Talk:The Boat Race 1841/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 21:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems old enough for me to be interested. I'll probably have a potter around the newspaper archives to see whether there's anything interesting before I review fully. Harrias ^talk 21:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few things from BNA

This article offers a bit about "discussions" regarding when the race would be, and fair bit about the boats, and mentions that Oxford also rowed the route a few times in advance.
Added a bit from this. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A bit about the betting here. Harrias ^talk 09:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, more interesting was the "agreement" to stop racing if a steamer overtook the crews.... The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A not very revealing piece about the race. (Which lists the winning margin as 6 lengths, so it might not be brilliant reliable!)
Taken a bit or two. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This suggests that Oxford arrived in London and started training on the route before Cambridge, albeit without their full crew; also has a decent description of the race.
The newspapers that I've read all suggest there was only one umpire and a starter; Mr Garnett as the umpire, and Mr Searle junior as the starter.
What can I say? The written history of the event includes the others... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Might be worth clarifying it was in London.
Added. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"The 5th Boat Race ... It was the fourth of the University Boat Races..." Is this just a mistake, or am I missing something?
Ah, the fourth to be contested in London. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"..in a time of 32 minutes and 3 seconds." Should be 30 seconds.
Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"..who also saw two pairs of brothers rowing for them." This looks like it has just been stuck on the end; it doesn't really flow with the sentence it completes.
Tweaked... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Background

"having won previous year's race" – Missing "the".
Added "the". The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a suitable article we can link to for "length"?
Not really, it's the length of a boat, which is variable. What actually happened back then was that the winning distance was calculated by taking the winning margin in seconds and dividing by three to get boat lengths. Very unscientific... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crews

The abbreviations seem a bit odd: why include Richard Bethell's first name, but only abbreviate John Matthew Ridley in the table? Is "Ed. Vaughan Richards" an honorific, or just short for Edward? Similar with "Wm. Lea"?
This is how the source I use presents them to me. I can look to see if other sources do it differently, but as you'll see in the 2015 article, we now have full names, this evolved over the 170-odd years...! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think we should offer as much information as we can when we have it, so if we know the names of people, I would favour using them, irrespective of how the source presents the information. That said, this is my opinion, and it certainly doesn't make a different to whether the article becomes a GA or not.

Race

Nice map!
Indeed! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As always, it would be nice if this bit could be longer, but even the pair of race reports I link to above don't really offer much more.
Agreed. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, another solid piece of work digging up what information can be found. I'll stick this on hold. Harrias ^talk 09:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and the helpful links. I've added some stuff from most of them which I felt improved things. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I've responded to one comment above, but I'm passing it, as that is a relatively minor issue anyway. As always, good work! Harrias ^talk 16:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]