Wikipedia:Peer review/Percy Fender/archive1

Percy Fender

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Fender was one of the more interesting characters around in cricket before the Second World War. I'm hoping to take this to FAC at some point in the new year. As usual, any prose comments but particularly anything impenetrable to non-cricketers. I'm still hoping to cut the article back by 500 words or thereabouts, so please let me know of anything that really doesn't need to be there. Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 15:10, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

 Doing... The least I can do, after your help on Larwood. I can't promise a line-by-line commentary, but I may be able to help you lose the 500 or so words to which you refer above. And it may be a day or two before I get there (trouble at t'mill). Brianboulton (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

As a starter I've looked at the lead, which I believe can be reduced by removing minor details and repeated information, and by some careful rephrasing. The current lead has 411 words; my suggested version (below) has 318:

Percy George Herbert Fender (22 August 1892 in Balham, London – 15 June 1985 in Exeter, Devon) was an English cricketer who played 13 Tests and was captain of Surrey between 1921 and 1931. An all-rounder, he was a middle order batsman who bowled mainly leg spin, and completed the cricketer's double seven times. Noted as a belligerent batsman, in 1921 he hit the fastest recorded first-class century, reaching three figures in 35 minutes which remains a record in 2012. On the basis of his Surrey captaincy, contemporaries judged him the best captain in England.

As early as 1914 Fender was named one of Wisden's Cricketers of the Year. After war service in the Royal Flying Corps he re-established himself in the Surrey team and became captain in 1921. His captaincy inspired a team which lacked effective bowlers to challenge strongly for the County Championship over the course of several seasons. Besides his forceful though occasionally controversial leadership, Fender was an effective performer with bat and ball, although he lacked support as a bowler. From 1921, he played occasionally for England but was never particularly successful in Tests. Despite press promptings, he was never appointed captain of England, and following a clash with the highly-influential Lord Harris in 1924, his England career was effectively ended. Further disagreements between Fender and the Surrey committee over his approach and tactics led the county to replace him as captain in 1932 and to end his career in 1935.

A very recognisable figure, Fender was popular with his team and with supporters. Cartoonists enjoyed caricaturing his distinctive appearance, but he was also well known outside cricket for his appearances and activities in society. In addition to his cricket career, Fender worked in the wine trade, had a successful career in journalism, and wrote several well-received books on cricket tours. He worked well into the 1970s, even after going blind. He died in 1985.

You may think this is too savage a cut, but I think it serves the purpose of the lead; brief and to the point, and keep the details in the main article. It's entirely up to you what you do with this suggestion! Brianboulton (talk) 19:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

No, that looks pretty good to me, and I have adopted your wording with a little tweak to make it clear he played Tests for England. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Early years

I have tweaked the prose a bit, nothing major. If you want to cut you could generalise Fender's aptitude for sports rather than listing all those he was good at. One question: he was born in Surrey, went to school first in Surrey then in London. So why was he watching Sussex at Hove, Eastbourne etc? Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Cut the sports list. On the Sussex issue, he often stayed with his grandparents who lived in Brighton, which is where his qualification came from. It mentioned this in the next section, but I've added a mention here too to clear it up. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

PS: I suggest you ignore the dab signal on High Master. There is no other useful link that explains what the term means. If it really bothers you, I'll create a stub: High Master (academic) that we can pipelink to. Brianboulton (talk) 16:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

That may be a good idea. As I'm a little clueless on these matters, I'd be obliged if you could handle that one. It is guaranteed that someone would complain at FAC! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Done, and put the pipelink in place. What's the betting that some creep will decide to delete the article as "lacking content"? Wait and see. Brianboulton (talk) 15:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Sussex career

I've done minor tweaks again.

• Date for his debut match v Notts?
• Suggested trim: Cut out what's between "...end of season" and "In total, he scored...". Nothing of great interest there.

Brianboulton (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Done both of these; for the latter, I salvaged the part about bowling medium pace as he changed his style later and would like to make the distinction. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Move to Surrey

• "To facilitate this..." - what is "this"?

• Sorted. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• "funds and lyrics" is a mismatched pair that doesn't work. A bit more explanation is necessary. "Some musical shows" is very vague.

• I've tried re-wording. The source was a little vague too, but I'll dig a bit. Is this any better? Sarastro1 (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• "By the end of the 1914 season, Fender had both convinced his father that he could successfully pursue a career in county cricket, and improved as a cricketer to the point where he was chosen as one of Wisden's Cricketers of the Year." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Cricketers of the Year are announced the following spring, so both of these things could not have been apparent at the end of the 1914 season. In any event, linking unrelated events like this together leads to awkward prose. Suggest: "By the end of the 1914 season, Fender had convinced his father that he could successfully combine cricket and business. His improvement as a cricketer was ercognised when was chosen as one of Wisden's Cricketers of the Year for 1914."

• Adopted this. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• I would trim the last couple of sentences. Suggest: "The season ended prematurely because of th outbreak of war in August 1914. Surrey had established a commanding lead in the County Championship table; as their nearest challengers had no objection, the MCC declared them as county champions".

• Adopted your wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Career in wartime

• Minor tweaks only - no real scope for serious trimming though I've managed a bit. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

• Much appreciated. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Resuming:

Appointment as Surrey captain

• Old review chestnut: do captains "win" matches, or do they lead sides to victory?

• Sorted, although you would think I'd know better by now! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• "His captaincy was very influential: I think, in this context, it's "effective" rather than "influential" (who was it influencing?)

• Fixed. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• "in one of the last games of the season" (second para): clarify that you mean 1920, having apparently moved on from there in the previous paragraph. Incidentally, the lead dates Fender's fast century to 1921, while Wisden says 1920.

• Oops. The lead is wrong, courtesy of yours truly! I've clarified 1920, which the whole paragraph should be about as that was the year of the record. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• The final paragraph obviously relates to 1920, butv again this needs to be clarified.

• See above, the whole thing should be 1920, as he scored the century in 1920. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• Up to you, but I don't like "Johnny" (not encyclopedic"

• Tend to agree: went for JWHT, and also switched "Reggie" for "Reginald". Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Otherwise I have done a bit of light ce and trimming. Brianboulton (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Test match cricketer

• The controversy between Tennyson and Armstrong (something to to with the declaration rules, I think) had nothing to do with Fender, and you could save a little text by omitting this info.

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• "Fender's best batting came for teams other than Surrey, but Wisden described his fielding as "dazzling". Two unrelated facts should not be linked by "but".

• I've added that it was Wisden that made the batting comment, and reworded slightly. The "but" is still there, but should hopefully work now. Hopefully. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Minor prose trims. Continuing... Brianboulton (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

More

Peak

• What office did Harris then hold, that entitled him to decide on players' regisrations and throw his weight around generally? MCC committee menber?

• All round big cheese. Added a sentence. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Is there a "cricket terminology" link that will help readers to understand "matting wickets"?

• Not really. Rather than adding to the mess that is the cricket glossary article, I've added a note for the moment. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The usual minor prose tweaks, saved a couple of dozen words. No further suggestions.

Controversy

• Possible sentence for the chop: "Further publicity came his way which may have soured his relationship with Lord's when his engagement was leaked by the press during the second Test." Not obvious why this would have upset Lord's, and not worth time explaining.

• Agreed and cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Possibly misplaced sentence: "In the following seasons, they dropped steadily and by 1929 were tenth." I got a bit muddled when, immediately afterwards, you jumped back to 1926. Perhaps the sentence could be deferred, or even left out?

• Left it out as the previous sentence makes much the same point, and added a comment for 1929. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• This observation could be relegated to a footnote: " In his survey of England cricket captains, Alan Gibson suggests that Fender and Carr were the only two realistic candidates by that time—other county captains either lacked the skill to play Tests or had already been tried and discarded."

• I think, if this is to be kept in (and I think it should be for the moment), it is better in the main body. It would not really add anything as a note, and sort of explain the narrative a little. If you are not convinced, I'd be easier to persuade that the comment should not be there at all. But for the moment, I'd prefer it to remain. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Late 1920s

• Gibson should have done his homework better. In 5 tests against the 1920-21 Australians, Fender scored 198 runs at 24.75 and took 14 wickets at 37.28. In his remaining Tests, all against South Africa, he scored 182 at 15.17 and took 15 wickets at 44.2. So his batting and bowling figures against the all conquering Australians were considerably better than those against the (then) feeble South Africans. In the circumstances, since Gibson's comment is plainly inaccurate, I'd advise dropping it.

• Regretfully agree (I'm very fond of Gibson!) and removed. Gibson is not the only one who should have done his homework better! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments on final sections to follow

Last instalment !

Involvement with Bradman and Bodyline

• Minor copyediting - some text rearrangement towards the end

Resignation and retirement

• Who, prior to the 1936 season, suggested to Fender that he should play fewer games?

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Batting, bowling and fielding

• A pity the photograph tells us so little about Fender's batting style. He might as well have been chopping wood.

• I agree, but we're a bit stuck. There is a marvellous photograph here and a few more here, but I cannot find a date or place of first publication, although I suspect some may be PD. And there is no chance of a fair-use image. However, I should be able to add a caricature of him. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I'm not sure that 24 runs in an over is special enough to be worth a mention, particularly for today's readers. 30+, yes.

• Cut. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Er, I don't believe for a moment he hit the ball "132 yards out of the Oval". That would be a hit of around 300 yards. He may have hit the ball out of the ground, a distance of 132 yards from wicket to landing place. Needs clarifying.

• That was pretty much what the source said, but I think it means 132 yards, which took it out of the ground. I simply cut "out of the Oval". Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I don't think it's possible for him to "catch balls some distance from him". I kind of know what you mean, but I think it needs rephrasing. Perhaps: He could move quixkly to catch balls hit some distance from him".

• Went for your wording. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Captaincy

• I dislike "possibly rooted in truth", unless it's a quote, (according to...)
• The last paragraph, apart from the final few words, is not about Fender's captaincy, and should be relocated in the article.

• Moved this to previous section. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• In general, I feel that this section could be cut. It repeats information (e.g. about Fender's early declaration tactics) already covered, likewise amateur and professional gates (which were really part of his battles with the establishment rather than his captaincy).

• I've taken out some of the repetition, but I think most of the section needs to remain (including one or two sort-of-repeated facts) to give a picture of his overall approach to leadership. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Cricket journalism

• It should be possible to give the titles and publication details of Fender's five books, perhaps in a listing à la Cardus, though obviosly not so long

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I cut the bit about his bookd being valuable, as I wasn't sure of the relevance. You might decide to reinstate.Checking with ABE Books, I see that he is the author of The ABC of Cricket and was a contributing author to The Lonsdale Library Volume VI. The Game Of Cricket. You may wish to mention these.

• No problem. Mentioned the first, but haven't added anything of which he was not the main author. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Personal life

• You mention "his father's stationery firm"; earlier, Fender senior is descibed as "the director of a firm of stationers" and then there is mention of "the firm of paper manufacturers and stationers of which his father was managing director". We need to be clear: did Robert Fender own the business, or was he merely a senior employee? If the latter, it shouln't be described as "his father's stationery firm".

• The sources say director. I'm not sure I see a problem, even if he was an employee. If he had worked in, say, the same factory that his father was a machinist, I think it would be OK to say "his father's factory" without necessarily implying ownership. And the sources are vague enough that I am not too sure of the best way to word it otherwise. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• It's a bit disconcerting, after reading right through the article, to find oneself back in Fender's early life. I don't think we need reprise his woking for his father's firm; I'd begin the section at: "[Fender] worked for his father up until..."

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Likewise I would transfer the last two paragraphs of this section into the earlier "Retirement" section, which more or less abandoned Fender in 1936 and left readers wondering until now what he did next.. It is easier for the reader if you keep to the main chronology of his life.

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

That more or less finishes my review. During its course we have lopped off about 350 words, with maybe a few more to follow. It's still a long article, but that's mainly because Fender was an interesting cricketer; the text is, happily, not cluttered by yards of match-by-match performance accounts, as used at one time to be the case. I think a little further work will quickly render it FAC-worthy; if you want me to take a final look, please ping my talk. Brianboulton (talk) 19:23, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Much obliged for your help and edits. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)