Jump to content

Talk:Bill O'Reilly (cricketer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleBill O'Reilly (cricketer) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 20, 2010.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 11, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
May 22, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 20, 2018, October 6, 2019, and December 20, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Vote to REDIRECT Bill O'Reilly to Bill O'Reilly (commentator)

[edit]

There is a new vote on the Bill O'Reilly page to change its name to Bill O'Reilly (disambiguation). The old vote was archived before it was completed. With this change the search term 'Bill O'Reilly' will be automatically redirect to Bill O'Reilly (commentator). This vote is taking place at Talk:Bill_O'Reilly#New_Vote_on_Disambiguation_page

The reason for the change is convenience; the usage of the Bill O'Reilly (commentator) page is at least 100x greater and google hits of local and international web pages pull Bill O'Reilly (commentator) before and more frequently than Bill O'Reilly (cricketer) in every english speaking country except Australia where it depends on how you spell bill oreilly. Mrdthree 07:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The vote has concluded and the vote to redirect failed to acheive consensus (12 for 10 against). Mrdthree 15:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

[edit]

Someone has proposed a move of Bill O'Reilly (commentator) to Bill O'Reilly. Check out Talk:Bill O'Reilly (commentator) for discussion. Nil Einne 09:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The debate has now been closed, with an overwhelming consensus against the move. Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FA Drive - To do list

[edit]
  • review article structure
  • add cn requests
  • cite cn requests
  • copyedit
  • complete addition of material from Wisden obituary
  • massively expand post cricket career. The guy had a hugely successful journalism career. May be tricky - he died in 1993, so we'll probably need dead wood sources, as Internet sources will be patchy from that long ago.
  • check life story is "well balanced" across the years and for hagiography - particularly ensure controversy and negativity is represented appropriately, if it occurred.
  • add / check images and captions
  • add / check graphs and tables
  • Peer review
  • Check image licences
  • WP:FAC

That's all. --Dweller 08:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peebles quote

[edit]

There's something strange going on with the tenses in that quote. --Dweller 16:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, first is should be was. Or is that Tiswas? The Rambling Man 16:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at it again this evening. ;-) Johnlp 17:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checked it again: the quote is correct with "is". Maybe grammar wasn't Peebles' strong point? Johnlp 20:40, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've hacked it. I think it's an improvement. Consensus? --Dweller 08:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Peebles of course died well before O'Reilly, so I suppose the "is" might refer to the fact that Bill was still around, and still cantankerous, when it was written? Anyway, 'tis better as you've got it. Johnlp 08:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Career history

[edit]

We can go two ways with this. Currently, it's chronological, but it means the domestic achievements interrupt the flow of the Test narrative and vice-versa.

I certainly appreciate that there are arguments for the status quo, but I'd opt for summarising his domestic career into a separate section, giving greater flow and freedom to telling the story of his international success. What say others? --Dweller 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suits me. The Rambling Man 16:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd argue to retain the chronological approach, because at the time he was playing, Test cricket hadn't assumed the primacy over other forms of cricket that it has in recent years. Also, there isn't that much domestic cricket in his career to report on: after 1933-34, he only appeared in occasional state and trial matches until 1937-38, when he turned out quite regularly for New South Wales again. He's actually, in the middle, most productive period of his career, almost exclusively an international bowler, taking many more wickets for the Test team and touring sides than he does in domestic games. The domestic career in effect tops and tails his international career, and doesn't need to interrupt the flow very much at all. Johnlp 21:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Thanks. --Dweller 08:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Suits me as well, either way works. I guess the new sections should go! The Rambling Man 09:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is this the same idiot who is a FOX news anchor? I'm confused. If he's not the same Bill O'Reilly, from the Factor please put a note in disambiguation. I think most people around the world are more familiar with the fucktard newsreporter.200.6.185.88 (talk) 08:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strange deletion

[edit]

We seem to have lost the paragraph about his becoming a regular in the NSW team and his Test debut. I don't quite see when it disappeared by going back through the audit trail, but it means there is a bit of a jump now from him being a student and being a Test regular. Johnlp 16:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scrub that. It seems to be back again. Johnlp 17:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

The first cn is from the Wisden report on MCC in Australasia in the 1934 edition: I'm away from home at present and don't have access to the actual book, but the averages are on page 670 (ref 13) and show Grimmett temporarily underperforming (he came back strongly in 1934, of course) and only one fast bowler used in most of the matches, if I remember right. I think the whole report is pages 649 to 670. If you want to put that in I can check for certain on Thursday (late) when I will be back home.

The second cn re O'Reilly not bowling much in state matches in 1934-35 and not at all in 1935-36 comes from Wisden 1936 and 1937, but you can probably check it through Cricket Archive as well. I'll see if I can find that from here. Try this.

The others will follow. Johnlp 16:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph with two cn's in it is all from the Australians in England report in Wisden 1939, which starts on page 197 (I think). Again, I'll check on Thursday if no one else can in the mean time. Or just put ref 4 for the whole paragraph.

The final cn on the shift in NSW state cricket towards seam and away from spin after the war is in the report on Cricket in Australia in the 1947 Wisden. Again, not with me, so exact pages will have to wait or be found elsewhere.

Were there any others? Johnlp 16:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to ambiguate

[edit]

Please see Talk:Bill O'Reilly#Move to ambiguate. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 15:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The debate was just closed with no consensus.[1] Zzyzx11 (talk) 09:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expand

[edit]

I don't think it is comprehensive and plan to expand YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He went bush in 1928 and missed major cricket for a few years, which is not in the article, stuff about his RL interfering YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Best Bowler

[edit]

Why is most of the article set on stating and proving that he was the best bowler in the history of the game? Seems strange because there's not much statistics to prove that. In fact the linked page ICC Player Rankings does not show him anywhere in the top. Cribananda (talk) 02:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's been dead a long time. The ICC Rankings show current players. If you scroll down his article, you'll find a graph showing that the retrospective application of ICC Rankings computer calculates he was #1 in the world for most of his career. --Dweller (talk) 11:48, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Had to say....

[edit]

Bill O Reilly the cricketer? On of the best "spin bowlers" in history? The one who had "no pretensions to grace of style" but "could hit tremendously hard and was always a menace"? That Bill O Reilly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.62.61.66 (talk) 07:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no inconsistency. The two quotes you mention refer to his batting prowess, not his bowling. In cricket, every player must bat, whether picked as a specialist batsman, bowler or wicket-keeper. --Dweller (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Tell that to Chris Martin (cricketer) Nil Einne (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the original comment was a wry observation that the quotes could apply equally to the other Bill O'Reilly. :-) -dmmaus (talk) 05:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason we are not using the Distinguish template?

[edit]

like...

Not to be confused with Bill O'Reilly (political commentator).

There may have been discussions in the past but i dont see them. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it's because of the guideline Wikipedia:Hatnote, specifically section 5.4. --Erik Lönnrot (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good point The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good call. Agreed. --Dweller (talk) 09:01, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline (for those who'd prefer not to have to click through) says:

a reader following links within Wikipedia or using Wikipedia's own search engine would not have ended up at tree (set theory) if they were looking for other types of trees, as tree does not redirect there.

This is logical. No-one will end up at an article called "Bill O'Reilly (cricketer)", if they're not looking for a cricketer. If we had two cricketers called Bill O'Reilly we might need a hat-note. --Dweller (talk) 11:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2011 proposal to ambiguate

[edit]

Another proposal has been made to make Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) the primary topic of Bill O'Reilly. Feel free to join the discussion at Talk:Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)#Requested move. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2013 proposal to ambiguate

[edit]

There has been another proposal to make Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) the primary topic of Bill O'Reilly. Feel free to join the discussion at Talk:Bill O'Reilly#2013 Requested move. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn. HiLo48 (talk) 06:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lede issue

[edit]

The lead introduction is five paragraphs. WP:LEAD wants no more than four, unless restructuring/rewriting the introduction is impossible. --George Ho (talk) 16:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uh-huh. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2016 proposal to ambiguate

[edit]

There has been another proposal to make Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) the primary topic of Bill O'Reilly. Feel free to join the discussion at Talk:Bill O'Reilly (political commentator). Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:12, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bill O'Reilly (cricketer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bill O'Reilly (cricketer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bill O'Reilly (cricketer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:28, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bill_O%27Reilly_(cricketer)&oldid=1229040973"