peel

The article Bobby Peel you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bobby Peel for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sahara4u -- Sahara4u (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Ralph Richardson peer review

I've made the changes you suggest. In particular, if you can bear to skim through the article, I'd like to know if you think embedding the Radio/Audio/TV/Film stuff in the main text looks all right - no obvious seams. No rush whatever. Tim riley (talk) 11:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Profumo affair

Do you have time to drown your cricketing sorrows with something completely different? I've been working on the Profumo affair, a major political scandal of long ago. The peer review is now open, if you feel so inclined. Brianboulton (talk) 22:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Brief courtesy message to let you know that Profumo is now at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 17:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you with a bit of Profumo business, but a reviewer has questioned the use of a non-free image of Profumo in the article. This was to be expected. I have broadly stated my rationale for this in the FAC ( link here), but I would welcome input from other reviewers on this matter, if you can spare a moment. Brianboulton (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Sir Ralph again

After my most stimulating and comprehensive PR ever, I have Ralph Richardson up at FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Quasi-peer review request

Hi. I was wondering if you'd be able to take a look at Larry Doby, namely, if you could look at the 1947 section for me. To me, this section feels bloated, and while it's well-written and an important part of his career, it feels like it can be condensed, yet I'm not entirely sure what parts to take out. I'm planning to take this to FAC and am partway done with a top-to-bottom restructuring beforehand, but before I wrap that up I wanted to get another opinion on that section. Thanks, Wizardman 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for looking over that. As for your review request, I'll try to take a look at the article Sunday or Monday. I'd love to do it but I don't want to call dibs on it only to have to also abandon it halfway through, and my time is not what it used to be on this site. If I can't I'll at least try to do the other article you have at GAN since it's quite a bit shorter. Wizardman 00:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Belated FA congratulations

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Abe Waddington to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,310 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know.

Sorry this is late - I overlooked Waddington's elevation to the 1st XI of Wikipedia in January. Bencherlite^Talk 09:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

FAC

It occurs to me that as a native of that side of the Pennines you might like to look in at the FAC for the Stockton and Darlington Railway. I peer reviewed it and commented at FAC, but (surprisingly, I think) railway articles don't seem to get many people on board at PR/FAC, so the more the merrier if you're interested. Tim riley (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks quite interesting actually. I'll try to take a look this week. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edwin St Hill

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edwin St Hill you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 23:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gubby Allen

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gubby Allen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 00:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

St. Hill

Hello Sarastro, I have the death entry for the above if you should be interested in seeing it? Cassianto (talk) 21:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem, stand by for an email... Cassianto (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edwin St Hill

The article Edwin St Hill you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Edwin St Hill for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 08:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gubby Allen

The article Gubby Allen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gubby Allen for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 22:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm so pleased that Seabuckthorn has done the GA review. I know I said I'd do it, and so I would, but I'm glad I didn't have to spend time in the company of Sir George, one of those cricket panjandrums I find it hard to warm to. That said, it's a fine article and I applaud the promotion. You're having a good week, and quite right too – three GAs in as many days! That must be a record. Tim riley (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, the barnstar and your kind words. To be honest, Gubby, although objectionable, was not as objectionable as I'd expected! Sarastro1 (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of D'Oliveira affair

The article D'Oliveira affair you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:D'Oliveira affair for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 03:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Gubby Allen

"holding key positions in the Marylebone Cricket Club, which effectively ruled cricket at the time..." I think that's a bit too sweeping, given that Australia had - as founder members of the ICC along with England - the right to veto proposals put forward at the ICC. I suggest replacing "cricket" with "English cricket". JH (talk page) 09:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I started listening to TMS back when Freddie Brown was an expert summariser, and he made the later Fred Trueman seem understanding and compassionate in comparison. I've rarely formed such a strong dislike for anyone. In total contrast, the other expert summariser at the time - Norman Yardley - came across as a lovely man (possibly too nice to be a successful captain). JH (talk page) 10:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Edwin St Hill

Hi, congratulations on the GA. I have nominated the article for Did you know, which will hopefully result in the article appearing on the main page. The link is here. Thanks, Matty.007 18:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Gong

		The Original Barnstar
		For a hat trick of cricket GAs in three days. First class achievement. – Tim riley (talk) 14:53, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Edwin St Hill

The DYK project (nominate) 15:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

An award for you!

	The Don Bradman Award of Excellence
	For your exceptionally fine contributions to cricket on wikipedia! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:50, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for D'Oliveira affair

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

PR request

Hi Sarastro, can't wait for the next Yorkshire cricketer. I've put up Tjioeng Wanara for PR here, and would be much obliged if you could take a look. Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)