This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket
There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
User:PeeJay2K3 states that it "doesn't look that good" to have the squad table in the centre of the page, yet this is the standard across all of these articles. Can a better reason be presented to go against this long-standing formatting? Thanks. LugnutsFire Walk with Me13:19, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just because something is apparently a "standard" doesn't mean it can't be changed. It seems like it was a formatting trend that was applied years ago and has never gone away. Honestly, there's just no reason for the table to be centred, and it could perhaps even be considered a little jarring for readers to suddenly have a table appear in the middle of the page when everything else is typically aligned to the left. If it must be aligned to anything other than the left, I would suggest the font size be reduced and the table moved to the right, but that would be far less preferable than simply leaving it on the left. – PeeJay13:23, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Lugnuts here. Further, I had considered reverting as I'm not sure about the date range for single day tour showing as 3 May 2019–3 May 2019, which does look bad in my opinion. Having said that, the previous England tour of Ireland (2015) and tour of Scotland (2018) both just have the start date and that does also look odd (10 June 2018– ) also doesn't look great. Bs1jac (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Bs1jac: Okay, but why do you agree? If it's just a case of the formatting now being different from every other tour article (which it isn't, there are some with the table aligned to the left), then I'm willing to make an effort to change more as I come across them. As for the infobox, I've requested that it be fixed at the template talk page. – PeeJay15:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PeeJay2K3: Thanks for the infobox - would be great if a single date tour could just have the one date. Regarding the squad alignment, to be honest I'm not that bothered either way. With only two lists it does look a little odd I suppose, but I actually prefer the central alignment when there are more.Bs1jac (talk) 15:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, fair enough. I'm happy for us all to use the WP:ILIKEIT argument, as long as we all know where we stand. My issue is that there doesn't seem to be a policy-based reason to add extra code just so we can put the table in the centre of the page. – PeeJay16:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to change, but as it's been the same layout for as long as I can recall, and that no-one else has ever changed or questioned it, I don't see a compelling reason to change it across all of these articles. LugnutsFire Walk with Me16:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Considering I've already been changing old ones as I came across them, it doesn't seem to have caused much consternation with anyone else. What was the reason to put it in the centre of the page to begin with anyway? – PeeJay09:05, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I wasn't suggesting that because I prefer something, that's how it should be. I gave my opinion (and not a very strong opinion), yes, the same as you gave yours. I mainly just wanted to make the comment about the date range.Bs1jac (talk) 21:26, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
