Thomas Land (cricketer) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 3 February 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Hambledon Club. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire 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.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire
I removed the piped link from "madge" to cunt. There is no mention in the target article that explains to a casual reader why the link sends them there. There is nothing in this article that explains the link. I realize that there was an invisible "edit mode" note that referred people to the talk page of the Hambledon, Hampshire, but how many casual readers would hit the edit link and see the note? If "madge" must be explained (and I can see why an explanation might be necessary), it should either be in the main article, or at the Madge disambig page if "madge" is wikilinked again. Joyous | Talk02:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is much better after BlackJack's latest edit, thank you Jack. But I still wonder if there's a reference we can cite to justify the claim. I was hoping that we could just cite the OED, but I checked and was surprised to find that this meaning of "madge" doesn't occur in there — apparently a madge is either a magpie, or a barn owl, or a kind of lead hammer wrapped in cloth. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If it doesn't appear in the OED that's reason to suspect that the meaning may well be false. This statement therefore needs robust sourcing. 86.136.94.9516:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
