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 Laser brain 21:28, 5 March 2011 [1].

---

Herbie Hewett[edit]

Herbie Hewett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Herbie Hewett/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): Harrias ^talk 16:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because having worked on it for a while I think that it meets the criteria. A couple of points to note are that there are a couple of issues unresolved from the peer review; I'm currently working on getting these cleared up, mostly involving having a little dig around some offline sources that is taking more time than I'd like. However, please feel free to repeat any of these as a friendly reminder for me to get them done! As noted in the peer review: "Primarily due to the fact that he wasn't an overly prominent player, and due to the time period he played in, there is little information on his personal (and non-cricketing) life. It is unlikely that much more can be revealed on this, although little gems may be gleaned." Harrias ^talk 16:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. A couple of external redirects which may lead to link rot; see them with the tool in the upper right corner of this page. --PresN 19:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the ESPNcricinfo links, thanks. Harrias ^talk 20:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comments

• Publisher details required for Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game. This was a weekly publication; you should give the numbers, as well as the years, of the issues you are using.
• Likewise, give publisher details for Lillywhite's annual, MCC Cricket Scores and Biographies, The Complete History of Cricket Tours at Home and Abroad, Inner Templars who volunteered and served in the great war (1916) and Dewar's annual.

• With the exception of Inner Templars who volunteered and served in the great war (1916), these sources were all added by User:Nigej. I have left a message on his talk page dated 17 January 2011, asking for most information on these references. If this information is still not forthcoming as we approach the close of this candidacy, I'll have to remove some of the information unfortunately. Harrias ^talk 16:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I feel this issue should have been resolved before bringing this to FAC, particularly if you yourself have not seen the cited material. The removal of material relating to these refs could substantially alter the article content. Brianboulton (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Being honest, I forgot that hadn't been doing - I had been holding off on nominating the article until we'd worked the issue out one way or the other, but then was glancing through articles the other day, and couldn't remember why I hadn't nominated it. So it's me being a bit stupid I'm afraid. Looking online I've managed to work out a fair bit of information about some of the sources: see numbers 25, 43, 44. Although I haven't see the sources themselves to verify the information, will this level of detail on the references suffice? I can come up with similar for the Cricket: A weekly record of the game, but they would still be lacking issue number. Apologies again for my forgetfulness! Harrias ^talk 17:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Nigej has kindly added some more information for the references he has provided. Harrias ^talk 17:38, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Consistency required in page ref formatting. E.g. ref 8: "p. 109", ref 57: "p46" Check throughout.

• Have made them consistent.

• The hyphen in ref 7 page range needs to be an ndash. Brianboulton (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed. Harrias ^talk 07:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 77: what is the nature of this publication? Book, article or other?

• I'm not sure, this is another one from User:Nigej. I'll endeavour to find out. Harrias ^talk 16:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*See my comment above Brianboulton (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've removed this reference from the article. Harrias ^talk 17:38, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 85: Wood → Woods

• Fixed. Harrias ^talk 16:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 99: it should be stated that this obituary is from Wisden 1922.

• Have clarified this, can you check if the way I have done it is appropriate? Harrias ^talk 17:38, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I see some evidence of overreferencing in the article. For instance, why are there four citations for his wartime appointment as a Provost-marshal? One would do.

• No single references covers all the facts given in the preceding sentence: each of the four gives something a little different: start date, end date, position and what branch he served in. I will try and clean the duplicates up higher in the article though. Harrias ^talk 16:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 97 (the obituary) mentions nothing about Hewett's war service; ref 98 only lists his name. These citations are redundant. I suggest you slightly rephrase the sentence so that it reflects the information in sources 95 and 96. Brianboulton (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've trimmed the sentence and the references down to just those two from the London Gazette. Harrias ^talk 07:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly all the online sources are archived scorecards, so spotchecking has been highly limited. Other than the above points, sourcing seems adequate and reliable. I will try to return for a more general review later on. Brianboulton (talk) 12:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Generally a very good article. Certainly comprehensive. It may benefit from a light copy-edit in places, which I may be able to try in the next day or two if Harrias has no objections. A few points and questions.

• I've moved a list of resolved comments to Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Herbie Hewett/archive1 as this page was getting very full. If anyone has any objections, please move them back. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "but again failed to impress" Who? Critics? Team-mates?

• I don't have access to the source, but given the context I'm assuming he failed to impress the university selectors: he wasn't in the Oxford team in 1885. Harrias ^talk 09:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, maybe put that it. Was this from Nigej? --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was from Nigej: he changed it slightly to "played in a trial match at Oxford but without success." - I've removed the 'but' which seemed superfluous, but I'm not sure if the overall change has made the sentence any less ambiguous? Harrias ^talk 21:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that covers it. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Hewett's emotions were still raw from this loss when Surrey travelled to Taunton more than two months later..." Is this what the source says? If so (and it's David Foot, so I don't doubt it as he has a habit of embellishing his facts!), it may be reaching a little and I'm not sure if we can realistically know if his emotions were still raw or not.

• Changed to "Foot suggest that Hewett's emotions might still have been raw.." but can tone down further if you think it appropriate. Harrias ^talk 11:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to leave it out as it strikes me as one of Mr Foot's flights of fancy (don't know if you ever read his biography of Hammond!), but I've no personal objection to this. --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've removed the part about Hewett's emotions being raw. Harrias ^talk 17:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "scoring freely": may not be clear to non-cricketers what this means. And he did not have especially big scores, so does this mean he scored quickly? Freely suggests big scores, I would have thought.

• Have completely reworked this paragraph opening. Harrias ^talk 17:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Hewett began the 1893 season brightly"... Like freely, not sure about brightly.

• He had a torch on his head: so it was brightly! No, I understand your view on both of these, but as yet haven't worked out what to put instead. I will change them when I think of an alternative (feel free to dive in if you can suggest anything). Harrias ^talk 11:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed to "in good form". Harrias ^talk 17:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "The visit of the touring Australians began the process which led to Hewett's resignation from the county." Is this sentence necessary? And if so, it sounds like it didn't just begin the process, it was the process!

• I've reworked this a little. Harrias ^talk 19:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "he scored 112 "made in less than two hours, and was a splendid display of free and taking cricket without a fault"" Quote needs attributing in the text.

• Not my source, if I don't get a reply from Nigej in a short while, I'll probably cut it out; it's a little bit flowery to be honest. Harrias ^talk 21:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Attributed, but the quote does not actually make sense. A splendid display of free and taking cricket? I'll ping Nigej for this, but it may just need cutting. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nigej replied and suggested taking it out as it was correct but slightly archaic, so I trimmed it back. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• For batting style, anything about his best shots, or his defence?

• Not really from any of the sources I can find. Harrias ^talk 22:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• CA has him playing for Gents v Players at Lords here. Worth mentioning as the next best thing to a Test? And maybe point out the different levels of Gents v Players matches, that the Lord's game was the big one but the end of season ones were less important?

• I've included a bit on this in Later cricket career and life Harrias ^talk 19:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I've mentioned this in the lead, but not yet in the article (big no no!) Do you have any reference that backs up the Lord's game being the most significant? And it being the next best things to Tests? I know both of these things, but can't find anything to cite! Harrias ^talk 20:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look; I've certainly got something to ref this for post 1918, but I might know where to look. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it in the end, and it reads very clearly now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Personally, I wouldn't make too much of Somerset's first Championship game; I'm not sure the distinction between a County match 1885 and 1891 would have been that important as I think the start of the "official" Championship was not a big deal.

• Worth mentioning in terms of being their first match back in first-class cricket, or not really too much to bother about at all? Harrias ^talk 21:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it, I think the part about the CC only just starting, but I probably wouldn't even mention the first match as it does not seem particularly important. The second seems much more interesting. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still a little dubious, but only because I believe it was all a little woolly around then, and I don't think they would have seen 1890 as much different to the previous years. But not a big deal at all. To be honest, Blackjack is the man for this and I believe he's gone. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Maybe make more of the idea that he really emerged from no-where, after a moderate start to his career, to be one of the best batsmen in the country for a short time. The Wisden obituary suggests this if a ref is needed.
• There are a few bits in his Times obituary which might be useful to add, such as his university matches and his unorthodox style.

• Not having a Times subscription, I don't have access to his obituary. Harrias ^talk 21:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, Times, 15 Sept 1892 ("County Cricket in 1892", p. 5) "Somerset's many brilliant feats, and the fine play of Messrs. Hewett and Palairet in particular, were a marked feature of this year's cricket."

• Added into Batsman of the Year section. Harrias ^talk 21:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Had a look at Times, but apart from match reports, there doesn't seem to be anything else helpful. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good generally, though. As I've got quite a long list of comments, I'll move them to the talk page once they've been addressed, if that is OK. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments: a fair bit to tweak around here: I have addressed some of the points towards the start of the article. I haven't signed each reply, hopefully that won't cause an issue. Will continue to cover the points over the next few days. Also, if you have a Times subscription, anything else you can dig out would be grand *wink* Harrias ^talk 22:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look, probably at the weekend. I also was reading the biography of C. B. Fry the other day and spotted something about Hewett having a row with the captain of the ship he was on. I'll dig that out as well if it helps. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

• This bit from the lead feels repetitive: "Insults from the crowd prompted him to feel insulted".
• Oxford and Somerset: The comma before the last quote of the section should be a semi-colon; otherwise the lead-in to it is weak.
• Second class county cricket: Before the last quote in this section, I think "as" is meant to appear after "described".
• County Championship cricket: "expecting an easy win to secure a consecutive championship." Feels like the number of consecutive titles would be a logical one-word addition here.
• Touring North America: Comma needed after George Ricketts. Also, one should be added after Vernon Hill in Departure.
• Spare letter needs fixing here: "David Foot offered s a more tempered opinion". Giants2008 (27 and counting) 04:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your comments Giants2008: think I have corrected them all. Harrias ^talk 23:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Yet another strong cricket article. They never stop coming through here, do they? Writing, sources, etc. are all up to the usual high standard. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Ruhrfisch. I peer reviewed this some time ago and felt it was close to FA quality then. All of my concerns have been addressed since, and I am glad to support. I have a few quibbles, which do not detrct from my support.

• Two sentences in a row in the first paragraph use "capable" - could one use bechanged to something else?

• Along with the point below from Staxringold, I have changed the first sentence to ".., Hewett could post a large score in a short time against even the best bowlers." Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there supposed to be an apostrophe before Varsity in In his reminiscences, W. G. Grace suggests that Hewett "first won some little renown in Public School and 'Varsity cricket, but it was not until he joined Somersetshire ...?

• This was brought up at the Good article review; to quote what my reply there: "I assume Grace was using 'Varsity as an abbreviation for university. Not sure, but it's what he uses." Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Makes sense, suppose it could also be for "intervarsity", thanks Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:MOSQUOTE says not to use single quotes as in Hewett scored 113 against the sixteen man 'All New York' on Staten Island,[51] a match in which he was standing in as captain ...

• Removed the quotation marks. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Double quotes would also have worked, your call. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• He either had a sister (or perhaps was married) to have a brother-in-law Hewett missed most of the match against Kent shortly thereafter, returning to Taunton due to the death of his brother-in-law, during which time George Wood replaced him as a substitute.[68] I know details are sparse, but should his sister be mentioned?

• I've added this speculation at the end of Later cricket career and life. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I would not link Reverend in the Personality and style section per WP:OVERLINK

• Unlinked. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand cricket, but I enjoyed this article. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments – Just a couple small things

• The lead has "demoralising" where the quote I assume it's referring to has "demoralizing". Should use a consistent spelling. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Covered below. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• On that note, that seems like a somewhat iffy word for an encyclopedic lead. What about "Hewett was capable of surprising bowlers", for example? The bit this is referring to seems to largely be discussing his ability to hit shots in all directions that threw people off guard. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Along with the point above from Ruhrfisch, I have changed the first sentence to ".., Hewett could post a large score in a short time against even the best bowlers." Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Also from the lead, "England did not play any Test matches at home in 1892, or else Hewett would probably have won a Test cap." What's the sourcing for that? I understand the point of this sentence (to explain to a reader why he didn't win a Test cap, he didn't have the chance), but this seems like a pretty big statement that I don't see sourcing for. It seems to be referring to the Almanack quote from the Batsman of the Year section, but that doesn't really fully support this sentence. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I think ".. Hewett would undoubtedly have been given a place." pretty closely supports my statement? Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• My mistake, didn't realize a cap referred purely to making the team (I thought it meant winning something once on the team). Could you link to Cap (sport) so outsiders like myself understand the term? Staxringold _talk^contribs 14:08, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• My fault: I should have linked that already, I'm normally pretty good at that. Done now. Harrias ^talk 14:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Under Departure from Somerset the sentence "The crowd continued to show....'the decision not to play was premature'" seems like a run-on sentence. Maybe change it to "The crowd continued to show their dismay at the decision, and eventually the Somerset officials asked the umpires to take another look at the ground. Woods supported this decision in his reminiscences, claiming that "the decision not to play was premature.""? Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed as suggested. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Small thing, but it seems like there are a couple quotes under Later cricket career and life with improper period placement. Lord Hawke's shouting and the block-quote about Mr. "Erbert" have the period outside the quotation marks. Obviously if there was more in the source that's fine, but if the sentence ended where the quote did the period should be inside the ""s. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The source for the Lord Hawke quote has the punctuation out of the quote, and I have changed the Mr 'Erbert one. Harrias ^talk 12:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Looks good, my issues are dealt with. Staxringold _talk^contribs 16:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support: A really good article which has got even better in the last few days, when I've been unable to do anything! I've performed a minor copy-edit, and my only worry is how readable it is to non-cricketers. The above supports reassure me about this, however. It is very comprehensive and readable, and I doubt there is anything about Hewett which is not covered and explained here. Great work. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The thing is any article on a topic with it's own language (sports, military, biology, etc) will require a certain amount of knowledge, or clicking through to linked articles on the confusing terms. But so long as the links are there (where available), there's nothing more you can really do. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:04, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Image review? At a glance, there are problems with MOS:CAPTIONS. --Andy Walsh (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I was going to review the image licenses and source information, but now you've mentioned MOS:CAPTIONS, I'll look at that as well.

  • (1) File:HTHewett.jpg (on Commons). Used as lead image in infobox - would be nice to have the image cleaned up a bit, but that is beyond the scope of FAC really. Regarding sourcing, I was unable to verify the source information for this image. It was uploaded in October 2010 by User:Harrias and the source given as 'London News Agency Photo'. This is a now defunct photo agency (see here). It is not clear where the "pre-1901" date for the photo comes from. I would like there to be more information about where this image came from, when it was taken, and where the "pre 1901" date comes from. When I searched for this image, I found it for sale at www.cricket-books.com. It is a pity the date is unknown, as that would be nice to put in a caption for the image in the article.

  • Thanks for the image review. I assumed the pre-1901 date came from Hewett holding a cricket bat in the photo, and knowing he played his last high level cricket match in 1901. I searched some on Google images and could not find any other sources for this photo. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It did come from that, but thinking about it, he continued to play club cricket beyond that, so it could theoretically have been later. I've removed the image until more information can be found out about it.Harrias ^talk 00:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • (2) File:OxfordUniversityCricketXI1886.jpg (note: this image, at the time of this review, was on Wikipedia, not on Commons). Uploaded December 2010. Source: James Lillywhite's Cricketer's Annual for 1887. The image information page does not state who scanned this image from the annual. I presume the uploader, but that information should be added to the image page, or the source of the scan added if someone else scanned it. No author information is given (if the author is not known, that needs to be stated by the uploader). Someone needs to check the annual to see if photo credits were included, as that would make it by a known author who may not have died more than 70 years ago - if no author is known, then the photo is fine both here and on Commons. If there is a known author and the date of death is not known, best to use as a local copy under PD-US-1923. The caption given with the image in the article needs improving though.
  • (3) File:Somerset1892 RedLillywhite1893.jpg (note: this image, at the time of this review, was on Wikipedia, not on Commons). Uploaded February 2007. Source: James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual for 1893. Same comments as above. If the user who uploaded it scanned this from a copy of the annual they have, the image information page should say this. Ditto for finding out the information about who originally authored this image (again, see above, but in this case, the photographer is named on the photograph - the "J. Chaffin and Sons" bit - so that information should be put on the image information page and then apply what was said below for image 4). Caption could be improved a bit as "centre" doesn't really tell the reader where Hewett is in the image. Say which row he is in and where in that row.
  • (4) File:Hewett & Palairet.png (on Commons). Uploaded October 2010. This image has a well-filled out information template - please use this one as a model when working on the other images, especially the ones uploaded locally to Wikipedia. The only thing missing there is the date of publication (the date provided is the date the photograph was taken). Copyright is calculated from the date of first publication, not the date the photograph was taken, so if you only know that it was published in From Sammy to Jimmy: The Official History of Somerset County Cricket Club, you need to say when that work was published. The author of the image is named as a Mr Chaffin. Really, to be certain copyright has lapsed in the UK, you need to know when Mr Chaffin died (but that is usually impossible to work out). In this case, it appears to be J. Chaffin and Sons, which is confirmed by looking at this image. That is the same image (this one is a crop and a better scan), and that one says it was published in 1892, so it was published before 1923, so OK if uploaded on Wikipedia. For Commons, you need to be sure that Chaffin died more than 70 years ago. Suggested caption improvement: tell the reader if the record wicket partnership is shown on the board behind them.
  • (5) File:HTHewett1892.jpg (note: this image, at the time of this review, was on Wikipedia, not on Commons). Uploaded December 2010. Artwork published in 1892, hence PD-1923 for local uploads on Wikipedia. Source information provided. Author information not provided. Ideally, the source would be checked to see if the artist is named. Image placement seems strange, though, as this one is dated "circa 1890", but the images in earlier sections are 1892, so the chronology is reversed.

  Apologies for going into so much detail there. As numbered above, images 2-5 are likely fine if a bit more information can be added to the image information pages. However, I'm not happy about the information available for image 1. The information is too scanty really, and there is no indication of where it was first published, or who the photographer was. That, coupled with the online auction of the image, makes me uneasy about it. Carcharoth (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Given the lack of information regarding the lead image I propose to do the following:

1. Remove the lead image
2. Place File:HTHewett1892.jpg as the lead image.
3. Contact Nigej to try and get more information on File:Somerset1892 RedLillywhite1893.jpg and File:OxfordUniversityCricketXI1886.jpg.
4. Move File:Hewett & Palairet.png to purely Wikipedia.

• Taking these steps, would the images be okay? Harrias ^talk 21:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• That all sounds fine. As I said, the only real objection I see is to the first image (which you are intending to remove). If you can find out more about the image (specifically when it was first published and where), it will be fine. For the other images, they are all fine on Wikipedia (because they were published before 1923), and there is no requirement at FAC (as far as I know) to upload them locally if there is some doubt about whether they are OK for Commons. You may be better off asking on Commons about the images, and then uploading them locally depending on what you are told there (but again, as far as I know, the images only have to meet Wikipedia image policy, not Commons image policy - I only mention it here because of the possibility objections may be raised on Commons in future). Carcharoth (talk) 03:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I have done what the first of what I suggested above, and have also cleaned up File:HTHewett1892.jpg slightly. No reply from Nigej as yet, and I haven't moved File:Hewett & Palairet.png: I'm hoping to find out some more about the photographer etc. Harrias ^talk 13:04, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Additional comment - I found out a bit more about London News Agency (LNA). See this Google Books search. It seems it was taken over by the Roy Reemer Organisation, though I'm not quite sure when and details are still sketchy. Just in case that helps (which it probably doesn't). Carcharoth (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - article images should also have alt text. See tool at top right of the review page and see WP:ALT TEXT. This is not currently part of the FA criteria (it was commented out in March 2010), but as the alt text tool is still included in the tool box, I still like to check. Having no alt text at all doesn't seem quite right. If this is not actionable, I'll raise this at WT:FAC and ask what has happened since the earlier discussions prior to March 2010. Carcharoth (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC) Per this, I'm striking this comment as not actionable under the FA criteria. Carcharoth (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Images, will someone please confirm if all image issues are resolved? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my view, they are fine as far as Wikipedia and US copyright laws are concerned (all published before 1923). There may be issues on Commons under UK copyright laws as the photographer is known but not their death date, but Harrias has said he is looking into that. You may want to ask another reviewer to double-check this, though. Carcharoth (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.