Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Bob Willis/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Bob Willis[edit]

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Bob Willis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Lugnuts (talk), Zia Khan 16:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, I've another nomination open at FLC which has three supports, so I think there wouldn't be a problem with this one. This list was created by User:Lugnuts, so gets a co-nomination here (This is his first FLC, if I'm not wrong). I mainly worked on the lead portion of the list. I hereby invite all the reviewers for comments/suggestions. Regards, Zia Khan 16:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, this is my first ever FLC. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 17:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from —Vensatry (Ping me)
Commenting on lede
  • former right-arm fast bowler cricketer
  • "As of" technique needed for 41 bowlers taking 15 fifers
  • Ref missing for the Ian Botham quote
  • Wisden Cricketers' Almanack linked twice in the lead
  • You need not repeat Ashes series against Australia everytime.
  • Wisden Cricketers' Almanack in 2002[10] – Ref. should come after punctuation
  • at the Old Trafford
  • He never took a ten wickets in a match
  • You say "8 wickets for 43 runs", "nine wickets for 92 runs" and "four wickets for 11 runs"
  • "at the same ground" which ground?
  • The last but one sentence of the second para seems too long and getting into too much detail.
  • "Willis has took three of his five-wicket hauls at Headingley" – grammar fail
  • Consider rephrasing the lede image's caption since he has retired.

—Vensatry (Ping me) 08:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments

  • The caption for the ground's image should name the ground
  • Headingley –> Headingley Stadium in the table as Headingley is the name of a locality
  • Date for 13th entry is 16 Jul 1981

—Vensatry (Ping me) 16:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done. Thanks for the review. Zia Khan 16:43, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • There is a inconsistency in the way Headingley Stadium is referred.
  • Lord's ---> Lord's Cricket Ground
  • WACA ---> WACA Ground
  • The section heading for the fifers section should be clearer. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 13:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
*Comments from Crisco 1492
  • a former right-arm fast bowler, represented the England cricket team in 90 Tests between 1971 and 1984. - Do you really need "former" here? I'm assuming that, if Willis were to try and bowl now, he would still use a similar style. That he is not playing anymore is clear from the end of your sentence.
  • as of 2013 - should use an {{as of}} template. Also, why not include the month?
  • These statistics do not change rapidly, so no need to include month.
  • Corrected. 4th Test of the series was played in January 1971. Zia Khan
  • eight wickets for 43 runs - per WP:NUMERAL avoid mixing and matching different number formats
  • These are not comparative figures since wickets and runs are different things, so I think I'm correct?? Zia Khan 18:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cats and dogs are different things too, but that's used as an example. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand your point, but this is not the case here. You are comparing the quantity of cats and dogs there, but in cricket "four wickets for 20 runs" is a totally different from "took 3 wickets and scored 129 runs". Hope you got my point. Zia Khan 23:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps another individual from a cricket background would care to comment? I'm not having you change "for" to "and". I'm just asking you to ensure that we don't end up with mix-and-match numbers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think these things should be discussed at their corresponding talk pages. Zia Khan 19:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, see below. Zia Khan 19:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • nine wickets for 92 runs - again

Comment regarding 4 for eleven (&c) I'm reasonably ambivalent to this, but cricket has its own way of doing things, and yes, "4 cats and 3 dogs" vs "4 days and seven hedgehogs" etc. For me, in cricket matches I've watched, been involved in, even scored for, I would always see runs and wickets in numerical format. It may not be the way to interpret WP:MOS but I would always use 4 for 7, 3 for 121, etc (or if you're Australian, 103 for 2, 44 for 3 etc.....) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Wickets and runs now switched to numerical format. Zia Khan 19:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_international_cricket_five-wicket_hauls_by_Bob_Willis/archive1&oldid=1090670437"