Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Arthur Gilligan/archive1

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

Addressed comments from Crisco 1492[edit]

  • "mainly for Cambridge University and Sussex and captained the latter team between 1922 and 1929." - Feels like you should split this sentence, perhaps with a semi-colon, after Sussex
  • A semi-colon would leave a bit of a fragment. I've added a comma to try to avoid the and...and. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • he held several important positions in cricket, including that of England selector and president of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), and became a journalist. - A little heavy on the "and"s
  • Gilligan first played cricket for Dulwich College before the First World War - Perhaps "began his cricket career with Dulwich, to avoid first ... First?
  • Just cut the first first as he played cricket before this and "began" suggests that this was his first team. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Following a slow start to his county career, - You just mentioned he was in county cricket, so is "to ... career" redundant?
  • I don't think so; there is a distinction between his county career and university career, and removing this would leave it ambiguous. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • He became a writer, journalist and respected cricket commentator in later years, while maintaining his connections with Sussex. - This feels redundant to the last clause of the above paragraph (journalist)
  • Not quite sure what you mean here, but cut the mention of journalist from the first paragraph. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • He died in 1976, aged 81. - Didn't you give his death date already, above?
  • Personally, I think it reads better with the date than without. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The family had a strong connection with Sussex; Gilligan followed Sussex County Cricket Club as a child - which Gilligan? Also, two semi-colons in a row.
  • Fixed semi-colon, but I don't think we need to specify which Gilligan. The whole article is about the same chap, and Arthur is the subject of the previous two sentences. "Arthur Gilligan" is cumbersome here, and "Arthur" seems out of place. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lord's - Link?
  • Done. It was linked later by mistake. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any more about his military career? Was he commissioned as a captain, or work his way through the ranks?
  • I'm afraid that's all the sources have. I'd imagine he was commissioned, but nothing says so. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gilligan faced little competition for his place in the team and although he took 32 wickets at an average of under 27 in Cambridge matches, critics considered this a poor return. - I don't see the relation which requires the use of "and". Also, if critics considered it a poor return despite the scores, that implies that other may think it good
  • The "and" really is there to show that he was able to keep his place despite not performing as there was no competition. The critics consideration is an important distinction to make as (particularly today) an average of 27 is statistically not too bad, and looks like a good performance. But at the time, it was not as good as it may look now. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, I tried rephrasing to "and took 32 wickets at an average of under 27 in Cambridge matches, which critics considered a poor return." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • the University Match - Big or small t? The article is at "The University Match", suggesting it is part of the proper title.
  • WIthout getting into the whole Beatles thing (!), small t is standard in cricket for this match within a sentence. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • festival game - Link?
  • joined a General Produce Merchants - Why is GMP capitalised? Also, perhaps Subsequently, Gilligan left Cambridge and joined Gilbert Kimpton & Co., a G(g?)eneral P(p?)roduce M(m?)erchants in London in which his father was a senior partner (get rid of some commas)
  • Not sure why I capitalised it. Fixed now, and adopted your wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps I'm misreading this, but did he work at Kimpton and Co. while playing for Sussex?
  • Yes; as an amateur, he had a "proper" job outside of cricket. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, perhaps clarify that he stayed with the company for (however long). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm afraid that the sources do not indicate this either. It's a throwaway line in one source. Amateur cricketers' other careers tend to receive little coverage unless they have a full-length (and lengthy) biography. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • in all first-class games - Those he played, or all in total?
  • Not quite sure what you mean. The sentence gives his personal record, so it is those he played. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the event - Which event? Is this a BrE term?
  • BrEng thing, but reworded to avoid confusion. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • in consecutive matches, Gilligan and Tate dismissed the sides for 53 and 41 respectively. - Is this sentence related to the preceding one enough to warrant a semi-colon?
  • Yes. Clarified a bit, but it was these two strongest teams which were dismissed cheaply. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Oval - Link?
  • by a delivery from Frederick Pearson - You follow this with a footnote directly contradicting the statement. At the very least, Pearson doesn't need to be linked in that footnote.
  • The sources do not agree, but the main contemporary ones go for Pearson, who I think is the more likely culprit. However, I think it is worth pointing out the disagreement. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, reminds me of my reasoning for including the official birthdate of Sudirman in the lede with other suggestions as a footnote. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Skipping forward...

  • on the grounds of her husband's infidelity - With whom, if available? Many, few?
  • Gilligan's two brothers, Frank and Harold, also played first-class cricket. - Not really related to marriages, perhaps as a note above (in the early life section)?
  • Cut this as the earlier section makes the same point. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Following his retirement from cricket in 1932, Gilligan began to work in journalism. He wrote several cricket books, including a history of Sussex cricket in 1932 - 1932 ... 1932
  • "When" tag added
  • During the Second World War, Gilligan served in the Royal Air Force as a welfare officer; he was initially a pilot officer but later achieved the rank of squadron leader. - What's this doing here, after you've already discussed the 1950s?
  • I think this may be the best place to put it. There's not really enough on his journalism to warrant going through it chronologically, and it spanned the war. So I think it's better to do journalism then military, instead of chronological. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • the English golf union - Formal name?
  • In 1971, a stand named after Gilligan was opened at Hove Cricket Ground, but this was demolished in 2010 as part of a ground redevelopment - Ground ... ground.
  • I copy edited, be sure to double check. I'll try and tackle the rest of this article tomorrow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most changes above look good, continuing:

  • four for 12 - Isn't it standard per WP:NUMERAL to have 4 for 12?
  • I know opinion is divided on this one; there is another fine cricket article now at FAC which follows this convention. However, I prefer the distinction for two reasons; it separates two different quantities (runs and wickets), and more importantly, this is the format followed by Wisden Cricketers' Almanack, which is the gold standard of cricket writing. See here for one such example. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • he was dismissed as naive and easy-going on the field. - By whom? Players or critics?
  • his captaincy lacked tactical sophistication - it did (objectively) or it was thought to (by critics)?
  • Both really. He was outmanoeuvred by a very sharp opposition captain. And I'd really like to avoid any more critics in this paragraph! Sarastro1 (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Appearing in fewer games, he scored 542 runs at 15.05, but bowling far less frequently that in previous seasons, he took just eight wickets. - This feels like it needs rewriting. Perhaps "Appearing in fewer games and bowling far less frequently than in previous seasons, he scored 542 runs at 15.05 and took only eight wickets."
  • Harold also took over as captain of an MCC team which toured New Zealand in the winter of 1929–30 when Gilligan withdrew from the tour owing to illness. - Is "from the tour" necessary?
  • particularly against fast bowling. - Against fast bowling or bowlers? (maybe a BrE difference)
  • A couple of the paragraphs look like they could be split, but that seems to be a personal preference. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let me know if there is anything which is really bad. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only one that really sticks out is the brief overview of his career at the end of #Remaining cricket career — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/Arthur_Gilligan/archive1&oldid=524869747"