Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Douglas Jardine/archive1

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

The article was promoted by Karanacs 03:06, 16 June 2010 [1].

Douglas Jardine[edit]

Douglas Jardine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Sarastro1 (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it is currently a Good Article and has received a peer review. I feel it now meets the FA criteria. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Douglas Jardine was the captain of the England cricket team in the early 1930s. As the captain during the Bodyline series, he remains a very controversial figure but was still a very notable cricketer, as well as an interesting character. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content comments

  • Should give context about lack of exuberance, no celebration in the old days to explain why Jardine's jumping up and down re Bradman is of note?
  • Discuss Jardine ordering the players to refer to Bradman as "little bastard"? Important to convey the bad blood etc
  • Ditto for mentioning "Well bowled Harold" after hitting Woodfull in heart and the almost riot should be mentioned?
  • Should explain that in those days most bowlers were slow and bowled full; the non aficionado might not know this, that physicality was rare in those days, or how the new field setting came into it.
Field setting was not really new, it had been used before, including with some faster bowlers such as Frank Foster, George Hirst, Fred Root (although a bit more medium paced), Bill Voce (pre-bodyline I believe, but I may be wrong) and even Ted McDonald while playing for Lancashire. Although none of them were as fast as Larwood, and that field setting at that pace was unusual to say the least! And bang-it-in fast bowlers were not that rare in those days either. I think it was the combination which made it revolutionary and a just a bit dubious. Not too sure where I could make this point, though, without forcing it in. I've put a bit after the description of the Australian XI match but it may need more. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "When the first Test began, Jardine persisted with Bodyline tactics, even though Bradman did not play in the match" it might be good to say beforehand that they wanted to hamper all the Australians, not just Bradman because this way it seems like a surprise
  • Should the amateur-pro divide be touched on to explain how Allen and the Nawab disobeyed and the "I see his highness is a conscientious objector" lol
In this case, I don't think it was relevant. Allen and Pataudi disobeyed; Pataudi was dropped, Allen wasn't. Similarly, Larwood clashed with Jardine but survived, as did Bowes. And Jardine was quite tolerant of some of Larwood's excesses. I think his main concern was how useful the player was, not their social class. I think he disliked Freddie Brown quite a lot too. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just realised, this makes him sound a very socially enlightened sort of chap with regard to the professionals. He wasn't! But very few amateurs were in those days.--Sarastro1 (talk) 08:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you think Bradman's century in Melbourne should be mentioned, that people thought Bodyline had been tamed after that? The result of the first two Tests isn't actually made explicit and some thought that Bradman coming back and winning at the MCG meant that with him in the team, Bodyline could be dismantled
  • Larwood's foot is misleading; it didn't end his career; he recovered but was then excluded for political reasons
  • Would it be useful to explain who the second manager is; most books always say "The Eng manager Warner" and never mention the other guy, whoever he was
  • Mention fears that the controversy would cause a trade boycott per Bodyline. Bodyline transcended the scoreboard
Done: taken most of the trade bit direct from Bodyline article. Did the rest of the comments. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "A controversial figure among cricketers" - The public/pundits also didn't like him
In Australia maybe, and I think this is covered quite well, but he was popular with the public in England and the pundits had mixed views but didn't dislike him as such. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • First paragraph is a bit understated and doesn't really capture the feelings he fuelled, especially as Bodyline is stated without explaining the physical nature etc, or that Bodyline was new etc
Took a bit from Bodyline article. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "run out by Tate" explain a mix-up? Else people will think it is some WIndian named Tate?
  • Dropped after 83? Or only two Tests in the series??
Probably rested to look at someone else before Ashes tour, but it doesn't say this anywhere. He may have been injured. Or even dropped! --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He was also on the five-man selection committee for the tour" They only select during teh tour, not the original squad, correct?
  • "Jardine did not appear in first-class cricket in the 1929 season" Any reason?
None that I can find. Financial? Fed up with cricket after the tour? Who knows! --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that it helps (and it could for a few other things): "After this tour, Jardine did not play at all in 1929 for business reasons, and only nine matches in 1930." OrangeKnight (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. However, I think it is taken straight from the Douglas book in the main (it says as much) but does not reference anything else. I'm not sure how reliable the "business reasons" explanation would be, although it's probably correct, and I'm not sure how reliable an article like this on CricketArchive would be. I'm open to suggestions! --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Found a vague reference to business reasons in Le Quesne, so added it here. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • So JArdin'es first Test as captain was a draw? It is phrased rather tantalisingly
  • "England only played one Test match, India's first ever match" You mean their first Test rather than their first FC etc as a nation?
  • 974? explain phenomena, not just another world class player
  • Foster did slow leg theory, needs differentiating?
Foster was quite fast and drew complaints from the Australian players for hitting their inside legs at a brisk pace and generally knocking them about, but never by bowling short or at the man.--Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was not unusual for Oxford and Cambridge cricketers to wear similar caps while batting, as both Jardine and M.C.C. captain Percy Chapman did so on this tour, although it was slightly unorthodox to wear them while batting" repetition
All done except those mentioned above. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the main issue is not explaining Bodyline enough, how it contrasted from the status quo, as from just reading it, one doesn't get an impression of how it shook up the orthodoxy, especially with the incidents. It might be useful to include the thing about it being voted the biggest scandal ever, per the main article YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 03:43, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully it is a little more prominent now, but I didn't want this to just turn into a second article about bodyline so didn't go into too much detail. However, it was a little sparse on how controversial this was; hopefully it's better, but just let me know if it needs more. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll go have another look at the presentation YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 06:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources issues

  • I have fixed an unformatted link in the infobox
  • Cricinfo is a cited source (infobox and ref. 25) and should not, therefore be listed as an External link
  • Ref 47: "Fouglas" needs correcting
  • The Peebles book needs an ISBN
The edition I have doesn't seem to have an ISBN for some reason.--Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Readers Union is, or was, a book club rather than a publishing house, and evidently didn't bother with ISBNs on its reprints, so there's not much you can do. Brianboulton (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • General: the sources look OK, but I am concerned about a rather narrow range, and an over-reliance on the Douglas book. Of about 220 citations to book sources, 155 (70% of the total) are to Douglas. 45 are to Frith (that's all right), and a bare 20 to the other listed books. This looks like over-reliance on a single book. I know it's the only full-length biography, but much has been written about Jardine as a cricketer which I might have expected to find represented here, e.g. Bradman, Neville Cardus, etc. A history of Surrey CCC might also be an informative source. Brianboulton (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Other sources which I have access to do not go into enough detail about his life, but rather talk about his technique, personality or the bodyline series. Many of them tend to repeat the same points and give very little biographical information. Do you know of any other good sources? --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Jardine's life as a cricketer is what is notable about him. This should be the focus of the article, and should be covered from a range of angles. As to additional sources, I've mentioned the Surrey history - I'm sure there's more than one. There are several general histories of cricket covering the 1930s. Pelham Warner was a prolific writer - and England's manager on the bodyline tour; I'm sure he had plenty to say about Jardine. Bradman's autobiography Farewell to Cricket could be useful. There are the lives of cricketers such as Larwood, whose careers were greatly affected by Jardine's actions. Plenty of places to look, really. Brianboulton (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added some more sources, including Larwood biography, biographies of some Australian players, Fingleton's books on Bodyline, Warner's autobiography and a couple of others. Unable to locate a Surrey history at the moment. Also, Bradman's book does not really mention much about Jardine, except in general terms and mainly concentrates on bodyline series. As I've said above, I don't think this article should focus solely on bodyline unless directly related to Jardine, so I haven't used any of Bradman's stuff. I would appreciate any comments on if the sourcing is improved and what else may be needed.--Sarastro1 (talk) 20:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The additions to the sources are good. A couple of further suggestions: this BBC broadcast could be interesting (I don't have the software to play it); also, Jardine's ODNB entry might have useful information - I'll check it out when I'm next in the library. Brianboulton (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Later) You should definitely check out the ODNB entry. It has interesting information, e.g. about Jardine's degree class from Oxford, and the fact that he died leaving £71,000 (worth over £1¼ million today), and the textbook Cricket: How to Succeed that he wrote for the National Union of Teachers. If you have a library card you can access ODNB online. Also, a couple of points from the article:-
  • In the Early life section you describe Jardine as living with his aunt in St Andrews and attending school "nearby" in Newbury, Berks. They are hundreds of miles apart.
  • "Australian figures such as Alexander Hore-Ruthven..." He was by no means an Australian. Brianboulton (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the two points you raised. Great call on the ODNB, thanks. Added some of the info to the article. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Non-sources point

"Jardine's father-in-law was keen for him to pursue his law career but he instead continued as a bank clerk..." I need some convincing that Jardine's employment with the bank was in the role of a "bank clerk", a lowish-grade clerical profession unlikely to be occupied by an Oxford graduate who was a qualified solicitor and had the status of an England cricket captain. Please check out the sources. Brianboulton (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The source (Douglas) does say that he worked as a clerk. It is possible, as he was never financially wealthy, and Douglas mentions it twice. The author spoke to Jardine's daughters in writing the book. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very curious. Jardine may not have been independently wealthy - so why would he choose a low-paid job in a field in which he was evidently not qualified (he trained as a solicitor, not as a banker)? I've not read Douglas's book, but I suspect he is short on details, and uses the term "clerk" rather loosely; maybe Jardine worked in the bank's legal department, rather than as a cashier in a High Street branch? But that's guesswork - you can't go beyond your sources. Brianboulton (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I was a little hesitant but this article is so thorough it meets my interpretation of the standards. I found myself reading it and half and hour later was still engaged clicking on the links of links and images. I loved the bits about the crowd giving the guy a hard time. A few notes:

  • I also agree that the Douglas source is used a little much but what are you going to do? Some Google news archive searches or hitting the library databases could help but if one source has the info then one source has the info.
Some more sources added as mentioned above.--Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • More wikilinks are needed for cricket terms. I was able to assume what was going on (making the links provided that much more interesting) but I imagine those who don't follow sports at all would be lost.
Tried to link a few; but I could do with a few more specific examples of what needs linking. --Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just read through the first few paragraphs and it seems better after trying to dissect it. I noticed that every time I found something I wanted linked it was already done (century, Test, and so on). You kept within the linking standards and did not overlink later on in the article. Maybe it was my misunderstanding of the game and not the linking that was a concern.Cptnono (talk) 23:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutrality is good. I noticed that every time I thought it was getting a little pompous (like the guy?), "however" would be there. However, you might use "however" a bit much even though you did not exactly break WP:HOWEVER.
Removed some of the "howevers".--Sarastro1 (talk) 18:50, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, I feel like I have a good understanding of the guy. You are a little screwed with it being so in depth since that it is a long read there are many more opportunities for grammatical errors. Nothing jumped out, though. Nice work putting it all together.Cptnono (talk) 11:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - The comment directly above this one is 100% correct. The longer an article, the more things can be spotted; that goes double for someone like me who reviews line-by-line. That said, this is certainly an interesting read, and looks quite comprehensive in scope. Picked up the following items in what I read, which sadly doesn't include anything related to Bodyline:

  • "Best known for captaining the English team during the 1932-33 Ashes tour of Australia". The sentence continues for a little bit, but it's lacking one important thing: a subject. Is this meant to be "Jardine is best known", by chance?
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leg side is linked twice in one sentence, which is a bit of overkill.
I think it's leg stump and leg side in the same sentence, which are two different things, unless I'm missing where it is. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Must have read the links incorrectly. Sorry about that. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He joined the Territorial Army in the Second World War, most of which was spent in India." Currently reads like the majority of WWII was in India, which I doubt is the intention. Is it that Jardine mostly stayed in India?
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early life: "But his main sporting reputation came from cricket." Somewhere in the deep corners of my brain, I remember seeing that starting a sentence with "But" is not optimal. Maybe try "However" here? (a comma might be needed if this is done).
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Test cricketer: "but later cheered him his last fifty runs were scored in half an hour." Feels like a word is missing between "him" and "his".
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Their bowlers had enjoyed some success against England and possessed several fast bowlers who bowled with hostility." The bowlers possessed bowlers? I think the first one should more specifically refer to the team.
Reworded.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Appointment as captain: Little inconsistencly here regarding Bradman's first name; I see both Donald and Don. Honestly, I don't even think a first name needs to be provided after the first use, so that might be the best fix.
Fixed as suggested.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Picky, but there should be an apostrophe after The Times', like that. Don't want the fussy reviewers to notice that (yes, there are reviewers fussier than me).
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "claimed that the Jardine's appointment...". Here, "the" should be dropped, unless you wanted to go with "the appointment of Jardine".
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "showing himself to be a good in defence despite his lack of cricket in the past two seasons." Don't think "a" should be there.
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Typo lurking in here: "A notable innings was his 104 for The Rest to prevenet defeat against champion county Yorkshire."
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but it was some time before this ... were confirmed." Taking out the bit bracketed by commas, it appears as though "were" should be "was" to ensure the proper tense. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got to read through the Bodyline section and it was mostly good. I made a couple little copy-edits changes, and found the following couple items that I can't fix myself. If I spot anything else I'll post it later.
  • Beginning of the tour: "although bowlers had previously used both leg theory bowling, where bowlers bowled at our outside leg stump...". First, I don't understand where "both" is coming from, since leg theory is the only thing mentioned (is it two types of leg theory?). Second, what is "our" doing here?
  • Quote in Retirement: "I have neither the intention for the desire to play cricket against Australia this summer." Is "for" a typo, or is that correct as is? Need the book to know for sure, so I have no way to tell. Sounds funny, though. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Both done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Last one from me: in the quote at the end of Captaincy, it appears that an attribution is missing beforehand. Right now, it says "In fact", and then goes on to the quotation. Without "Werner said" or similar, it sounds more editorial than is intended. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 03:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I assume it is an honorary position. He did umpire one match according to CA, but not sure it's worth mentioning, and he was certainly president, according to Wisden.--Sarastro1 (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I peer-reviewed this in early May and greatly enjoyed it, although I know little about cricket. Now that others more well-versed in cricket lore have helped improve the content, I'm happy to support. Finetooth (talk) 22:00, 15 June 2010 (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_article_candidates/Douglas_Jardine/archive1&oldid=1089085180"