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 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | → | Archive 55 |
It's taken the Telegraph a long time to publish an obituary, but now that they've done so it's excellent: [1] Lots of good anecdotes, at least one or two of which ought to be included in his Wiki article. At the moment his article doesn't really give the flavour of the man. JH ( talk page) 16:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
The Rose Bowl, Hampshire page has been vandalised. I couldn't fix it. Could someone please do so? Abeer.ag ( talk) 06:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Another first-class cricketer up for deletion. Help appreciated! Andrew nixon ( talk) 21:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Despite all the huffing and puffing from the latest "expert" about how CricInfo does not recognise the Madras Presidency as first-class, guess where we found copies of the full scorecards? In addition to Stephen's advice above, can I recommend that WP:CRIN is always quoted in these discussions to emphasise notability in project terms and WP:ATHLETE in site terms. BlackJack | talk page 08:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The character who perpetrated the AfD has just been blocked indefinitely. Apparently he was troll! :-) BlackJack | talk page 19:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Another part of the Invincibles is now at FAC. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ian Johnson (cricketer) Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 07:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Some good news here. Once an announcement is made we can think about renaming articles etc. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ talk 08:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
It is now the "Sheffield Shield presented by Weet-Bix". An improvement perhaps but when CA uses the full name (six times in the linked media release) it reminds me of Idiocracy! I see a redirect has already been done, I seem to recall the SS and PC being different articles before. I am not sure if the move has lost any content. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 08:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The article really could do with a photo of the shield - from memory its a very impressive bit of silverware. I presume that it would be on display in the SCG currently. Moondyne 09:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I see this was unilaterally moved, without discussion from its previous name. I don't really mind whether it's called Flannels or Whites (cricket), but hate the current name passionately. I have a mild preference for Flannels, but recall that this is a geographic thing around the cricket world and think Whites is the more common term. So I'd suggest it goes to Whites, with the other two as redirects. Objections? Support? -- Dweller ( talk) 14:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
It's 'Whites', at least these days, and that's what the article should be called, although I suppose that doesn't cover boots and stuff like that. Flannels only refers to trousers anyway. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In case anyone cares. Moondyne 00:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Could someone who understands these things kidly slap an appropriate infobox on the page of the world's newest (most surprised?) Test cricketer? Thanks. -- Dweller ( talk) 09:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
This is the most bizarre England selection in recent memory, it's certainly the only time England have picked someone I've never even heard of. Derek Pringle was picked while still an undergraduate I believe but there'd been a lot of buzz about him and Tony Pigott was a strange one, but they were short of fast bowlers in New Zealand and he happened to be around - that's the closest one I can think of. Other swing bowlers have been picked as virtual one offs for Headingley in recent times but Mike Smith and Neil Mallender were respected county bowlers with hundreds of wickets to their names and Martin Saggers and Kabir Ali were decent county performers although obviously out of their class. Quite how we pick a chap who is nearly thirty, has only played a dozen first class games and only started bowling in England this year is beyond me. Matthew Hoggard was an ever present, knows Headingley like the back of his hand and now he's on the scrap heap apparently. Still anything's better than bringing Harmison or Plunkett back I suppose. Let's hope he takes five wickets but if he's more than a one test wonder I'll be amazed. Is the cupboard really so bare? Is this the upshot of half the counties having half a dozen Kolpac players in the ranks? If I was pretty much any up and coming fast bowling hopeful in England, or even seasoned country pro, I'd be pretty miffed at this one. Nick mallory ( talk) 11:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm just pleased that finally an Victorian who does not have the initials SKW is given a chance at Test level, even it is for England! -- Mattinbgn\ talk 01:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Carr was more understandable than this. England needed a secret weapon to pull themselves back in a series, Carr could bowl the new googly, he'd taken a spurt of wickets for Kent. It's not like there aren't other seasoned swing bowlers who could have been given a go. Carr took seven wickets in his first test, apparently, anyone think Pattinson will? Nick mallory ( talk) 05:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I was trying to find the article on this (I knew we had one), and finally found it at Rainout (sports). I set up some appropriate redirects, but at present Rainout (sports) only refers to rain stopping play in baseball and motorsports; it's very US-centric. Not knowing that much about cricket, I wondered if the experts here at WP:CRICKET might like to put together a paragraph regarding the effect of rain on cricket play on the Rainout (sports) article? I have left a similar sort of message on the WP:TENNIS talk page. Neıl ☄ 11:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Why not just have an article for 'rain stopped play' for cricket? Nobody would use 'rainout' for cricket. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Looks like CI is doing with us these days what we used to do with them - rewriting our articles. I first noticed it with Vizzy. It used to be like this when we expanded our article. CI article was recently changed to include three paragraphs from us, including a long quote from Mihir Bose and another one by Kanhai. Joginder Rao didn't have an article in CI till very recently. The source of the present article is an easy guess. Tintin 16:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia has ripped far more information from Cricinfo than they've ripped off us, to be fair. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
We have (at least) two articles for the forthcoming EPL - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty20_English_Premier_League and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Premier_League_%28cricket%29 here for example. The second appears to me to be a better template - could someone who knows what they are doing merge these two? JP ( talk) 15:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
While improving Pattinson's article (looks more like a 'proper' article now, lol) I noticed his brother has been selected for the Aussie U-19s, which led me to Australian_U-19_cricket_team#2008 Under-19s World Cup. Of the three blue links, I have serious doubts about the current notability of two of them. Anyone? -- Dweller ( talk) 15:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I've been pondering recently whether it would be possible to update the stats in the players' infoboxes automatically. I'm sure the programming would be possible: the more difficult part would be finding an always up-to-date database that we can pull the stats from. (It obviously wouldn't be appropriate to screen scrape from another website without permission).
Does anyone know of such a database? For example, does anyone have contacts at CricketArchive, and know what their attitude might be to letting us use their statistics, with proper attribution? Or does anyone know of any other database that we might be able to use?
Thanks,
Stephen Turner ( Talk) 09:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting deletion debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jalat Khan that project members might want to comment on. The player concerned has not played first-class or List A cricket but has played for his national side. Stephen Turner ( Talk) 13:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
The decision was delete so we can use this as a precedent. We do have to be careful of the overall notability rules, however, as these can override WP:Athlete and WP:CRIN if there is sufficient evidence of notability despite not meeting the level of competition criteria. BlackJack | talk page 13:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I came across this response to an understandable vandalism warning. It wasn't vandalism, but it does seem to have been (unless I missed a discussion somewhere) a unilateral, undiscussed move by a single (and, surprisingly, an experienced) editor and, it seems, part of a large series of such edits.
Personally, I disagree with such a move, mostly because the separation will put the Eng v Aus articles in a different style from other tour articles where the trophy has less notability.
I've not posted to any user talks - wanted to know what you guys think, esp. people like Blackjack who've done masses of work on tour articles. I perhaps have a jaundiced view, having written what is currently (but hopefully not for long) our only FA on a tour. -- Dweller ( talk) 19:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to propose a policy to address situations like this.
Cutting and pasting significant contributions from one article to another breaches GFDL and cannot be allowed. Even if all of the original contributors agree and are given due credit in the new article, there will be concerns about coherence between articles and reduction of the original article's quality. I think we should declare such actions immediately reversible. Copying and pasting is less serious, because at least the original contributions remain in the original article, but it is also a breach of GFDL and it creates duplication.
I think development of a separate series article should not be allowed if there is already a significant series section in the tour article. There is bound to be a lack of coherence and an element of duplication. Even if the tour article does not have a significant series section, given that most are only a results summary, we will ultimately face the problems of lost coherence and duplication of effort if someone goes ahead with a spinoff.
The principle doesn't only apply to tour vis-à-vis series. It would equally apply to a player's Test career being moved into a separate article; or to a separate article about one competition that took place during a particular season; or even to articles about individual Tests independent of a series, etc.
I propose that we should state as policy on the main project page that we will revert any subset/spinoff unless the proposal has been fully discussed at WT:CRIC and consensus has been achieved. I don't think this should be applied to long-standing subsets such as the 1948 and 2005 Ashes articles because their longevity implies consensus; but I do think we should take action to revert any recent or future subsets. BlackJack | talk page 09:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, for what it is worth, on BlackJack's page, I found a link to this: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use the most easily recognized name, where it says: "The names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers", and as I wrote in response to him: "It should probably also be noted that in common language, cricket fans usually refer to the '1981 Ashes series' or '1981 Ashes', not the 'Australian cricket team in England in 1981'. In fact I think I am fairly certain that it was in searching for a detail about the 1989 Ashes series that I discovered the coverage of the topic was so poor, and endeavoured to create pages for each of the Ashes series. Robert Fleming ( talk) 14:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
What is the general consensus of people interested in this debate in my following proposal. I will take one of the series and tours that has poor coverage at present, say the 1977 series and tour. And write two separate articles 1977 Ashes series, and an expanded Australian cricket team in England in 1977 - which at the moment is a short stub. If people think the combination works, we will retain the system, if the general consensus is unhappy with the result, we will merge the two, and go with just having tour articles. If the Wikiproject Cricket community is happy with the way the two compliment each other, I will continue to write detailed Ashes articles, alongside the existing tour articles. I think the current situation with the 1948 Ashes series, and Australian cricket team in England in 1948 is pretty much the ideal, IMHO. Robert Fleming ( talk) 16:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
In light of the above thread, I think it's time to bite the bullet on a thread I've long wanted to post. I propose we merge this information to the tour article and make this a redirect.
I now stand back and await a barrage of rotten eggs. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Erm, why? In any case the article will get too big eventually and some forking scheme has to exist. If people want a sequential thing, we can do a chronological fork and break it into months like Australian cricket team in England in May 1948, see 2008 Tour de France they just break the stage reports into two halves. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
One point worth mentioning is that at present, even when thee isn't a separate "Ashes" article, many of the tour articles lack the Ashes template and The Ashes category, which I think that they ought to have. JH ( talk page) 09:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, After using Stepshep's bot's help a whole bunch of cricketer's articles have been included in the Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of sportspeople
I was wondering if anybody knew a way to search for a large number of photos online in one go.
ajoy ( talk) 19:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The following are cricketers who have made their first-class debuts in England this season but as yet do not have Wikipedia articles (click on the player's number for a link to their Cricketarchive profile):
If you find this list useful, please feel free to knock off an article if you so wish. If you'd prefer I kept this list elsewhere, please say so - it's of no particular worry to me, there are several other places I can keep it safe. Bobo . 03:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
... I think this person is asking for help, if anone can. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 07:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
An IP address is presently editing county club articles with limited overs kit colours and details of the team's sponsors. Does this breach WP:ADS?
See recent edits to Derbyshire County Cricket Club, Essex County Cricket Club, Leicestershire County Cricket Club, Warwickshire County Cricket Club for examples. BlackJack | talk page 08:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
According to this page from the Southern Premier League as well as several local sources, the Isle of Wight has been a Minor County for a year now. Is the reason it is not shown at Minor counties of English cricket that it doesn't yet have a CCC First XI? Is there any other reason it is not shown? Are these valid reasons, or should it have been added to the list in 2007? -- Peeky44 ( talk) 17:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Aggers is busy shooting himself in the foot by chatting about his article on the wireless - have an eye on it, it's getting a bit silly over there. → Ollie ( talk • contribs) 14:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Given that the net result of the changes since the incident is this, what exactly prompted the problem - was he complaining about lack of accuracy? In which case, I guess it's still inacurate in his eyes. It's not a brilliant article, but it's not appalling. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I nominated the Indian national cricket captains at WP:FLRC. I believe some changes are needed in order to keep this list featured. Please, respond here. Thank you.-- Crzy cheetah 07:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Please see this diff and this Cricket Archive link and if you think I've gone wrong somewhere or overlooked something I shouldn't have, please revert back to the previous version. Bobo . 04:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:CRIN talks about individuals but is silent on the thousands and thousands of cricket clubs and associations. WP:ORG sets a high bar and is fairly clear but I wonder if some specific exceptions need to apply for cricket. Moondyne 10:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Following on from the clubs thread above, I notice that Category:English club cricket teams includes some but not all county clubs (including Sussex and Yorkshire) and several former first-class clubs like Hambledon and Slindon. All of these are in more specific categories like category:First-class cricket teams and category:Former first-class cricket clubs.
I also notice that category:Minor counties cricket is not part of the category:Cricket teams structure, which is surely wrong. It is under the cricket in England structure.
Should the English club teams category be reserved for clubs that have never been first-class and have not been in the Minor Counties Championship; or should it include all English clubs? At the moment, we are very inconsistent.
Any other ideas and suggestions? BlackJack | talk page 08:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I may well have missed a discussion about this, and if so please feel free to let me know, but I'm bothered by User:BlackJack's decision to remove the above category from people like Doug Padgett. I know I agreed with his reasoning about this subject couple of years ago, but I have changed my mind since then. I really don't see how we can have a category which contains only some of the people who qualify for it, and where inclusion is based on a necessarily subjective opinion of who was and who was not a "significant" MCC player. I really do think we need to include every MCC player or not have the category at all. Loganberry ( Talk) 22:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Generally speaking Los Angeles Krickets would not fit into the notability guidelines but the article refers to a large amount of press coverage in the 90s so perhaps it could pass. If it is notable the text would need some serious work on it. -- Roisterer ( talk) 02:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The above article has been nominated for speedy deletion. I have just created it and would like some help to prevent it being deleted as it is notable. Thanks. 02blythed ( talk) 04:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that there is only little info due to him only playing one match. So there is nothing really I can add. 02blythed ( talk) 05:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback above and the expansion of the article. What I will do is that I will add the teams he played for and the number of games he played for each team. I will also add the date of birth and death. I hope that this means that it will prevent future articles from being deleted. Thanks again. 02blythed ( talk) 22:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Another attempt at speedy delete. The player made two first-class appearances. Please follow the link to the AfD page and have your say. Thanks. BlackJack | talk page 15:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you all know that I'm in the process of nominating Bradman for Main Page on his 100th birthday, later this month. Under the new points system, it's a decent bet for approval, but Raul has his own criteria and it's not a certainty. -- Dweller ( talk) 14:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I was performing New Page Patrol when I stumbled upon a brace of articles about cricket players. Examining them, I found them to be lacking significant content, and so flagged them for speedy delete. The author did { hangon } and referenced me to your organization.
I see the criterion posted on the project page, specifically, "has appeared in at least one major cricket match since 1697 as a player or umpire". The two players in question, Matthew Allin and David Allison, both meet this criteria, just. That said, there's no notability for these players on a Wikipedia level in my opinion, and I think this part of your notability guideline comes in to play:
"Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion."
The author was able to provide aggregated statistics for these players, and a DOB/DOD, but that's it. My contention is that this doesn't warrant an article. I had suggested to the author that there be articles created for the clubs, with lists of players by year, rather than these not-even-stub articles. An admin deleted the articles, rendering our discussion moot as far as they were concerned, but there is still the larger question. Establishing a better notability criterion, OR going with club player lists will keep your members from wasting their time creating articles that only end up deleted within the hour. -- Forridean ( T/ C) 04:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
We have a problem here in that the two articles have already gone so can we be given an insight into what the content was? If David Allison is the man who played for OUCC in 1970 then he was a first-class player who should have an article as a great deal could be said about his career in that one season. The other player admittedly is marginal and "just qualifies" under the terms of WP:Athlete and WP:CRIN.
I think your point about creating a list of players in a club or other article has some merit because I've taken that approach myself in List of early English cricketers to 1786 where you can see who have articles and who do not. It is certainly worth considering and we'll see what other project members think. BlackJack | talk page 05:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
It's simple to my way of thinking. Notability is conferred by having played a sport at the highest level. That's not a WP:CRIC issue, it's WP:ATHLETE. Playing one solitary major match is automatic notability. Lack of further information is not a problem - we're not going to run out of pages and who's to say that definitely nothing futher can be added to those stubs. Cricket historians are working all round the world every day of the year and new documents and information are unearthed. So, in summary, they're notable, there's no harm to the Project in them existing and they can develop. Which way's DRV? (NB If they were speedied, it was an incorrect action, as they at least contained notability claims. That an admin failed to recognise them as claims is understandable) -- Dweller ( talk) 09:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Allison played in SIX first-class matches. How can he not be notable? I can understand the guy Forridean having doubts if the original article was just a sentence or two, but the admin who implemented the speedy delete needs to study WP:Athlete. I don't know who he is.
BlackJack |
talk page 19:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I wish to know how I should write the articles in the future. The problem is that I am creating artilces with few First class/ List A matches. I have already created all the bangladeshi cricketers that have ever palyed first class/ list A cricket as of the summer 2007. I did this to try and broaden our horizons and not forget the thousands of cricketers with few appearences that are still very important to wikipedia. I believed that if it was not for me and nick mallory they would never be created. This is what I am trying to do with English cricketers. I hope the above does not sound arrogant or bad in any way, i do not mean to be. I would like to have a possible template or such or all the info that needs to be added so articles will not be speedy deleted or deleted in general. I will now add the WP cricket tag on the talk page as suggested above. Thoughts greatly welcomed. Thanks. 02blythed ( talk) 01:27, 7 August 2008 (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 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | → | Archive 55 |
It's taken the Telegraph a long time to publish an obituary, but now that they've done so it's excellent: [1] Lots of good anecdotes, at least one or two of which ought to be included in his Wiki article. At the moment his article doesn't really give the flavour of the man. JH ( talk page) 16:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
The Rose Bowl, Hampshire page has been vandalised. I couldn't fix it. Could someone please do so? Abeer.ag ( talk) 06:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Another first-class cricketer up for deletion. Help appreciated! Andrew nixon ( talk) 21:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Despite all the huffing and puffing from the latest "expert" about how CricInfo does not recognise the Madras Presidency as first-class, guess where we found copies of the full scorecards? In addition to Stephen's advice above, can I recommend that WP:CRIN is always quoted in these discussions to emphasise notability in project terms and WP:ATHLETE in site terms. BlackJack | talk page 08:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The character who perpetrated the AfD has just been blocked indefinitely. Apparently he was troll! :-) BlackJack | talk page 19:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Another part of the Invincibles is now at FAC. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ian Johnson (cricketer) Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 07:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Some good news here. Once an announcement is made we can think about renaming articles etc. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ talk 08:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
It is now the "Sheffield Shield presented by Weet-Bix". An improvement perhaps but when CA uses the full name (six times in the linked media release) it reminds me of Idiocracy! I see a redirect has already been done, I seem to recall the SS and PC being different articles before. I am not sure if the move has lost any content. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 08:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The article really could do with a photo of the shield - from memory its a very impressive bit of silverware. I presume that it would be on display in the SCG currently. Moondyne 09:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I see this was unilaterally moved, without discussion from its previous name. I don't really mind whether it's called Flannels or Whites (cricket), but hate the current name passionately. I have a mild preference for Flannels, but recall that this is a geographic thing around the cricket world and think Whites is the more common term. So I'd suggest it goes to Whites, with the other two as redirects. Objections? Support? -- Dweller ( talk) 14:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
It's 'Whites', at least these days, and that's what the article should be called, although I suppose that doesn't cover boots and stuff like that. Flannels only refers to trousers anyway. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In case anyone cares. Moondyne 00:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Could someone who understands these things kidly slap an appropriate infobox on the page of the world's newest (most surprised?) Test cricketer? Thanks. -- Dweller ( talk) 09:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
This is the most bizarre England selection in recent memory, it's certainly the only time England have picked someone I've never even heard of. Derek Pringle was picked while still an undergraduate I believe but there'd been a lot of buzz about him and Tony Pigott was a strange one, but they were short of fast bowlers in New Zealand and he happened to be around - that's the closest one I can think of. Other swing bowlers have been picked as virtual one offs for Headingley in recent times but Mike Smith and Neil Mallender were respected county bowlers with hundreds of wickets to their names and Martin Saggers and Kabir Ali were decent county performers although obviously out of their class. Quite how we pick a chap who is nearly thirty, has only played a dozen first class games and only started bowling in England this year is beyond me. Matthew Hoggard was an ever present, knows Headingley like the back of his hand and now he's on the scrap heap apparently. Still anything's better than bringing Harmison or Plunkett back I suppose. Let's hope he takes five wickets but if he's more than a one test wonder I'll be amazed. Is the cupboard really so bare? Is this the upshot of half the counties having half a dozen Kolpac players in the ranks? If I was pretty much any up and coming fast bowling hopeful in England, or even seasoned country pro, I'd be pretty miffed at this one. Nick mallory ( talk) 11:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm just pleased that finally an Victorian who does not have the initials SKW is given a chance at Test level, even it is for England! -- Mattinbgn\ talk 01:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Carr was more understandable than this. England needed a secret weapon to pull themselves back in a series, Carr could bowl the new googly, he'd taken a spurt of wickets for Kent. It's not like there aren't other seasoned swing bowlers who could have been given a go. Carr took seven wickets in his first test, apparently, anyone think Pattinson will? Nick mallory ( talk) 05:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I was trying to find the article on this (I knew we had one), and finally found it at Rainout (sports). I set up some appropriate redirects, but at present Rainout (sports) only refers to rain stopping play in baseball and motorsports; it's very US-centric. Not knowing that much about cricket, I wondered if the experts here at WP:CRICKET might like to put together a paragraph regarding the effect of rain on cricket play on the Rainout (sports) article? I have left a similar sort of message on the WP:TENNIS talk page. Neıl ☄ 11:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Why not just have an article for 'rain stopped play' for cricket? Nobody would use 'rainout' for cricket. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Looks like CI is doing with us these days what we used to do with them - rewriting our articles. I first noticed it with Vizzy. It used to be like this when we expanded our article. CI article was recently changed to include three paragraphs from us, including a long quote from Mihir Bose and another one by Kanhai. Joginder Rao didn't have an article in CI till very recently. The source of the present article is an easy guess. Tintin 16:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia has ripped far more information from Cricinfo than they've ripped off us, to be fair. Nick mallory ( talk) 05:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
We have (at least) two articles for the forthcoming EPL - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty20_English_Premier_League and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Premier_League_%28cricket%29 here for example. The second appears to me to be a better template - could someone who knows what they are doing merge these two? JP ( talk) 15:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
While improving Pattinson's article (looks more like a 'proper' article now, lol) I noticed his brother has been selected for the Aussie U-19s, which led me to Australian_U-19_cricket_team#2008 Under-19s World Cup. Of the three blue links, I have serious doubts about the current notability of two of them. Anyone? -- Dweller ( talk) 15:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I've been pondering recently whether it would be possible to update the stats in the players' infoboxes automatically. I'm sure the programming would be possible: the more difficult part would be finding an always up-to-date database that we can pull the stats from. (It obviously wouldn't be appropriate to screen scrape from another website without permission).
Does anyone know of such a database? For example, does anyone have contacts at CricketArchive, and know what their attitude might be to letting us use their statistics, with proper attribution? Or does anyone know of any other database that we might be able to use?
Thanks,
Stephen Turner ( Talk) 09:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting deletion debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jalat Khan that project members might want to comment on. The player concerned has not played first-class or List A cricket but has played for his national side. Stephen Turner ( Talk) 13:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
The decision was delete so we can use this as a precedent. We do have to be careful of the overall notability rules, however, as these can override WP:Athlete and WP:CRIN if there is sufficient evidence of notability despite not meeting the level of competition criteria. BlackJack | talk page 13:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I came across this response to an understandable vandalism warning. It wasn't vandalism, but it does seem to have been (unless I missed a discussion somewhere) a unilateral, undiscussed move by a single (and, surprisingly, an experienced) editor and, it seems, part of a large series of such edits.
Personally, I disagree with such a move, mostly because the separation will put the Eng v Aus articles in a different style from other tour articles where the trophy has less notability.
I've not posted to any user talks - wanted to know what you guys think, esp. people like Blackjack who've done masses of work on tour articles. I perhaps have a jaundiced view, having written what is currently (but hopefully not for long) our only FA on a tour. -- Dweller ( talk) 19:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to propose a policy to address situations like this.
Cutting and pasting significant contributions from one article to another breaches GFDL and cannot be allowed. Even if all of the original contributors agree and are given due credit in the new article, there will be concerns about coherence between articles and reduction of the original article's quality. I think we should declare such actions immediately reversible. Copying and pasting is less serious, because at least the original contributions remain in the original article, but it is also a breach of GFDL and it creates duplication.
I think development of a separate series article should not be allowed if there is already a significant series section in the tour article. There is bound to be a lack of coherence and an element of duplication. Even if the tour article does not have a significant series section, given that most are only a results summary, we will ultimately face the problems of lost coherence and duplication of effort if someone goes ahead with a spinoff.
The principle doesn't only apply to tour vis-à-vis series. It would equally apply to a player's Test career being moved into a separate article; or to a separate article about one competition that took place during a particular season; or even to articles about individual Tests independent of a series, etc.
I propose that we should state as policy on the main project page that we will revert any subset/spinoff unless the proposal has been fully discussed at WT:CRIC and consensus has been achieved. I don't think this should be applied to long-standing subsets such as the 1948 and 2005 Ashes articles because their longevity implies consensus; but I do think we should take action to revert any recent or future subsets. BlackJack | talk page 09:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, for what it is worth, on BlackJack's page, I found a link to this: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use the most easily recognized name, where it says: "The names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers", and as I wrote in response to him: "It should probably also be noted that in common language, cricket fans usually refer to the '1981 Ashes series' or '1981 Ashes', not the 'Australian cricket team in England in 1981'. In fact I think I am fairly certain that it was in searching for a detail about the 1989 Ashes series that I discovered the coverage of the topic was so poor, and endeavoured to create pages for each of the Ashes series. Robert Fleming ( talk) 14:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
What is the general consensus of people interested in this debate in my following proposal. I will take one of the series and tours that has poor coverage at present, say the 1977 series and tour. And write two separate articles 1977 Ashes series, and an expanded Australian cricket team in England in 1977 - which at the moment is a short stub. If people think the combination works, we will retain the system, if the general consensus is unhappy with the result, we will merge the two, and go with just having tour articles. If the Wikiproject Cricket community is happy with the way the two compliment each other, I will continue to write detailed Ashes articles, alongside the existing tour articles. I think the current situation with the 1948 Ashes series, and Australian cricket team in England in 1948 is pretty much the ideal, IMHO. Robert Fleming ( talk) 16:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
In light of the above thread, I think it's time to bite the bullet on a thread I've long wanted to post. I propose we merge this information to the tour article and make this a redirect.
I now stand back and await a barrage of rotten eggs. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Erm, why? In any case the article will get too big eventually and some forking scheme has to exist. If people want a sequential thing, we can do a chronological fork and break it into months like Australian cricket team in England in May 1948, see 2008 Tour de France they just break the stage reports into two halves. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 02:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
One point worth mentioning is that at present, even when thee isn't a separate "Ashes" article, many of the tour articles lack the Ashes template and The Ashes category, which I think that they ought to have. JH ( talk page) 09:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, After using Stepshep's bot's help a whole bunch of cricketer's articles have been included in the Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of sportspeople
I was wondering if anybody knew a way to search for a large number of photos online in one go.
ajoy ( talk) 19:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The following are cricketers who have made their first-class debuts in England this season but as yet do not have Wikipedia articles (click on the player's number for a link to their Cricketarchive profile):
If you find this list useful, please feel free to knock off an article if you so wish. If you'd prefer I kept this list elsewhere, please say so - it's of no particular worry to me, there are several other places I can keep it safe. Bobo . 03:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
... I think this person is asking for help, if anone can. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 07:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
An IP address is presently editing county club articles with limited overs kit colours and details of the team's sponsors. Does this breach WP:ADS?
See recent edits to Derbyshire County Cricket Club, Essex County Cricket Club, Leicestershire County Cricket Club, Warwickshire County Cricket Club for examples. BlackJack | talk page 08:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
According to this page from the Southern Premier League as well as several local sources, the Isle of Wight has been a Minor County for a year now. Is the reason it is not shown at Minor counties of English cricket that it doesn't yet have a CCC First XI? Is there any other reason it is not shown? Are these valid reasons, or should it have been added to the list in 2007? -- Peeky44 ( talk) 17:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Aggers is busy shooting himself in the foot by chatting about his article on the wireless - have an eye on it, it's getting a bit silly over there. → Ollie ( talk • contribs) 14:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Given that the net result of the changes since the incident is this, what exactly prompted the problem - was he complaining about lack of accuracy? In which case, I guess it's still inacurate in his eyes. It's not a brilliant article, but it's not appalling. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I nominated the Indian national cricket captains at WP:FLRC. I believe some changes are needed in order to keep this list featured. Please, respond here. Thank you.-- Crzy cheetah 07:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Please see this diff and this Cricket Archive link and if you think I've gone wrong somewhere or overlooked something I shouldn't have, please revert back to the previous version. Bobo . 04:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:CRIN talks about individuals but is silent on the thousands and thousands of cricket clubs and associations. WP:ORG sets a high bar and is fairly clear but I wonder if some specific exceptions need to apply for cricket. Moondyne 10:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Following on from the clubs thread above, I notice that Category:English club cricket teams includes some but not all county clubs (including Sussex and Yorkshire) and several former first-class clubs like Hambledon and Slindon. All of these are in more specific categories like category:First-class cricket teams and category:Former first-class cricket clubs.
I also notice that category:Minor counties cricket is not part of the category:Cricket teams structure, which is surely wrong. It is under the cricket in England structure.
Should the English club teams category be reserved for clubs that have never been first-class and have not been in the Minor Counties Championship; or should it include all English clubs? At the moment, we are very inconsistent.
Any other ideas and suggestions? BlackJack | talk page 08:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I may well have missed a discussion about this, and if so please feel free to let me know, but I'm bothered by User:BlackJack's decision to remove the above category from people like Doug Padgett. I know I agreed with his reasoning about this subject couple of years ago, but I have changed my mind since then. I really don't see how we can have a category which contains only some of the people who qualify for it, and where inclusion is based on a necessarily subjective opinion of who was and who was not a "significant" MCC player. I really do think we need to include every MCC player or not have the category at all. Loganberry ( Talk) 22:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Generally speaking Los Angeles Krickets would not fit into the notability guidelines but the article refers to a large amount of press coverage in the 90s so perhaps it could pass. If it is notable the text would need some serious work on it. -- Roisterer ( talk) 02:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The above article has been nominated for speedy deletion. I have just created it and would like some help to prevent it being deleted as it is notable. Thanks. 02blythed ( talk) 04:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that there is only little info due to him only playing one match. So there is nothing really I can add. 02blythed ( talk) 05:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback above and the expansion of the article. What I will do is that I will add the teams he played for and the number of games he played for each team. I will also add the date of birth and death. I hope that this means that it will prevent future articles from being deleted. Thanks again. 02blythed ( talk) 22:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Another attempt at speedy delete. The player made two first-class appearances. Please follow the link to the AfD page and have your say. Thanks. BlackJack | talk page 15:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you all know that I'm in the process of nominating Bradman for Main Page on his 100th birthday, later this month. Under the new points system, it's a decent bet for approval, but Raul has his own criteria and it's not a certainty. -- Dweller ( talk) 14:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I was performing New Page Patrol when I stumbled upon a brace of articles about cricket players. Examining them, I found them to be lacking significant content, and so flagged them for speedy delete. The author did { hangon } and referenced me to your organization.
I see the criterion posted on the project page, specifically, "has appeared in at least one major cricket match since 1697 as a player or umpire". The two players in question, Matthew Allin and David Allison, both meet this criteria, just. That said, there's no notability for these players on a Wikipedia level in my opinion, and I think this part of your notability guideline comes in to play:
"Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion."
The author was able to provide aggregated statistics for these players, and a DOB/DOD, but that's it. My contention is that this doesn't warrant an article. I had suggested to the author that there be articles created for the clubs, with lists of players by year, rather than these not-even-stub articles. An admin deleted the articles, rendering our discussion moot as far as they were concerned, but there is still the larger question. Establishing a better notability criterion, OR going with club player lists will keep your members from wasting their time creating articles that only end up deleted within the hour. -- Forridean ( T/ C) 04:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
We have a problem here in that the two articles have already gone so can we be given an insight into what the content was? If David Allison is the man who played for OUCC in 1970 then he was a first-class player who should have an article as a great deal could be said about his career in that one season. The other player admittedly is marginal and "just qualifies" under the terms of WP:Athlete and WP:CRIN.
I think your point about creating a list of players in a club or other article has some merit because I've taken that approach myself in List of early English cricketers to 1786 where you can see who have articles and who do not. It is certainly worth considering and we'll see what other project members think. BlackJack | talk page 05:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
It's simple to my way of thinking. Notability is conferred by having played a sport at the highest level. That's not a WP:CRIC issue, it's WP:ATHLETE. Playing one solitary major match is automatic notability. Lack of further information is not a problem - we're not going to run out of pages and who's to say that definitely nothing futher can be added to those stubs. Cricket historians are working all round the world every day of the year and new documents and information are unearthed. So, in summary, they're notable, there's no harm to the Project in them existing and they can develop. Which way's DRV? (NB If they were speedied, it was an incorrect action, as they at least contained notability claims. That an admin failed to recognise them as claims is understandable) -- Dweller ( talk) 09:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Allison played in SIX first-class matches. How can he not be notable? I can understand the guy Forridean having doubts if the original article was just a sentence or two, but the admin who implemented the speedy delete needs to study WP:Athlete. I don't know who he is.
BlackJack |
talk page 19:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I wish to know how I should write the articles in the future. The problem is that I am creating artilces with few First class/ List A matches. I have already created all the bangladeshi cricketers that have ever palyed first class/ list A cricket as of the summer 2007. I did this to try and broaden our horizons and not forget the thousands of cricketers with few appearences that are still very important to wikipedia. I believed that if it was not for me and nick mallory they would never be created. This is what I am trying to do with English cricketers. I hope the above does not sound arrogant or bad in any way, i do not mean to be. I would like to have a possible template or such or all the info that needs to be added so articles will not be speedy deleted or deleted in general. I will now add the WP cricket tag on the talk page as suggested above. Thoughts greatly welcomed. Thanks. 02blythed ( talk) 01:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)