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 Dabomb87 21:55, 27 January 2010 [1].

---

List of international cricket centuries by Donald Bradman[edit]

Nominator(s): ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 07:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Donald Bradman/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Starting off the new year with another centuries list. I think the legend deserves to have a list of his own ;) As always, all comments and suggestions would be most welcome. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 07:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments yeah, not sure you could have made a better choice of subject for these kinds of list, even if he wasn't the most prolific centurion, his efforts certainly deserve this kind of content fork. Hate that [N 1] by Test cricket. I'm sure our community could survive waiting until the end of the sentence before reading Note 1. Done: Moved to end of sentence. "20 year" hyphenate, and to be picky, from 1928 to 1948 is actually 21 years. And did he bat internationally during the Second World War? Removed "20 year" I'll check that and mention it. Done: Added part about the break from cricket. "in just" is a bit POV. Done: "just" removed. "These centuries also enabled him to be the fastest to reach 2000..." not necessarily true. He could have played hundreds of mediocre innings. I know he didn't but you get my point...? This may not be the place to discuss total runs scored... You mean drop the part about being fastest to 2000, 3000 etc? Not necessarily, it's a personal opinion, I'd rather hear about his significant centuries than being fastest to 3000 runs... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] Yes, I see your point now, and I have to agree. I've removed that part, since it's not only his centuries that took him there. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 11:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] " He is also the record holder for the highest number of triple centuries (2), a feat later matched by Virender Sehwag and Brian Lara" - so he's the joint-record holder then? Done: Rephrased that. "Making his first triple century (334 against England in the 1930 Ashes), Bradman scored 309 runs on 11 July 1930, which remains as the highest amount of runs scored by a single batsman in one day.[15]" - for me this reads a shade confusing for our non-cricketing types. Perhaps a rephrase to say he scored 309 of 334 in a single day? Done: How is it now? "to victory against England with 270 runs" - by 270 runs? 270 is his own score. If we say "by" it would sound like Australia won by 270 runs, no? Of course, my mistake. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] Score doesn't sort correctly for me. I always seem to have problems with sorting :P Will work on it. Done: Sorting templates added. "cricket were initiated much later" - perhaps just state that he didn't play ODI/T20. Done: Changed. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] Thanks. I've made some changes, and will fix the sorting and career details in a few hours. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 01:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] That's done now. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 08:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support

• "19 of his centuries were made against England, which remains the world record for the highest number of centuries against a single team": per MOS:NUM, "Numbers that begin a sentence are spelled out, since using figures risks the period being read as a decimal point or abbreviation mark".

• Done

• The above goes for "5393 of his 6996 Test runs came from these 29 centuries", although MOS:NUM also rules out spelling out 5393, so I'd recommend rewriting the sentence.

• Done

• Something about Bradman's captaincy should be mentioned in the lead. A great deal has been written on the man, and I'm sure someone has commented on how the captaincy affected his batting (he averaged about 3runs more as skipper, although that's not a huge difference considering his average when not captain was 98.69).

• Done

• The lead is left slightly open, it feels like it needs something to round it off. How about mentioning his retirement?

• Done: I've changed the lead quite a bit as well, and would appreciate your views on that.

In addition to Rambling Man's points above, I've done some copy editing myself. Everything else seems fine. The sources seem ok (reliable and consistently formatted); alt text is present; the table is sortable and easy to use. If these issues can be sorted, I think I'll be able to support the article. Nev1 (talk) 00:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your comments and copy edit. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 15:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The only remaining issue is that I'd like to see something on how the captaincy effected Bradman's batting, aside from the raw stats that he scored 14 centuries as skipper. However, it's not a significant issue and doesn't really change the comprehensiveness of the article, so I'm switching to support. Nev1 (talk) 15:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Most books think that Bradman was a lesser after the war, but on the other hand, Bradman also had to put up with Bodyline in his earlier years. The stats can also be altered by a few sticky wickets so it might not be all that indicative. On another note, most historians also regard the 1930s as being somewhat weak on the bowling front, so averages might not equate with ability at the time YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I didn't add that since I thought it would look more like a batting analysis than a lead for a centuries list. I added the normal average since I thought it would show his rate of scoring, or how often he scored centuries. If this information is really needed, I can add it. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 12:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

• "in the 1936/37 season". I'm pretty sure the Manual of Style says somewhere that slashes like this one shouldn't be used in prose. Usually en dashes are used for seasons in other articles I've seen.

• Done: Hmm... I'll remember that.

• "and scored 14 of his centuries as captain of the Australian side," Punctuation switch needed at the end of this part.

• Done: Stupid mistake.

• "In fact, he would have retired with an average of 100 had he scored four more runs in his final innings." Don't believe the first two words are needed. While they may be intended to show that a given fact is surprising, most of the time it's better to just let the fact speak for itself. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: Thanks for your suggestions. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 03:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – The cricket project has got itself another winner here, on a subject who truly deserves it. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Can you also add that the 334 was also the highest Test score at the time (a record that lasted near three years)? I think the list is otherwise comprehensive. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 04:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: Thanks, I had missed that. Chamal ^talk _{stealth mode} 07:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, could you reword "In the same series, he went on to score one century, two double centuries and a triple century, accumulating 974 runs in 7 innings" to something like "...he also scored a century and two double centuries....accumulating 974..."; it currently reads a bit like the century, two doubles and the triple followed the original triple, although the total says that's not the case. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 17:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: I have reworded it to make it clearer, although not in the way you suggested. What do you think? ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 14:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Comments have been addressed. I do think Mattinbgn's comment on the name is valid, but it's not (IMO) important enough to hold up this list. –SpacemanSpiff 18:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

• You state "Bradman only played international Test cricket matches and not One Day Internationals and Twenty20 Internationals, which were not played by that time." To me, this indicates these had previously been played but weren't any longer, should the 'by' be changed to 'at' maybe? Otherwise, it all looks good!

• Done

• ''"He is also the joint record holder for the highest number of triple centuries (2) with Virender Sehwag and Brian Lara." Per WP:MOSNUM, should the (2) be (two)? Similarly with the rest of the numbers under ten that you use throughout the article.

• Done

Other than those two issues, it looks great, and it'll be good to see such a worthy recipient of FL! Good work. Harrias (talk) 10:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Both fixed, and thanks. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 14:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, thanks for the quick fixes, and as I said above, a very worthy article about a very worthy subject. Harrias (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Great work. However, wouldn't a more appropriate title for this list be List of Test cricket centuries by Donald Bradman? I understand why you have used the title you have (consistency with List of international cricket centuries by Sachin Tendulkar et al) but it rings of false inclusiveness and anachronism if you ask me. International cricket was Test cricket prior to 1970 and sure enough the list provided here only includes Test centuries. The name isn't a deal-breaker by any means but it just rings false with me. Once again, great work with the list. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 20:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• As you said, I named the article that way to be consistent with the already existing lists. I don't have a problem with renaming it if others feel the same way, or keeping it as it is. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 11:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I said above, the name is not a deal-breaker, the list is certainly featured quality. Personally I would support a name change, others may feel differently. Perhaps others at WT:CRIC may have an opinion. If the name is the only thing holding this up, please don't worry about it. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 08:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support: — Thought this may have passed by now. Great work nonetheless. Aaroncrick (talk) 12:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The lede needs a copyedit before it reaches the requirements for featured content. The following particularly struck me:

• Australian cricketer Sir Donald Bradman, often called the greatest batsman of all time,[2][3][4] scored twenty-nine Test cricket centuries during his international career which lasted from 1928 to 1948.[N 1] However, his cricketing career was interrupted from 1941 to 1946 due to the outbreak of World War II, followed by poor health.[5] I think it would be better to break the first sentence after "career" and then continue "It lasted from 1928 to 1948 with an interruption from X to Y due to a combination of World War II and and ill health."
• The "X to Y" above is because I'm not sure you picked the right dates. Australian first class cricket was suspended before the start of the 1940-41. Looking at History_of_the_Australian_cricket_team#The_1930s, I would be surprised if a tour wasn't initially scheduled either for 39-40 (possibly a vist by South Africa though India and NZ were theoretically available too) or more likely 40-41 (which would fit with a 4-year schedule for a visit by England).

• The provided ref clearly says "... on 3 September World War Two broke out. It was decided that cricket would continue for purposes of morale", mentions a 1st class double century in 1940, and also says that he enlisted after the surrender of France (25 June). History_of_the_Australian_cricket_team#The_1930s is completely unreferenced, so we can hardly rely on that can we? I had mentioned the year as 1941, I have fixed that.

• He assumed the captaincy in the 1936–1937 season,[6] and scored fourteen of his centuries as captain of the Australian side. Better: "He became captain of Australia during the 1936-1937 season and scored fourteen of his test centuries as captain." Answers the question "captaincy of what?"

• Reworded

• Bradman holds the world record for the most double centuries scored by a single batsman, with twelve to his name. Better "Bradman's total of twelve double centuries is a world record.
• He is also the joint record holder for the highest number of triple centuries (two) with Virender Sehwag and Brian Lara.[9] Again I prefer Bradman was the first of just three batsmen to have twice scored triple centuries in test matches. The others are Virender Sehwag and Brian Lara."

• Reworded

• Nineteen of his centuries were made against England, which remains the world record for the highest number of centuries against a single team. "How about "His total of 19 centuries against England remains the record against any one (test? international? first class?) side."

• Reworded

• It was also the highest individual test score at the time, and remained so until being surpassed by Wally Hammond in 1933.[12] better "It was the highest individual test score until Wally Hammond score 3xx in 1933."

• Reworded

• In the same series, he went on to score one century and two double centuries as well, I prefer "Bradman also scored two double and one single century that series,"

• Not done, since to me this makes it seem like his 974 runs (mentioned following this phrase) came only from those.

• And one unrelated point. Shouldn't the South African flag be the old one as he never played against the post-apartheid side?--Peter cohen (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed
• Thanks for your suggestions. I have changed the article somewhat, but I haven't done most of the rewordings exactly as suggested. Since the lead is basically a bunch of scores, I'd prefer not to have short sentences so that it wouldn't look like a bunch of statistics thrown together. Anyway, I will take a look at the factual problems and then try to reword the sentences more suitably as soon as possible. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 17:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tour by England in 1940-41 did exist before it was cancelled. There was still some first-class cricket in 1940-41 and maybe the year after as well. I don't have the book with me, but Military career of Keith Miller, Ray Lindwall, Arthur Morris, Bill O'Reilly and so forth will have sourced details of some matches in 1941... I'm pretty sure they kept on playing until Pearl Harbor YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworded the article some and corrected the flag. However, the rewordings are not exactly as suggested, due to the reason I've given above. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 15:09, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. support I still think the use of "as well" is not the superb prose expected in featured content. How about In the same series, he went on to score a further century and two more double centuries...? The triple century technically falls into both those categories at least e.g. when compiling a list of his centuries.

--Peter cohen (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds better to me too. Changed as suggested. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 16:07, 27 January 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.