This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
SportsAddicted has added a picture to my bio of Alexei Kervezee. It's taken straight from Cricinfo, as is stated on the image page, but SA justifies that by using the "promotional" template. It does look as though it is, although I'm not absolutely sure. However, there are a heck of a lot of pics on Cricinfo ( Gooch's being a more-or-less random example) that are in that "promotional-looking" style, and since we haven't already used those, the addition of this Kervezee one gives me pause.
I've left a note on SA's talk page mentioning my doubts, and also pointing out that two of the requirements for this tag - that there is evidence of ownership of the photo (ie not just "from Cricinfo), and that the picture is of low resolution - are not met. I've never been all that certain about fair-use images anyway, so I'm posting here in the hope that those with more knowledge of the bounds of acceptability could decide. Loganberry ( Talk) 01:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
One thing we should be able to do more is to have more photos of long-dead people. Where there is a photo or picture of a 19th century cricketer, it is almost certainly out of copyright (regardless of frequent claims to the contrary). jguk 18:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a basic guide to UK copyright law as it applies to digital images here from Oxford. [1]. I remember when I dealt with this as a new law in 1988 that the "life of the originator plus 70 years rule" applied then and something similar had applied in the US for about 10 years previously. The person photographed only has rights where the image is being used in way that they explicitly do not approve of or implicitly could not be expected to approve of; the originator is the photographer, whether he has or hasn't assigned the copyright to an agency such as Getty. I think the previous rule was 75 years from date of photo, so UK photos before 1931 would all be fair game now.
The greyest of grey areas in all this is not the photograph, but the spoken word, where the speaker and the "recorder" both have rights as the owner and originator of the words. Johnlp 23:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
A bit of an off-the-wall suggestion, but I don't suppose anyone knows of any photos of cricketers under UK Crown Copyright, or at least photos of cricketers included in other Crown Copyright images? Since that protection still only lasts 50 years from the end of the calendar year of creation, everything up to and including 1955 would be fair game (the same as for Australian photos). Loganberry ( Talk) 00:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
This article for Lord Hawke is shockingly stubby, for such an important figure in cricket history. I'm adding it to my to-do list, but this is an invitation to any other editor to get stuck in too. -- Dweller 14:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I've updated this list to include Sir Francis Lacey and Sir Frederick Toone, who were both English cricket administrators and I believe the first two people to be knighted for services to cricket. I hope before long to write articles for each of them.
The preamble to the list says that it's of people knighted for services to cricket, but Sir Aubrey Smith is included even though his article says: "He was knighted in 1944 for services to Anglo-American amity." Something similar applies to Learie Constantine (whose article oddly did not seem to mention his knighthood - which I've now put right). I think that it might be better to change the preamble rather than to change the list. JH 19:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I've now created an article for Francis Lacey JH 20:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Most of the questions raised above are answered here (as at 2001):
It points out an apparent omission in our list: Sir Neville Cardus, knighted for services to cricket and music journalism. (And he was a cricketer as a young man, even if only an assistant professional at a school). JH 20:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Re some additions made yesterday in the West Indies section, does anyone have a reference for Gibbs-Gibbs, Drakes-Hurley, Butcher-Butcher and Bishop-Gray ? Tintin ( talk) 06:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
OT : Google seems to have ditched Cricketarchive. It doesn't appear anywhere near the first few pages for player searches. Tintin ( talk) 07:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Added fact tags to all four entries. Tintin ( talk) 09:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
What club (not players) stubs should I do now?? can anyone give me an assignment??
Reply to me when you find an assignment
Also I'm a routine member who edits the international cricket season during on weekdays, i'm edited from the last 3 months of 2006 season, but I edited the most of 06-07 season with the tables, results.
Rakuten06 19:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Any support for the idea of creating articles about some of cricket's iconic scores? 333, 364, 375, 501 etc? Some of the ones that spawned merchandise are particularly notable. -- Dweller 09:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC
In my article on Martin Donnelly, I mention that he is one of two cricketers to have scored a century at Lord's in a Test Match, an Oxford v Cambridge match and a Gentlemen v Players. Is there a term which decribes this trinity of matches besides "classic matches", which I currently use? -- Roisterer 14:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC) ]
We have 2005 Ashes series. We also have Australian cricket team in England in 2005, which has a lot of material on said Ashes games. Given that (even these days) tours don't only consist of internationals they're not covering identical subjects, but it seems a bit pointless to have all the Ashes details in the general tour article. The problem is that the way that general article has been written it's rather tricky just to use the usual "see main article" template. Any thoughts? Loganberry ( Talk) 14:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Above is the new name of the Australia domestic one-day competition (was ING Cup for 4 years previously). The competition has a history of fairly frequent name changes to the current sponsor's name. Do we rename the article every time there's a sponsor change (and change all the associated links), or can we come up with a more generic name? I'm happy either way but don't want to start changing things just yet. -- Moondyne 04:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Why don't we have categories for minor counties? I realise they don't play first-class cricket, but they do play at List A level, and if we're going to allow anyone who's played List A cricket to have an article then surely we should also allow List-A-playing teams to have categories? If there's been a discussion/decision on this in the past, then I admit that I've forgotten about it and would welcome being pointed towards it. My interest right now is because I've just written David Taylor (English cricketer): he played no first-class matches, but appeared in eight List A games spread between five counties, three of which were minor counties. I saw there wasn't a category for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire or Oxfordshire cricketers, set them up, then wondered if I might have done the wrong thing. (If so, by all means delete those cats without further comment.) I'm still curious, though. Loganberry ( Talk) 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I like this idea. When I set up the files for the individual minor counties in a rather mechanistic way, I put a section for famous players in each of them. They're pretty basic and under-populated, but there could be the start of a collection for categories there. It would also get around one of the places where our former colleague Jack and I had a small debate: I put one-time England Rugby Union captain Dickie Jeeps in as a famous Cambridgeshire cricketer, but Jack argued convincingly that he wasn't a famous cricketer and should therefore not appear. He could, though, appear in a Cambridgeshire cricketers category. Johnlp 21:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Just as an aside, we already have a precedent for a non-county first-class category (other than the universities), and that's Category:MCC cricketers. Whether we should allow every first-class team to have a category and so have, for example, Category:Players cricketers, Category:Combined Services cricketers and so on is another matter - I can see that there has to be a limit somewhere given that WG Grace played first-class cricket for no fewer than 29 teams! But the minor counties seem a much less controversial proposition.
On that note, though I'd like to know whether people think that only those minor counties for which the player has appeared at List A level should count for the categories. For example, there are players who have had careers with two minor counties who have appeared in a List A match (eg in the NatWest Trophy) with one but not with the other: do they get one category, or both? As I said above, I'm inclined to be quite restrictive and only consider List A careers (though one game would be enough). Loganberry ( Talk) 23:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
The S/G has one disputed section. Rather than just leaving it that way, could we have another attempt at consensus please. Current text is:
The Australian style of reporting team scores is established and will never change. It seems only logical that matches played there are reported accordingly. To be consistent throughout is a noble ideal but impractical and imposes a bias. I would prefer to show in the format of the host country. -- Moondyne 01:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the benefits of having one style throughout Wikipedia far outweigh any benefits from trying to have a special rule for Australia. It makes the corpus of cricket articles easy to read; Australian readers are going to have to get used to runs-for-wickets notation anyway. With the Ashes round the corner, we'll only see those ignorant of the cricket style guide using runs-for-wicket notation in the 2006-07 Ashes article, and it would be a nightmare policing edits for the next world cup hosted by Australia.
Before we proceed further, may I ask whether there are Australian contributors who would be genuinely concerned if we stated runs-for-wickets notation as the only acceptable notation? I'm happy to discuss the point further if there are, but if there aren't, we might as well officially move to one standard, jguk 18:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
This article has just been moved (without discussion on dubious grounds). I object. Does anyone mind if I move it back? -- RobertG ♬ talk 08:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Looking at some scorecards recently added to Cricket Archive a came across this which reports that in a match between Leicestershire and the Gentlemen of Canada in 1880, their captain was arrested during the match. I mentioned this incident in the Canadian cricket team article, but think the player deserves a write up. He did later play one first class match [4], so he fits our notability criteria. I'm not sure I can do a biographical article justice, but I mention it as I think it would make a great little fact for the DYK section. There can't be many sportsmen who have been arrested during a match surely? Andrew nixon 10:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Tom Melville, The Tented Field : A History of Cricket in America, Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1998, ISBN 0-87972-770-5, p.81
Melville's sources are "Daily Inter-Ocean, 14 August 1883, 2; Clipper 3 July 1880, 115; St Louis Globe-Democrat 22 June 1880, 6; Detroit Free Press 5 June 1880, 6; 28 July 1881, 1." Tintin ( talk) 10:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Wikipedia has a stated policy re date links?
WP:MOS-L warns agains overlinking by various means including low added-value date links but doesn't seem to say if dates and years should be linked. I always used to link them because I thought it was required but I'm no longer sure and I cannot see the point, so now I write them unlinked. I've noticed that some other users do religiously link them. -- BlackJack | talk page 18:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
(back to left) Yes, I've got myself confused about the date format. Obviously someone else may have a different preference and would see a different value. So I agree that the date should be linked but not the year, which achieves nothing other than a nice blue number. -- BlackJack | talk page 16:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Reply to Loganberry: I liked that idea for a short time (I did it in Will Jefferson, for example), but I went off it rather quickly. The reason is that it confuses the reader because it doesn't lead to where he expects. That is, if he clicks it at all — probably he doesn't because he expects it to be the usual useless year link. I prefer to spell it out now: "In the 1997 season, Hick did something or other", rather than "In 1997, Hick ...". Stephen Turner ( Talk) 21:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
User:Gene Nygaard placed a "prod" on 1969 English cricket season because it was in "template" form and contained no data, just a few headings and references and categories. This allowed us five days to expand the article so that it becomes a meaningful stub. I managed to do this by talking about the county competitions and finding the top batsmen and bowlers.
There are several other stubs like this around which haven't been developed so if you spot any more "prods", just use 1969 as a crib and add some info. -- BlackJack | talk page 21:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Engineer's biography named From the far pavilion came out last year. Does anyone here have that book ? Tintin ( talk) 14:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I have now been reunited with my copy of From the Far Pavilion. On p77, the book says "At lunch India were 125 for no loss with Engineer just six short of his century. Wisden, which summarised Farokh's innings as a 'brilliant display of controlled hitting', noted how he 'smashed a six just after the interval to bring up his hundred'." I agree that this is inconsistent with the scorecard, jguk 08:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I've also just noticed that the Frindall reference Tintin refers to above was a response to a question by the author of From the Far Pavilion, John Cantrell. The book itself was published in 2004, so it seems Cantrell wasn't quite sure that what he had written (and no doubt heard first hand from Engineer) was corect, jguk 13:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I have uploaded the interview with Engineer at http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CTE9G6VT (2.4 mb, 4 minutes long). Most of it is about the hundred at Madras and he repeats the Gibbs six story. But the interesting part is the description of the opening over of the match from Wes Hall. Engineer says he straight drove the very first ball of the match for four. The next five balls were bouncers and Engineer hooked two of them out of the ground because of which three newballs had to be used in the first over. How could you trust the word of someone who makes such obviously false claims ? Tintin ( talk) 16:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to records that would enable us to complete the list of ends at the Test cricket grounds? The existing details are mostly from cricinfo, but its database is not complete.
We are missing a few old ones that are no longer used for cricket, such as Brisbane Exhibition Ground and Bramall Lane and Old Wanderers and Bombay Gymkhana, and several newer ones, particularly in India and Pakistan. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The new articles Minor Counties Cricket Championship, MCCA Knockout Trophy and Second XI Championship all include a list of winners. I decided to do these as I can't find any similar lists elsewhere on the internet. If anyone can add any useful information about the history of these competitions that would be a great help.
Within the minor counties there are four that have played first-class cricket in the distant past. Berkshire was first-class in the 18th century but that team had no direct connection with the present club and is too remote to be included in the present club's article apart from an xref. The other three are Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. With these there is a discernible line from the essentially town clubs that represented the counties at first-class level to the present county clubs.
Norfolk and Suffolk were only briefly first-class and played just a few matches each so they are easily dealt with. Cambridgeshire has a longer story to tell and I've so far only provided a high-level mention of its first-class era and who its best players were. If any of you have some readily useful info about Cambs in the mid-19th century, please see Cambridgeshire CCC. -- BlackJack | talk page 15:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I've been trying to establish a consistent approach to the layout of the 18 first-class county articles and I've extended this to the minor counties. The principles equally apply to equivalent overseas clubs but I haven't ventured that far.
Some of the county articles are much more developed than others and have significantly more sections, especially around things like club captains, club records, past players, current players. Most of them had a history section and nearly all had some form of honours list. Some of the articles like Somerset and Yorkshire were already very good; some like Essex and Lancashire were poor.
The approach I've introduced is to have a standard intro that explains who the club is and what it represents, followed by a paragraph about its venues and then perhaps a short piece around its current status, captain, coach and what have you. The next section is honours which I've standardised with help from JH. This is near the top to follow Playfair. Next comes the history starting with earliest cricket in the county, then the formation of the club and then the main events in the club's history up to the present.
This is where Essex and Lancashire failed because in both cases you would think the clubs were formed in the last 25 years or so.
Some counties have a complete list of captains and this is either in the article or else in the club's category page with an xref from the article. This is one thing we need to think about though the priority is to have a complete list for each club.
Although the club captains were mostly notable players, I think we need another list of players with most appearances (rather than most runs and wickets) so that we highlight the stalwarts as well as the stars. Then there are the club records. And so on.
I'd like to use this forum to capture ideas about what else we can include in these articles and realistically develop. -- BlackJack | talk page 16:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I had a idea, why not post an article about Power Cricket?? where Asia versus RoW (Rest of the World) in 15 overs competition, there was a mention in Shahid Afridi about the first batsman to hit an 12, hitting the roof in Cardiff, England Rakuten06 18:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The article on Lord's Cricket Ground says that the current ground is the second, whilst the article on Thomas Lord says that it's the third. They can't both be right. I believe that the correct article is the Thomas Lord one. There's a case for replacing much of the part of the Lord's article that deals with the early history with a link to the Thomas Lord piece, to ensure consistency. JH 21:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Following the iconic scores thread (above), please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/99.94. Interested in the opinions of the Wikiproject. -- Dweller 17:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
See [6] for proposed rename of 1890-1914 to 1890-1918 so that it will include the new article 1915 to 1918 English cricket seasons -- BlackJack | talk page 06:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Jack has done some tidying up of the Wisden Cricketers of the Year article, including correcting a few names. All to the good... but he's again followed what, at the risk of sounding unpleasant, seems to have become almost an obsession of his - that of changing the names of "initialled" cricketers to the format W G Grace (ie with spaces but no punctuation). Strangely he's not been consistent in this, at least at the time of writing: for example, MJK Smith and K. S. Duleepsinhji remain listed as such.
To be honest, I am getting heartily sick of this particular topic, and despite my personal preference for the punctuation-less "MJK Smith" format I would be more than willing to move to using "M. J. K. Smith" myself if it would help to give us all one format to use. Actually I'd be willing to use Jack's preferred format if there were a consensus for its being acceptable here - but there is not. What I don't want is for one person (whether Jack, me or anyone else) to keep changing names from an existing acceptable format to one that has no advantage other than that he personally prefers it. Loganberry ( Talk) 15:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Loganberry has no need to apologise to me. It's me that must apologise to Sam: I should have checked the histories of the Golden Age articles.
I agree that an individual article must have a consistent format throughout and it is something I tend to address along with typos, bad punctuation and the like but without really thinking about it. All the best. -- BlackJack | talk page 10:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
H. D. G. Leveson-Gower points to HDG Leveson-Gower now. Should point the other way. Tintin ( talk) 14:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear - I did not see this conversation before I reverted some of User:BlackJack's changes. Some were good (for example, he changed [[Patsy Hendren|EH Hendren]] to simple [[Patsy Hendren]]); some were bad (for example, he replaced J. T. Hearne with J T Hearne, which goes via a redirect). I'm not sure why Duleepsinghi and MJK Smith were left as they were, when Ranjitsinhji was changed. Anyway, I have put most things back the way before they were changed. It is rather wearing that BlackJack keeps pushing for his preferred version without a consensus for change.
And I have only just noticed that BlackJack has also, for example, moved C. B. Fry to C B Fry, and Jack Russell (Essex cricketer) to C A G Russell. I think he has recognised above that both are wrong now, and I will be moving them to the dotted-initials versions. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I would like to ask if this monster category should be cut down to size? We also have sub-categories for English players in terms of place and time (though the latter is currently established for the 18th century only). Perhaps players should be restricted to those because the big category is not easy to use and could be off-putting to readers. Obviously that would pose the logistical problem of removing Category:English cricketers from hundreds of articles. Something to discuss: I have an open mind about it because of the difficulties a change would invoke. -- BlackJack | talk page 11:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Having one overarching category is important: it means you don't necessarily have to know something about the cricketer you are looking for in order to be able to find him through the category system. If you don't find the category useful, then you are not obligated to use it (you can delve into info through subcategories) - but it is particularly useful for seeing whether we have an article on a less well-known cricketer whose article might go under a variety of names. Note that Cricinfo and CricketArchive both keep full alphabetical lists of their content, jguk 09:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Neither of these have disambig links to cricket-related articles. -- Dweller 19:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
There are an awful lot of links to whites that previously automatically redirected to white people. You need to get someone with a bot to go through and change all these instances to [[white people|whites]], jguk 18:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Someone may like to fix this is up. It is basically a load of OR and somebody's essay. Also I blanked out the parts about the famous sledge comments as they would contravene WP:BLP as some of the alleged comments are obsceneetc. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 03:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Bodyline is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy ( Talk) 00:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Is there a nice green image of cricket that could go here [7]? -- Dweller 14:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
If so, can you give me a page number for the obituary of Peter, the Lord's cat (or just add it to the relevant footnote in the article). Thanks, Stephen Turner ( Talk) 13:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Great chunks of the Frith article are identical to those on this page of Bob Woolmer's site. What I don't know is whether a Wikipedia editor took the text from BW (in which case it's a copyvio) or vice versa (in which case BW should acknowledge it). This also leaves a very obvious inconsistency in our article, which says that Frith was born in 1937 but returned to England at the age of 28 in 1964. If he was indeed born in 1937, Frith's 28th birthday would not have been until 1965! Loganberry ( Talk) 03:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
According to Oxford Companion to Australian cricket (also known A-Z of Australian cricket), Frith was born on 16 March, 1937. I have removed the age of 28, but this figure disagrees from the DOB of March 17 that we have in the article. Tintin ( talk) 11:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
All cricket related categories (ie. including and below Category:Cricket) are in the process of being tagged with the new {{ CricketWatch}} template. From this, WatchlistBot generates a full list of cricket related articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Articles. The purpose is to be able to track the project history using related changes (or related watchlist which only shows the last change for each article).
WatchlistBot will refresh the Articles page every few days to once a week.
This will make (the manually maintained) List of cricket topics somewhat redundant. — Moondyne 08:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Do any of you have anything on this topic, which came up on our Usenet thread recently
Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow
Could one of you with admin functions please have a think about category:English cricket from 2001 which is now in speedies as I would like to add the word "seasons" as per the convention established in the discussion about the Golden Age category which I have quoted in the nomination. Perhaps I am too keen to get things done quickly but I find it somewhat pedantic that someone has objected to this change, especially as it was overlooked when the other category was renamed. If it really shouldn't be there, let me know and I'll put it in the queue. -- BlackJack | talk page 09:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Moondyne (Ian) re the above. I've moved this nomination to:
As you can see it simply meets the convention agreed in a previous discussion and this should have been done at the same time as the first but was overlooked. Please support the change because I guarantee some clown will come along and insist the category should be deleted for having no articles about chirping insects in their mating seasons. -- BlackJack | talk page 13:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
CricketArchive reckons it's College Ground, Cheltenham but there's no article here under that title, which surprised me given that it's hosted over 300 first-class games. College Sports Ground and Thirlestaine Road draw blanks as well. We do have an article under College Ground but that turns out to be one in Loughborough that hosted a grand total of two f-c matches in the late 1920s. Do we actually have an article on the Cheltenham ground under another title? If not, where should one go? Loganberry ( Talk) 16:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I've just added an article about this man who is a significant historical source for the period from 1790 to 1805. He is believed to have been MCC's first official scorer and he produced an annual series of match scores until, it is thought, he died in 1805. No personal details are available as yet including his DOB. Britcher's scores were not easily available for study until a few years ago and Keith Warsop of the ACS&H has made some interesting discoveries which he has reported in the ACS journal this year.
The Britcher article is a stub, naturally, but I'd be particularly interested if anyone does have info about him and can expand the article. -- BlackJack | talk page 21:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
This article needs some serious WP:NPOV trimming. — Moondyne 03:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
I've asked the Biography project to complete their boiler plate for this article and we should do ours. We need to rate it for quality. Being completely unfamiliar with these things, I also wondered how close the article is to FA status; should we request a peer review? If you could pick just (say) 5 cricketers from all eras that should have a FA biog article, I'd argue that most people would include Grace... -- Dweller 08:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
A quick notice that our resident scorekeeper on International cricket biographies, User:Shyam Bihari has offered himself to the community for RfA. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 03:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 30 |
SportsAddicted has added a picture to my bio of Alexei Kervezee. It's taken straight from Cricinfo, as is stated on the image page, but SA justifies that by using the "promotional" template. It does look as though it is, although I'm not absolutely sure. However, there are a heck of a lot of pics on Cricinfo ( Gooch's being a more-or-less random example) that are in that "promotional-looking" style, and since we haven't already used those, the addition of this Kervezee one gives me pause.
I've left a note on SA's talk page mentioning my doubts, and also pointing out that two of the requirements for this tag - that there is evidence of ownership of the photo (ie not just "from Cricinfo), and that the picture is of low resolution - are not met. I've never been all that certain about fair-use images anyway, so I'm posting here in the hope that those with more knowledge of the bounds of acceptability could decide. Loganberry ( Talk) 01:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
One thing we should be able to do more is to have more photos of long-dead people. Where there is a photo or picture of a 19th century cricketer, it is almost certainly out of copyright (regardless of frequent claims to the contrary). jguk 18:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a basic guide to UK copyright law as it applies to digital images here from Oxford. [1]. I remember when I dealt with this as a new law in 1988 that the "life of the originator plus 70 years rule" applied then and something similar had applied in the US for about 10 years previously. The person photographed only has rights where the image is being used in way that they explicitly do not approve of or implicitly could not be expected to approve of; the originator is the photographer, whether he has or hasn't assigned the copyright to an agency such as Getty. I think the previous rule was 75 years from date of photo, so UK photos before 1931 would all be fair game now.
The greyest of grey areas in all this is not the photograph, but the spoken word, where the speaker and the "recorder" both have rights as the owner and originator of the words. Johnlp 23:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
A bit of an off-the-wall suggestion, but I don't suppose anyone knows of any photos of cricketers under UK Crown Copyright, or at least photos of cricketers included in other Crown Copyright images? Since that protection still only lasts 50 years from the end of the calendar year of creation, everything up to and including 1955 would be fair game (the same as for Australian photos). Loganberry ( Talk) 00:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
This article for Lord Hawke is shockingly stubby, for such an important figure in cricket history. I'm adding it to my to-do list, but this is an invitation to any other editor to get stuck in too. -- Dweller 14:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I've updated this list to include Sir Francis Lacey and Sir Frederick Toone, who were both English cricket administrators and I believe the first two people to be knighted for services to cricket. I hope before long to write articles for each of them.
The preamble to the list says that it's of people knighted for services to cricket, but Sir Aubrey Smith is included even though his article says: "He was knighted in 1944 for services to Anglo-American amity." Something similar applies to Learie Constantine (whose article oddly did not seem to mention his knighthood - which I've now put right). I think that it might be better to change the preamble rather than to change the list. JH 19:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
I've now created an article for Francis Lacey JH 20:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Most of the questions raised above are answered here (as at 2001):
It points out an apparent omission in our list: Sir Neville Cardus, knighted for services to cricket and music journalism. (And he was a cricketer as a young man, even if only an assistant professional at a school). JH 20:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Re some additions made yesterday in the West Indies section, does anyone have a reference for Gibbs-Gibbs, Drakes-Hurley, Butcher-Butcher and Bishop-Gray ? Tintin ( talk) 06:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
OT : Google seems to have ditched Cricketarchive. It doesn't appear anywhere near the first few pages for player searches. Tintin ( talk) 07:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Added fact tags to all four entries. Tintin ( talk) 09:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
What club (not players) stubs should I do now?? can anyone give me an assignment??
Reply to me when you find an assignment
Also I'm a routine member who edits the international cricket season during on weekdays, i'm edited from the last 3 months of 2006 season, but I edited the most of 06-07 season with the tables, results.
Rakuten06 19:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Any support for the idea of creating articles about some of cricket's iconic scores? 333, 364, 375, 501 etc? Some of the ones that spawned merchandise are particularly notable. -- Dweller 09:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC
In my article on Martin Donnelly, I mention that he is one of two cricketers to have scored a century at Lord's in a Test Match, an Oxford v Cambridge match and a Gentlemen v Players. Is there a term which decribes this trinity of matches besides "classic matches", which I currently use? -- Roisterer 14:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC) ]
We have 2005 Ashes series. We also have Australian cricket team in England in 2005, which has a lot of material on said Ashes games. Given that (even these days) tours don't only consist of internationals they're not covering identical subjects, but it seems a bit pointless to have all the Ashes details in the general tour article. The problem is that the way that general article has been written it's rather tricky just to use the usual "see main article" template. Any thoughts? Loganberry ( Talk) 14:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Above is the new name of the Australia domestic one-day competition (was ING Cup for 4 years previously). The competition has a history of fairly frequent name changes to the current sponsor's name. Do we rename the article every time there's a sponsor change (and change all the associated links), or can we come up with a more generic name? I'm happy either way but don't want to start changing things just yet. -- Moondyne 04:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Why don't we have categories for minor counties? I realise they don't play first-class cricket, but they do play at List A level, and if we're going to allow anyone who's played List A cricket to have an article then surely we should also allow List-A-playing teams to have categories? If there's been a discussion/decision on this in the past, then I admit that I've forgotten about it and would welcome being pointed towards it. My interest right now is because I've just written David Taylor (English cricketer): he played no first-class matches, but appeared in eight List A games spread between five counties, three of which were minor counties. I saw there wasn't a category for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire or Oxfordshire cricketers, set them up, then wondered if I might have done the wrong thing. (If so, by all means delete those cats without further comment.) I'm still curious, though. Loganberry ( Talk) 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I like this idea. When I set up the files for the individual minor counties in a rather mechanistic way, I put a section for famous players in each of them. They're pretty basic and under-populated, but there could be the start of a collection for categories there. It would also get around one of the places where our former colleague Jack and I had a small debate: I put one-time England Rugby Union captain Dickie Jeeps in as a famous Cambridgeshire cricketer, but Jack argued convincingly that he wasn't a famous cricketer and should therefore not appear. He could, though, appear in a Cambridgeshire cricketers category. Johnlp 21:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Just as an aside, we already have a precedent for a non-county first-class category (other than the universities), and that's Category:MCC cricketers. Whether we should allow every first-class team to have a category and so have, for example, Category:Players cricketers, Category:Combined Services cricketers and so on is another matter - I can see that there has to be a limit somewhere given that WG Grace played first-class cricket for no fewer than 29 teams! But the minor counties seem a much less controversial proposition.
On that note, though I'd like to know whether people think that only those minor counties for which the player has appeared at List A level should count for the categories. For example, there are players who have had careers with two minor counties who have appeared in a List A match (eg in the NatWest Trophy) with one but not with the other: do they get one category, or both? As I said above, I'm inclined to be quite restrictive and only consider List A careers (though one game would be enough). Loganberry ( Talk) 23:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
The S/G has one disputed section. Rather than just leaving it that way, could we have another attempt at consensus please. Current text is:
The Australian style of reporting team scores is established and will never change. It seems only logical that matches played there are reported accordingly. To be consistent throughout is a noble ideal but impractical and imposes a bias. I would prefer to show in the format of the host country. -- Moondyne 01:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the benefits of having one style throughout Wikipedia far outweigh any benefits from trying to have a special rule for Australia. It makes the corpus of cricket articles easy to read; Australian readers are going to have to get used to runs-for-wickets notation anyway. With the Ashes round the corner, we'll only see those ignorant of the cricket style guide using runs-for-wicket notation in the 2006-07 Ashes article, and it would be a nightmare policing edits for the next world cup hosted by Australia.
Before we proceed further, may I ask whether there are Australian contributors who would be genuinely concerned if we stated runs-for-wickets notation as the only acceptable notation? I'm happy to discuss the point further if there are, but if there aren't, we might as well officially move to one standard, jguk 18:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
This article has just been moved (without discussion on dubious grounds). I object. Does anyone mind if I move it back? -- RobertG ♬ talk 08:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Looking at some scorecards recently added to Cricket Archive a came across this which reports that in a match between Leicestershire and the Gentlemen of Canada in 1880, their captain was arrested during the match. I mentioned this incident in the Canadian cricket team article, but think the player deserves a write up. He did later play one first class match [4], so he fits our notability criteria. I'm not sure I can do a biographical article justice, but I mention it as I think it would make a great little fact for the DYK section. There can't be many sportsmen who have been arrested during a match surely? Andrew nixon 10:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Tom Melville, The Tented Field : A History of Cricket in America, Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1998, ISBN 0-87972-770-5, p.81
Melville's sources are "Daily Inter-Ocean, 14 August 1883, 2; Clipper 3 July 1880, 115; St Louis Globe-Democrat 22 June 1880, 6; Detroit Free Press 5 June 1880, 6; 28 July 1881, 1." Tintin ( talk) 10:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Wikipedia has a stated policy re date links?
WP:MOS-L warns agains overlinking by various means including low added-value date links but doesn't seem to say if dates and years should be linked. I always used to link them because I thought it was required but I'm no longer sure and I cannot see the point, so now I write them unlinked. I've noticed that some other users do religiously link them. -- BlackJack | talk page 18:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
(back to left) Yes, I've got myself confused about the date format. Obviously someone else may have a different preference and would see a different value. So I agree that the date should be linked but not the year, which achieves nothing other than a nice blue number. -- BlackJack | talk page 16:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Reply to Loganberry: I liked that idea for a short time (I did it in Will Jefferson, for example), but I went off it rather quickly. The reason is that it confuses the reader because it doesn't lead to where he expects. That is, if he clicks it at all — probably he doesn't because he expects it to be the usual useless year link. I prefer to spell it out now: "In the 1997 season, Hick did something or other", rather than "In 1997, Hick ...". Stephen Turner ( Talk) 21:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
User:Gene Nygaard placed a "prod" on 1969 English cricket season because it was in "template" form and contained no data, just a few headings and references and categories. This allowed us five days to expand the article so that it becomes a meaningful stub. I managed to do this by talking about the county competitions and finding the top batsmen and bowlers.
There are several other stubs like this around which haven't been developed so if you spot any more "prods", just use 1969 as a crib and add some info. -- BlackJack | talk page 21:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Engineer's biography named From the far pavilion came out last year. Does anyone here have that book ? Tintin ( talk) 14:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I have now been reunited with my copy of From the Far Pavilion. On p77, the book says "At lunch India were 125 for no loss with Engineer just six short of his century. Wisden, which summarised Farokh's innings as a 'brilliant display of controlled hitting', noted how he 'smashed a six just after the interval to bring up his hundred'." I agree that this is inconsistent with the scorecard, jguk 08:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I've also just noticed that the Frindall reference Tintin refers to above was a response to a question by the author of From the Far Pavilion, John Cantrell. The book itself was published in 2004, so it seems Cantrell wasn't quite sure that what he had written (and no doubt heard first hand from Engineer) was corect, jguk 13:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I have uploaded the interview with Engineer at http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CTE9G6VT (2.4 mb, 4 minutes long). Most of it is about the hundred at Madras and he repeats the Gibbs six story. But the interesting part is the description of the opening over of the match from Wes Hall. Engineer says he straight drove the very first ball of the match for four. The next five balls were bouncers and Engineer hooked two of them out of the ground because of which three newballs had to be used in the first over. How could you trust the word of someone who makes such obviously false claims ? Tintin ( talk) 16:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have access to records that would enable us to complete the list of ends at the Test cricket grounds? The existing details are mostly from cricinfo, but its database is not complete.
We are missing a few old ones that are no longer used for cricket, such as Brisbane Exhibition Ground and Bramall Lane and Old Wanderers and Bombay Gymkhana, and several newer ones, particularly in India and Pakistan. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The new articles Minor Counties Cricket Championship, MCCA Knockout Trophy and Second XI Championship all include a list of winners. I decided to do these as I can't find any similar lists elsewhere on the internet. If anyone can add any useful information about the history of these competitions that would be a great help.
Within the minor counties there are four that have played first-class cricket in the distant past. Berkshire was first-class in the 18th century but that team had no direct connection with the present club and is too remote to be included in the present club's article apart from an xref. The other three are Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. With these there is a discernible line from the essentially town clubs that represented the counties at first-class level to the present county clubs.
Norfolk and Suffolk were only briefly first-class and played just a few matches each so they are easily dealt with. Cambridgeshire has a longer story to tell and I've so far only provided a high-level mention of its first-class era and who its best players were. If any of you have some readily useful info about Cambs in the mid-19th century, please see Cambridgeshire CCC. -- BlackJack | talk page 15:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I've been trying to establish a consistent approach to the layout of the 18 first-class county articles and I've extended this to the minor counties. The principles equally apply to equivalent overseas clubs but I haven't ventured that far.
Some of the county articles are much more developed than others and have significantly more sections, especially around things like club captains, club records, past players, current players. Most of them had a history section and nearly all had some form of honours list. Some of the articles like Somerset and Yorkshire were already very good; some like Essex and Lancashire were poor.
The approach I've introduced is to have a standard intro that explains who the club is and what it represents, followed by a paragraph about its venues and then perhaps a short piece around its current status, captain, coach and what have you. The next section is honours which I've standardised with help from JH. This is near the top to follow Playfair. Next comes the history starting with earliest cricket in the county, then the formation of the club and then the main events in the club's history up to the present.
This is where Essex and Lancashire failed because in both cases you would think the clubs were formed in the last 25 years or so.
Some counties have a complete list of captains and this is either in the article or else in the club's category page with an xref from the article. This is one thing we need to think about though the priority is to have a complete list for each club.
Although the club captains were mostly notable players, I think we need another list of players with most appearances (rather than most runs and wickets) so that we highlight the stalwarts as well as the stars. Then there are the club records. And so on.
I'd like to use this forum to capture ideas about what else we can include in these articles and realistically develop. -- BlackJack | talk page 16:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I had a idea, why not post an article about Power Cricket?? where Asia versus RoW (Rest of the World) in 15 overs competition, there was a mention in Shahid Afridi about the first batsman to hit an 12, hitting the roof in Cardiff, England Rakuten06 18:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The article on Lord's Cricket Ground says that the current ground is the second, whilst the article on Thomas Lord says that it's the third. They can't both be right. I believe that the correct article is the Thomas Lord one. There's a case for replacing much of the part of the Lord's article that deals with the early history with a link to the Thomas Lord piece, to ensure consistency. JH 21:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Following the iconic scores thread (above), please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/99.94. Interested in the opinions of the Wikiproject. -- Dweller 17:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
See [6] for proposed rename of 1890-1914 to 1890-1918 so that it will include the new article 1915 to 1918 English cricket seasons -- BlackJack | talk page 06:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Jack has done some tidying up of the Wisden Cricketers of the Year article, including correcting a few names. All to the good... but he's again followed what, at the risk of sounding unpleasant, seems to have become almost an obsession of his - that of changing the names of "initialled" cricketers to the format W G Grace (ie with spaces but no punctuation). Strangely he's not been consistent in this, at least at the time of writing: for example, MJK Smith and K. S. Duleepsinhji remain listed as such.
To be honest, I am getting heartily sick of this particular topic, and despite my personal preference for the punctuation-less "MJK Smith" format I would be more than willing to move to using "M. J. K. Smith" myself if it would help to give us all one format to use. Actually I'd be willing to use Jack's preferred format if there were a consensus for its being acceptable here - but there is not. What I don't want is for one person (whether Jack, me or anyone else) to keep changing names from an existing acceptable format to one that has no advantage other than that he personally prefers it. Loganberry ( Talk) 15:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Loganberry has no need to apologise to me. It's me that must apologise to Sam: I should have checked the histories of the Golden Age articles.
I agree that an individual article must have a consistent format throughout and it is something I tend to address along with typos, bad punctuation and the like but without really thinking about it. All the best. -- BlackJack | talk page 10:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
H. D. G. Leveson-Gower points to HDG Leveson-Gower now. Should point the other way. Tintin ( talk) 14:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh dear - I did not see this conversation before I reverted some of User:BlackJack's changes. Some were good (for example, he changed [[Patsy Hendren|EH Hendren]] to simple [[Patsy Hendren]]); some were bad (for example, he replaced J. T. Hearne with J T Hearne, which goes via a redirect). I'm not sure why Duleepsinghi and MJK Smith were left as they were, when Ranjitsinhji was changed. Anyway, I have put most things back the way before they were changed. It is rather wearing that BlackJack keeps pushing for his preferred version without a consensus for change.
And I have only just noticed that BlackJack has also, for example, moved C. B. Fry to C B Fry, and Jack Russell (Essex cricketer) to C A G Russell. I think he has recognised above that both are wrong now, and I will be moving them to the dotted-initials versions. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I would like to ask if this monster category should be cut down to size? We also have sub-categories for English players in terms of place and time (though the latter is currently established for the 18th century only). Perhaps players should be restricted to those because the big category is not easy to use and could be off-putting to readers. Obviously that would pose the logistical problem of removing Category:English cricketers from hundreds of articles. Something to discuss: I have an open mind about it because of the difficulties a change would invoke. -- BlackJack | talk page 11:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Having one overarching category is important: it means you don't necessarily have to know something about the cricketer you are looking for in order to be able to find him through the category system. If you don't find the category useful, then you are not obligated to use it (you can delve into info through subcategories) - but it is particularly useful for seeing whether we have an article on a less well-known cricketer whose article might go under a variety of names. Note that Cricinfo and CricketArchive both keep full alphabetical lists of their content, jguk 09:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Neither of these have disambig links to cricket-related articles. -- Dweller 19:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
There are an awful lot of links to whites that previously automatically redirected to white people. You need to get someone with a bot to go through and change all these instances to [[white people|whites]], jguk 18:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Someone may like to fix this is up. It is basically a load of OR and somebody's essay. Also I blanked out the parts about the famous sledge comments as they would contravene WP:BLP as some of the alleged comments are obsceneetc. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 03:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Bodyline is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy ( Talk) 00:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Is there a nice green image of cricket that could go here [7]? -- Dweller 14:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
If so, can you give me a page number for the obituary of Peter, the Lord's cat (or just add it to the relevant footnote in the article). Thanks, Stephen Turner ( Talk) 13:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Great chunks of the Frith article are identical to those on this page of Bob Woolmer's site. What I don't know is whether a Wikipedia editor took the text from BW (in which case it's a copyvio) or vice versa (in which case BW should acknowledge it). This also leaves a very obvious inconsistency in our article, which says that Frith was born in 1937 but returned to England at the age of 28 in 1964. If he was indeed born in 1937, Frith's 28th birthday would not have been until 1965! Loganberry ( Talk) 03:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
According to Oxford Companion to Australian cricket (also known A-Z of Australian cricket), Frith was born on 16 March, 1937. I have removed the age of 28, but this figure disagrees from the DOB of March 17 that we have in the article. Tintin ( talk) 11:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
All cricket related categories (ie. including and below Category:Cricket) are in the process of being tagged with the new {{ CricketWatch}} template. From this, WatchlistBot generates a full list of cricket related articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Articles. The purpose is to be able to track the project history using related changes (or related watchlist which only shows the last change for each article).
WatchlistBot will refresh the Articles page every few days to once a week.
This will make (the manually maintained) List of cricket topics somewhat redundant. — Moondyne 08:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Do any of you have anything on this topic, which came up on our Usenet thread recently
Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow
Could one of you with admin functions please have a think about category:English cricket from 2001 which is now in speedies as I would like to add the word "seasons" as per the convention established in the discussion about the Golden Age category which I have quoted in the nomination. Perhaps I am too keen to get things done quickly but I find it somewhat pedantic that someone has objected to this change, especially as it was overlooked when the other category was renamed. If it really shouldn't be there, let me know and I'll put it in the queue. -- BlackJack | talk page 09:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Moondyne (Ian) re the above. I've moved this nomination to:
As you can see it simply meets the convention agreed in a previous discussion and this should have been done at the same time as the first but was overlooked. Please support the change because I guarantee some clown will come along and insist the category should be deleted for having no articles about chirping insects in their mating seasons. -- BlackJack | talk page 13:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
CricketArchive reckons it's College Ground, Cheltenham but there's no article here under that title, which surprised me given that it's hosted over 300 first-class games. College Sports Ground and Thirlestaine Road draw blanks as well. We do have an article under College Ground but that turns out to be one in Loughborough that hosted a grand total of two f-c matches in the late 1920s. Do we actually have an article on the Cheltenham ground under another title? If not, where should one go? Loganberry ( Talk) 16:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I've just added an article about this man who is a significant historical source for the period from 1790 to 1805. He is believed to have been MCC's first official scorer and he produced an annual series of match scores until, it is thought, he died in 1805. No personal details are available as yet including his DOB. Britcher's scores were not easily available for study until a few years ago and Keith Warsop of the ACS&H has made some interesting discoveries which he has reported in the ACS journal this year.
The Britcher article is a stub, naturally, but I'd be particularly interested if anyone does have info about him and can expand the article. -- BlackJack | talk page 21:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
This article needs some serious WP:NPOV trimming. — Moondyne 03:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
I've asked the Biography project to complete their boiler plate for this article and we should do ours. We need to rate it for quality. Being completely unfamiliar with these things, I also wondered how close the article is to FA status; should we request a peer review? If you could pick just (say) 5 cricketers from all eras that should have a FA biog article, I'd argue that most people would include Grace... -- Dweller 08:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
A quick notice that our resident scorekeeper on International cricket biographies, User:Shyam Bihari has offered himself to the community for RfA. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 03:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)