Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 74

Archive 70

←

Archive 72

Archive 73

Archive 74

Archive 75

Archive 76

→

Archive 80

Review needed

Could someone review the following AfC submissions?

• Harshad Khadiwale
• Anustup Majumdar
• Robin Bist
• Bhargav Bhatt

Thanks 117.198.105.101 (talk) 00:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Done. As you are creating quite a few articles, you could consider opening an account as it'll ease this process.—SpacemanSpiff 08:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Two articles about the same cricketer

Two articles on Wikipedia, KP Appanna and Kotragada Appanna are about the same cricketer KP Appanna. I feel that the latter needs to be deleted, since KP Appanna is more systematically written. Fenopy (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I know I created the initial article, back in 2008. Feel free to merge and consolidate. Hope all are well. Bobo. 23:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Found one more cricketer having two articles- Vinay Kumar and Ranganath Vinay Kumar.. Fenopy (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

SGGH has redirected the latter. extra999 (talk) 02:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Appanna, which is the correct spelling of his first name. It is spelt Kotragada on CricketArchive and Kotarangada on ESPNcricinfo. Hack (talk) 06:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Anyways, I have redirected Kotragada Appanna because KP article has the same information as it, and as Fenopy pointed out more systematically written. extra999 (talk) 06:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help guys. Cheers. Fenopy (talk) 16:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Jim Creighton

I am attempting to put the finishing touches on this article for a GA nom in the near future, and would like to know if this community would have better knowledge of this man's cricket career. Any help would be appreciated.Neonblak ^talk - 16:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

There are three scorecards from his career on CricketArchive, including one for the US national side alongside baseball hall of farmers Harry and George Wright, so there isn't much to go on there. I'll try and do something in the next few days though. Andrew nixon (talk) 05:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I got a note on my talk page as well. If someone had the interest and time to take on the Cricket sections of Harry and George, that would be great. Expanding and ultimately trying to promote any of these articles is most likely going to take cross-project teamwork, unless someone knows both sports really well, and in the case of George, probably tennis and golf :)Neonblak ^talk - 08:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Expanding the cricket content of George Wright's article is certainly on my to-do list. He's actually the only person to have played Major League Baseball and first-class cricket. His cricket career is more significant than Creighton's, with much more information available, so that'd be quite a big task. I might look at it when I have a few days off work next month. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

JohnLeachismymate

A user calling themselves JohnLeachismymate seems to have embarked on a campaign of vandalism against articles to which Blackjack has contributed, inserting gratuitous references to "John Leach" and "Jim Hardie". See Special:Contributions/JohnLeachismymate. I think we can guess who it's likely to be. I don't know what the required procedure is in such cases, so I will leave any action to someone who does. JH (talk page) 17:18, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Isn't it fairly obvious that it's the same person discussed a few sections above? Is there an SPI for this? —SpacemanSpiff 17:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a Daft, swims like a Daft, and quacks like a Daft, then it probably is... yep, we know who it is!!! I've added this new sock to an ongoing SPI. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I saw one of these obvious vandalism-only accounts earlier today and reported it to WP:ANI. It was deleted only a few minutes later. I've added this one too but wonder now if I've duplicated things? Sorry, I didn't realise the purpose of the SPI process. --Brian (talk) 19:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Nah, that won't cause any duplications. Seems someone actioned your report and slapped a final warning on User talk:JohnLeachismymate for vandalism. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I've blocked and noted on the SPI. I've also watchlisted the SPI. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 19:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll get the hang of it. --Brian (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

What a poor, pathetic sad life this individual leads. Does he really have nothing better to do? Andrew nixon (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Like extra999 (talk) 08:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Cricket season articles listed for deletion

• 2005 English cricket season (8–30 April) (AfD discussion)

It's a bulk nomination for all of that season's articles, not just that one. Uncle G (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but is there a specific reason for the 2005 season to be split like this? The main article 2005 English cricket season is quite good and summarizes things at an encyclopaedic level, similar to the other years. —SpacemanSpiff 13:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

It was very much the thought at the time that individual seasons were too large to be accommodated in one article, and a couple of then-prolific contributors (two of the most influential people in getting this whole project off the ground) did a lot of work on the 2005 season articles. By the time the 2006 season rolled around, their attentions had been diverted elsewhere and no one else picked up the gauntlet (for understandable reasons). They are a bit anomalous among our other coverage, though they don't do much harm either in my view. Johnlp (talk) 14:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I turned up long after these articles were created, by a Norwegian guy if I'm correct? They don't cause any harm, but I think it's an AfD with a pleasant outcome for the articles. Looking at this list mentioned in the AfD, reminds me of the days the minor counties look part in one-day matches... ah those were the days! Sad they were excluded. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

User:VictoriaHardie

Dafts back.... *sighs* Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

You know, I actually missed where all this started, and why. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 20:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Think it's a long-running dispute between Daft and BlackJack. Seems like it goes back to 2008, so Daft has been at it for 4 years. I told Daft to get lost about 18 months ago, after which he has taken a disliking to me as well. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

He seems to have some sort of personal aminosity towards BlackJack. I first encountered him in 2008 under the guise of User:Fieldgoalunit when he took issue with some work I'd done on Argentina national cricket team and John Jackson (Somerset cricketer). My work on the former article inspired him to say that people like me "render the WP project risible and [are] why the students who attend my University(Keele) are forbidden to use it as a reference." I appreciate that he has a problem with Wikipedia - many people do, and I have my own issues with it - but rather than try to improve things, he attacks people and vandalises articles. It's a strange affair indeed, and really rather sad. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Is his issue just that he believes we replicate Cricket Archive, or something? It does seem rather sad. His efforts to combat those people here he doesn't like seem to have consumed his time and effort to a magnitude far greater than whatever the original problem was, while it doesn't seem to take up any of our time at all... S.G.^(GH) _ping! 09:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Keele, I was under the impression it was one where a recent 9 wicket victory in a Test happened. We all have disagreements with eachother, it naturally happens on a collaborative effort like this, but this guy seems to spend all his time on some vendetta. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Edgar Willsher

Undoubtedly needs a bit of a clean up and expansion beyond what Cricket Archive can give me, but I think it can be moved to a Start class from a Stub class now. I note he is in our 'key biographies' list. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 15:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

"Despite having only one lung". How weird would that feel! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Notability?

What do people think about the notability of the Pakistan Champions Cricket League article? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

And these: Youth C.C, Khyber Green, Al-Noor Gymkhana, Combined C.C. extra999 (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Question

Can anyone tell me the cricketer who at least has played a First-Class/List-A game, went on to have the highest political post for an cricketer? extra999 (talk) 05:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

• Alec Douglas-Home who played 10 first-class matches was Prime Minister of the UK for just under a year in the 1960s.
• Kamisese Mara who played two first-class matches for Fiji became the first Prime Minister of Fiji and served in the position for 25 years, and then as President for a further seven years. Harrias ^talk 06:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

George Cakobau was Governer-General for part of Mara's term as Prime Minister and was a former first-class cricketer. The deputy Prime Minister at the time was also a first-class cricker, so the top three positions in the Fijian government were all first-class cricketers at one point! Andrew nixon (talk) 06:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

And the same for an international cricketer. extra999 (talk) 07:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

That would be the Fijians. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Fiji and international? I meant Test/ODI/T20I. extra999 (talk) 08:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't know if it was really a political position per se but England Test cricketer K. S. Ranjitsinhji was Jam Sahib of Nawanagar through political machinations. Hack (talk) 08:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Lord Harris and Stanley Jackson, both of whom captained England in Tests, would be strong candidates. The former was at various times Under-Secretary of State for India, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for War and Governor of the Presidency of Bombay. The latter was Financial Secretary to the War Office and Governor of Bengal. JH (talk page) 08:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

John Major wishes he was. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. extra999 (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

No Dada No KKR

Does anyone find this article useful? No Dada No KKR. It appears to be a rather unnecessary article about some protest group formed by local fans.Dee03 (talk) 06:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Yup, AfD it. extra999 (talk) 07:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

List of cricketers banned for match fixing

Currently Wikipedia's list of cricketers banned for match fixing includes Marlon Samuels, and I'm concerned that he may have been put there inaccurately. In 2008 Samuels was found to have breached the ICC Code of Conduct, article 4 ix and received a two-year ban [1]. The key phrase was "receiving money, benefit or other reward which could bring him or the game of cricket into disrepute". This Cricinfo article explicitly states "The charge does not refer to match-fixing, which carries a lifetime ban". In contrast, Messrs Butt, Asir, and Amir were charged with breaches of article 2, which states "Fixing or contriving in any way or otherwise influencing improperly, or being a party to any effort to fix or contrive in any way or otherwise influence improperly, the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of any International Match or ICC Event". Given this, would anyone object to me removing Samuels from list of cricketers banned for match fixing? Nev1 (talk) 20:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

No but it may be interesting to see if any popular press, e.g. BBC etc, refer to it as "match fixing" on Samuels' behalf, so you could include a justification for his non-inclusion by virtue of the various articles (both online and legislative) that you mention in a footnote perhaps, a little like a hat-trick (in football) that was nullified later by the dubious goals committee? Just a thought. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I think there are a number of reasons for confusion in our list. First of all, Samuels' ban was often mentioned in the same breath as match fixing, and before the investigation the concerns were of match fixing. Secondly, the phrasing of the reports on his ban (here's the BBC coverage, and here is the Telegraph's story) doesn't explicitly mention fixing, so it is left to the reader to make up their mind. The phrase "receiving money, benefit or other reward which could bring him or the game of cricket into disrepute" is often repeated in reports and its ambiguity may be part of the problem. Taking ESPNcricinfo's profile of Samuels as an example, it says "match-fixing allegations reared its head in 2008 when (Samuels) was found guilty of "receiving money, or benefit or other reward that could bring him or the game of cricket into disrepute". It doesn't say he was guilt of match fixing but, the phrasing could easily be read that way, while I feel conflicts with the ICC's judgement. Nev1 (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

So can we have a section for partial bans or have a note column where you tell this, extra999 (talk) 02:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd say renaming the article to "List of Cricketers banned for corruption" would be the best choice. A lot of the players on the list haven't actually been banned for match fixing for starters. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

That's probably a better name, especially given that spot fixing is the more likely case going forward. —SpacemanSpiff 12:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

KP retires from one day cricket

[2]. huh?! S.G.^(GH) _ping! 11:48, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not surprised when it comes to ODIs (a format I think is in its waning years), but I must admit to being ignorant to the rule which the ECB also has which forces retirement from T20Is as well. So I'm a little surprised that KP (obviously knowing that) has chosen this moment to retire with the T20 WC just around the corner... although saying that, it wouldn't surprise me if the ECB make an exception and KP plays. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:51, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Darren Gough was sounding off on this on TalkSport last night. He was saying that the ECB are inflexible, but the current contract expires in September and the new one may be more flexible. --Dweller (talk) 08:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Harbhajan Singh needs a clean up

Can anyone tidy up Harbhajan Singh? The thing seems to be falling to pieces under the weight of crap contributions and there is no way that it qualifies as a featured article as it now stands. - Sitush (talk) 15:19, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikilove....

I just created this new wikilove for users with good contributions to cricket articles. Thanks ƬheⱾtrikeҾagle ^™ 12:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

		The Cricket Barnstar
		{{{1}}}

New Zealand cricket team in Pakistan in 1996–97

What more is there in include here? I fancy making something of it. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 13:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

The scorecards would be useful I think, and expanding the names out in the infobox, rather than using initials would probably be a good idea. Possibly add a list of both of the squads if the information is available? I'll have a look over it briefly. Harrias ^talk 13:30, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

The Thornbury Turf Strokers

While making my way through the project's category system, I found this article which was in the wrong categories. Having read it, I think it is non-notable about a minor club and so I've used Twinkle to put it in the AFD process. I believe it's standard practice to inform the interested project so please look at the article and its AFD entry if you're interested.

And here's another AFD nomination. --Brian (talk) 08:59, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the notification but the easiest method is to check on the article talk page that all appropriate WikiProjects are listed. Most active projects have article alert systems in place to detect afds and other issues with their project's articles. There is also the WP:DELSORT system that allocates AFDs to various topic lists. The-Pope (talk) 10:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Notification

Just to tell you that along with Jfd34, have just refurbished and restarted WP:CRIC/GR, which was dead after the sudden departure of EdChem. extra999 (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Unnecessary categories?

Category:History of British cricket, Category:Cricket in the United Kingdom and the like seem pointless to me unless there is a site policy reason for having them. Can anyone advise? --Brian (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Tour categories

Further to the Australian cricket team in England and Ireland in 2012 discussion above, there is inconsistency in the categorisation of tour articles and I've found a couple of articles by chance rather than through any standard navigation process. I'll investigate this situation and try to ensure compliance. It looks as if articles about tours up to the start of ODI did have a standard, probably established in the early days of the project when it seems there may have been a drive to create tour articles. It is mostly articles about recent tours that don't comply. I'll report back when I've made some progress: it'll be an interesting challenge. --Brian (talk) 05:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I've been making a bit of progress by concentrating on the leading associate countries Ireland, Scotland (I didn't know we are in the top league!), Kenya, Canada, Netherlands and Afghanistan and trying to make their categorisations comply with the Test nations. Difficult because of few articles but feasible. The standard, or at least the normal practice, for tours is to apply five category types – year in cricket, year in host nation, host nation's season, visitors' tours abroad and international competitions. --Brian (talk) 18:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Infobox creation tool

A few years back User:Sam Korn had made an infobox creation tool but it's no longer accessible and he isn't active anymore either. Is there any other such tool available and/or could we think of creating one that will populate from CricketArchive or Cricinfo? If others think this might be helpful then we could ask around for help... cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:51, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Looking at how many biographies don't have infoboxes, I think it would be fantastic to have an infobox creation tool. Jenks24 (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Any WikiProject we can ask? extra999 (talk) 17:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I doubt there's a WikiProject for it, but there are editors with those skills. I'd asked ThaddeusB a long time ago if he could build a bot to actually go around updating the infoboxes, technically feasible, but we never got around to providing the specs and more importantly I don't think we found if CI or CA terms of use would allow that (Google's terms of use don't allow bots to run searches except through some specific process and so on). OTOH, a tool on the toolserver would still be human operated so it shouldn't violate any of these terms, I'm guessing most people who have an account on toolserver could do that, I don't know who they'd be! But if a bot to do this task is something we'd consider I'm sure there are project members who could bring up the subject with CA. —SpacemanSpiff 18:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

But bots do things like this, such as this one which retrieves information from Alexa, to update the monthly ranking for websites. Is a similar thing not possible here, cannot we ask the bot's operator, or the CI/CA terms shut the gates before that? extra999 (talk) 05:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

We'll need to find the terms of use before any requirements can be set for a bot. One of the CA friendlies on this board might be able to help with that. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Same person?

Is this Robert Barclay Fox the same as this R Barclay Fox. The article has a date of birth of 1873 and CI says 1879. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Given the Cornish connection it seems likely. Have you checked the 1935 Wisden in case it carries an obituary? JH (talk page) 08:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Just checked it and no mention. I googled his name and phrases related to "Cornwall" and "cricket" but they doesn't turn up anything. Guess I can't be sure 100%. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:CRIN re status of leagues

A discussion on an AFD page has highlighted a flaw in WP:CRIN which provides some guidelines about minor clubs in England and Australia but not about leagues themselves. Logically, one might assume that the Bradford, Lancashire, Central Lancashire and ECB Premier Leagues are notable but what of non-ECB Premiers that might be notable in themselves although none of their member clubs are? Also, what about minor clubs in other countries? --Brian (talk) 04:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

We've been around these loops a few times over the past few years. Discussion on club notability for countries other than England and Australia gets stuck on lack of input from other countries; on leagues themselves there has been little discussion, but there are considerations of general, regional or local notability as well as cricket notability that might apply here. My own view is that we should be fairly relaxed about the leagues we cover so long as there is sufficient referenced material: they also offer potential places to "park" contentious articles on clubs that don't make our rather more stringent guidelines, and they do little harm. Johnlp (talk) 09:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Richard Daft again?

A heads up that Richard Daft may have returned, this time under the alias of Cheesecombe. See the section that he's added to BrianDeeG's user page (note not to his talk page) here. Probably not enough evidence to do anything yet, but the suggestion that bona fide users are sock-puppets of BlackJack is characteristic. JH (talk page) 17:08, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

He never really left, I've blocked three socks in the past week or so, including one a few hours ago. Blocked this one now. —SpacemanSpiff 17:14, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Does this guy ever give up? He must know each time he appears he's going to get blocked. I don't know why he wastes the effort knowing that. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I wrote to AssociateAffiliate's talk page and gave a view about the troll trying to bother him. It looks like the troll thinks that, as he uses several accounts, other people must be doing the same. It's disruptive behaviour, that's all, to try and make people stop using the project but I've no idea what conceivable reason may be behind it. Stupid. --Brian (talk) 18:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Record of unluckiness

Which international captain holds the record of losing the most tosses consecutively? extra999 (talk) 08:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

It's either Nasser Hussain who lost more than 10 in a row at the beginning of the last decade (not sure of the exact number, 12 or 13 perhaps), or M. S. Dhoni who I think a couple of years ago had an unlucky run, though I don't know if he managed to surpass Hussain. Of course, having won the toss, which captain made the worst decision? Let's ask Ricky!... 407 runs later and day one ended for him!!! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

14! extra999 (talk) 09:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Help please at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No Dada No KKR

I don't get it. What am I missing? --Dweller (talk) 16:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Please, I'd be really grateful. --Dweller (talk) 08:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Cricket match summary

What is the purpose of this template? What function does it serve that couldn't be covered by either {{Test match}} or {{Limited overs matches}}? – PeeJay 10:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

It's generally used when much more than average, no. of matches are played in a tournament/series, since this this the compact version, like. extra999 (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I guess my point is that it's not really that much more compact than either of the other two templates and looks pretty much the same... Can't we dispense with it? – PeeJay 18:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Defunct cricket venues

Category:Defunct cricket venues and its sub-categories, which are within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Shameless, shameless, shameless self promotion

.... but I took a stab at writing a cricket blog. It's in its infancy, but Andrew Nixon didn't laugh so maybe you won't either :). Find it here. Who else writes? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 18:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

It's a good read, but why are your player links to Cricinfo rather than to their Wikipedia articles? :) JH (talk page) 18:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Cricinfo is a hundered times more reliable, especially when you are looking for stats. :) extra999 (talk) 01:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I wrote one on the England Test series against India last summer, but I've not written anything on cricket since. It's here if anyone wants to have a read. – PeeJay 18:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Australian cricket team in the British Isles in 2012

User:Mtking has merged the two articles Australian cricket team in England in 2012 and Australian cricket team in Ireland in 2012 to create Australian cricket team in the British Isles in 2012. Personally, I'm not too happy about this merger, since England and Ireland are separate international cricket-playing countries; if England toured South Africa and Zimbabwe at around the same time, we wouldn't merge the articles just because of the geographical proximity of the two countries. Traditionally, we keep tours of England and tours of Ireland in separate articles. What do others think we should do here? – PeeJay 07:53, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

There have been other occasions when teams have toured both - what have we done with them? We should be consistent. Didn't the all-conquering West Indies lose a one-day game in Ireland before winning one of their world cup wins? --Dweller (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

There don't seem to have been many "tours" of Ireland in the past, but according to Category:International cricket tours of Ireland, the last time Australia toured England and Ireland at the same time, the Ireland portion got its own article. – PeeJay 08:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I think all the other articles of this type tend to be of the "Australian cricket team in England in xxxx" variety and if the teams have strayed into Ireland or Scotland we've tended to count this as part of the tour of England, since the matches played there were of lesser status than the Test or ODI games in England (and however "fair" you want to be about these things, it's pretty unlikely that the Australians would have sailed the ocean blue for several months just for the joy of a single match in Edinburgh, where rain would probably stop play anyway). This tour is a bit different in that the matches in Ireland and England are of equal status: yet it's all patently a single tour. So this umbrella article makes sense, but I'd be very keen to retain as redirects the "Australian cricket team in England in 2012" and similar Irish articles, because there's a continuity from all the other tours that's nice to have here (not to mention various templates). When English cricket teams visited Australia from 1932-33 onwards, they tended to play Tests in New Zealand too: there's a case for doing a similar cross-reffing job with redirects for these tours as well. Johnlp (talk) 08:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm for keeping them seperate as they're seperate entities. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a fair merge. Having a seperate article for the single match in Ireland is overkill, and merging into this larger article with redirects makes far more sense to me. Harrias ^talk 16:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

We have some sort of Wikipedia stuff on British Isles naming right? I remember reading something regularly on the topic at ANI a while ago. Would that affect the choice of name? I'm not exactly familiar with the details of it, just remember seeing it regularly at AN/ANI. —SpacemanSpiff 17:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

It probably should be something like "Australian cricket team in Britain and Ireland in 2012". Hack (talk) 12:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Johnlp that it's a single tour and thus the articles should be merged, with appropriate redirects. JH (talk page) 17:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be a standard as such for merging multi-leg tours (or "visits", as some legs are). I notice that the inaugural Australian tour is covered by Australian cricket team in England and the United States in 1878 and this title, to me, is a more logical summary of the events. Given that Ireland is an independent country and has a status in ODI terms unmatched by Scotland and Wales, I don't agree with "British Isles" and suggest Australian cricket team in England and Ireland in 2012. Although I'm Scottish myself, I think any matches in Scotland and Wales should be considered part of the England leg; but Ireland does need special consideration and, if there isn't enough material (e.g., a single ODI) to justify a separate article, the title should specify Ireland. The other thing is that, for tours which went into Ireland before it achieved its ODI status, I would treat Ireland then as we do Scotland and Wales; the same applies to visits to the Netherlands, etc.

To take up the New Zealand point raised by Johnlp above, I understand most two-leg tours of Australia and New Zealand involved two Test series and so I think there is clear justification for the New Zealand legs to have separate articles. There is minimal coverage of New Zealand cricket. I found a "tours of New Zealand" template which looked promising but the vast majority of links redirect to overview articles like History of cricket in New Zealand from 1945–46 to 1970. --Brian (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Brian has it right. Merge the articles, and call the result Australian cricket team in England and Ireland in 2012. "British Isles" is extremely dangerous ground. HiLo48 (talk) 05:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's insensitive to say the least. There's a precedent at CricketArchive which has labelled the tour thus. --Brian (talk) 05:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I was just going with what Foxsports calls it "Australia's ODI Tour of The British Isles". Mtking ^(edits) 05:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Here's an interesting one. I found Pakistani cricket team in Ireland in 2011 which had not been categorised properly. Standalone article for two ODI matches against Ireland but the Pakistan team did not play in England. The "tour" as such was therefore of Ireland only but given Ireland's ODI status, the matches meet the notability criteria and the article must be valid. Therefore, as PeeJay and AssociateAffiliate have said above, Australian cricket team in Ireland in 2012 should be standalone too. I'm changing my vote to separation. --Brian (talk) 05:47, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

An article on a single ODI cricket match is unlikely to meet the encyclopaedia inclusion criteria for a standalone article, since sources are combining the tour better we do that. Mtking ^(edits) 06:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually even Cricket Australia are referring to it as "the VB Tour of the British Isles." - see here. Mtking ^(edits) 03:08, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

On a related matter, what about New Zealand cricket team in the West Indies in 2012? This tour includes matches in Florida, so should this be renamed? Andrew nixon (talk) 05:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand cricket team in West Indies in 2002

Can anyone bring it up to good standards. extra999 (talk) 13:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I've added the Test and ODI squads for both teams and scorecards for all of the matches (including the one tour match). By the way, if anyone wants any other tour articles expanding to include scorecards, I have nothing else to do these days, so just let me know. – PeeJay 18:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

If your enthusiasm goes beyond scorecards and includes infoboxes, Jenks posted this link in a section above. :) —SpacemanSpiff 18:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

There's no way I'll be able to make a dent in the English players, but I'll definitely try to blitz the countries that require fewer infoboxes (and Wales). That page could probably do with an update to see if there's any competitions, grounds and teams that need infoboxes adding. – PeeJay 18:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

By the way, I think we should start deleting some names from the list if they've been dealt with. No point having them on there just to strike through them. – PeeJay 19:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I think there's a bot that updates bases on "|needs-infobox=yes" on the banner, right? Perhaps this list was made differently. Eitherways, I think the ones needing infobox are mostly creations prior to 2009 or so, with a few exceptions. However, I think the bigger problem we have is with "stale" infoboxes, better not to have anything than to have it wrong, if you ask me. I don't believe the women's cricketers have been added to that list, but we're probably better off with the infobox ratio there (it's around 90% on India women). Agree with you on just removing the names instead of striking through. —SpacemanSpiff 19:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Or, if your enthusiasm goes beyond scorecards and infoboxes, there's always the 10,000+ first-class players needing articles! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:19, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I think I'll try sifting through the redlink tours for a bit. Might help to create articles where they are needed! – PeeJay 22:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I should like to see articles for English cricket team in West Indies in 1947-48 and English cricket team in West Indies in 1967-68. Don't be fooled by their not being redlinks, as the links are to a more general article covering the history of cricket in the West Indies post WW2. JH (talk page) 08:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

And if so you are, three more. South African cricket team in West Indies in 2001, Bangladeshi cricket team in West Indies in 2004, Sri Lankan cricket team in West Indies in 2003. And this guy who has played 342 FCs: Jim Cutmore. And this international ground: Sinovich Park. extra999 (talk) 03:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

And this one: Pascall Roberts. This]: Frank Gillingham extra999 (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Eng v WI

Assad Fudadin, slated to come in at 3, fc average a tad over 31... am I missing something? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm a few days late on this but, while somewhat low, his average isn't completely out of the box low, compared to others throughout history. Apologies to Ashley Woodcock, who was the first example I could think of; no doubt there are plenty worse. --Roisterer (talk) 09:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Woodcock's article is rubbish. --Dweller (talk) 09:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

It's not rubbish, in that it's all true and it's written in passable English. It is, however, decidedly succinct. Johnlp (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Shane Warne

Other than adding more references, what more should be done to Shane Warne to make it a Good article? There are a couple of sections that need cleanup/expansions, but what else? The great man deserves to have a good article, you know.. Fenopy (talk) 23:13, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Quite a bit. For example, coverage of his performance in the 2005 Ashes amounts to three sentences. There's also very little mention of his overall domestic career with Victoria, or playing county cricket for Hampshire. There's also hardly any mention of his time with the Rajasthan Royals. There needs to be more detail, with major tours covered in detail. Prose and sectioning could also do with major improvement. Your best bet would be to open a peer review on it if you need help, that's usually a good forum for other users to make suggestions: User:Harrias and User:Sarastro1 are excellent in that regard. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

A question perhaps for our non-Australian members

I updated the Jimmy Maher article with a reference to a controversial (racial) statement he made back in the 90s. Could someone perhaps not from Australian have a look at it (the last paragraph in the body of the article) and see if you understand why the statement was considered offensive or if it needs to be explained. Ta. --Roisterer (talk) 08:25, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Sort of. It would help if the first of the two wikilinks you provided wasn't pointing at a disambiguation page that implies that the racial slur is only used in the UK. If you must point at that page, it would be worth amending it, if you have sources. --Dweller (talk) 09:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I can see the first half is offensive, but don't get the reference in the second half. Johnlp (talk) 09:55, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Small

Currently, our article on the West Indies Test cricketer Joe Small is at Joseph Small. There is already a one-sentence article at Joe Small about a New Zealand singer and entertainer. I'm never too sure of the procedure here regards page moves or disambiguation pages. Is it worth trying to move things around, or just leave our Small where he is? Sarastro1 (talk) 22:34, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

The "About" template should do it. I'll have a go and you see if it suffices in your view. Johnlp (talk) 22:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I think that is fine. I was wondering more if the cricketer (who was known as Joe, not Joseph) should be at "Joe Small" or "Joe Small (cricketer)"; or if the entertainer should be "Joe Small (entertainer)"; or if "Joe Small" should just be a disambiguation page. I'm afraid I've never taken too much interest in these things, and I'm not quite sure what the correct procedure is. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Could do, but that gets to be more of an operation. The entertainer looks to me to be pretty marginal in terms of notability anyway, though it's rather difficult to judge these things. Johnlp (talk) 23:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Article move

I created Jones (Kent cricketer) some years back about a guy who played for Kent in the 1740s but whose first name is unrecorded. Bearing in mind that Jones is a very common name, is this recent move to Jones (cricketer) a sensible one? ----Jack | ^{talk page} 19:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I would say no. Even "Kent cricketer" could be ambiguous, even accepting that it's unlikely that anyone would confuse him with Geraint Jones! JH (talk page) 19:24, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

You're right. Normally, the title would be "Jones (Kent cricketer, born 1720)" to indicate the period but, as his dates are unknown too, I've moved it to Jones (Kent cricketer, fl.1740s). ----Jack | ^{talk page} 20:52, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

More early players

I spotted some omissions from our biography drive. These were Hyde (Sussex cricketer), D. Sharpe (Sussex cricketer), Hart (Sussex cricketer)‎, Priest (Sussex cricketer) and Hudson (Sussex cricketer)‎. They all played for Sussex county cricket teams in 1791 and/or 1792 when Sussex also went by the name of the Brighton Cricket Club which was a county match organiser much as Hambledon had been in Hampshire. After 1792, there was a long gap (largely due to the wars) before Sussex/Brighton next played first-class cricket in 1814. There was a game each year till 1817 and then another gap until the county took off again (the Broadbridge/Lillywhite era) in 1823.

I'm happy that all players from the 1790s Brighton phase now have articles and I'll check the 1814 to 1817 players next. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 06:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

We're okay for Sussex to 1817. All players have articles. Incidentally, given that first-class cricket is a statistical concept dependent on available data, I find it puzzling that CricketArchive regards this match as first-class. Historically significant, probably, but what if the unknown players were all reserves or juniors or amateur club members? Perhaps CA know who the players were but, if so, they should be listed. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 07:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Tom Maynard

Killed today according to this. Such a shame if so, he was having a great season with Surrey and seemed to be rediscovering the potential he had. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed by Surrey and reported in Telegraph. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:56, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hit by a train on the underground near Wimbledon according to reports. I fear and dread what more information is to emerge. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 11:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

BBC report says that he was seen driving eratically early in the morning, got out of his car and ran when spotted by police and was later found on the train tracks. This is looking like a rather tragic case. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:52, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I still wonder whether his death was a suicide? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The police are suggesting that "The incident is currently being treated as non-suspicious". This seems to suggest he was on the tracks of his own accord. This may be suicide or running from police as suggested by some reports. Hack (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

However it happened, we shouldn't be speculating on the cause here, on the article talk page and obviously not in the article. Wait for the official word. The-Pope (talk) 16:20, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Very sad news. He had looked to have a great career ahead of him. Just a few days ago, Surrey left him out of a couple of their T20 matches after what was described as a "motoring incident". So he seems to have been troubled in some way in recent days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhall1 (talk • contribs)

Seriously shocked. --Dweller (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes shocked me too, I was looking for this guy on cricinfo when I spotted it as the lead article, made my heart skip a few beats. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:41, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

West Indies cricket

Whatever the state of the current team, some of our West Indies articles are in a really bad state. The 1923 tour article isn't bad but there were two players linked to the wrong chap. There are also an alarming amount of red-links of the pre-Test, but still quite important, WI cricketers. If anyone feels like creating lots of articles, there are plenty to do. Unlike other teams, I'm not sure that they are covered in Bobo's lists. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

We had a drive to create tour articles in the early days of the project but a lot of them were merely placeholders, not even stubs, and the deletionists found them. Even where some work was done, it tended to be minimal with no real standards being established. Lack of interest really and in those days we were going for quantity of articles rather than quality. So, it doesn't surprise me that some have "just growed" and I think you'd find similar cases among the other countries. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 14:48, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

The D Files

Just a word of warning on everyones favourite troll Daft. He seems to be on some sock bomb of late, seven socks created in the last week, latest today - true to form User:BlackJack is the target and vandalism is the name of the game. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Can I suggest that we just ignore him? Just revert his edits and ban the accounts, no response, no discussion on here or on user talk pages, just revert, block and ignore? Andrew nixon (talk) 17:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree, Andrew. I now refuse to respond directly to him. Using Twinkle, it takes an instant to do the admin and it's all good practice as we do get other vandals besides this baby. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 18:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

And if anyone needs an admin to do the blocking etc, feel free to leave me a message or email me. I'm around most of the time Daft seems to be (but don't read anything into that....!) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, TRM. Much appreciated. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 18:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

And in case anyone has any remaining shred of sympathy for Asquith (aka Daft), see the sick message he has left on AA's talk page via 109.144.223.22. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 14:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

ODI

Hey folks, how are you all. Just a small point (and it is a fairly small thing) I noticed when browsing a few cricketer articles. There is a tendency to use the ODI abbreviation without any explanation except a wikilink. I realise that this is a fairly common contraction in cricket, but for an uninitiated reader it isn't clear what ODI means. There are only a very limited number of initialisms and acronyms that the MoS reckons are widely enough understood to be used naked, as it were (see WP:ABBR), and ODI is a fairly topic-specific abbreviation so I think it would be kind to your readers if you could introduce it properly (e.g. "One Day International (ODI)") at its first use on a page. Just a thought, otherwise very much enjoying your articles. Bye for now. Pyrope 19:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Pyrope is right and I think that if any article is being considered for at least B-class status, all cricket-related acronyms including lbw should comply with WP:MOS in this respect. I tend not to get into ODI territory but I do have the habit of writing Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) on first use and then just MCC thereafter. Our problem is of course our overwhelming number of articles, the vast majority of which are start- or stub-class and have had no refinement. But I think Pyrope's point is a useful tip we could all deploy routinely. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 08:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Wyman (MCC cricketer)

This is a stub I created some years ago but I've just realised that he did not play in a first-class match so I've prodded it for non-notability. The guy played in two early MCC matches, recorded in S&B, but they weren't f/c. If anyone else has anything they can add that would ensure notability, please go ahead. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 17:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Adelaide leak

A user on the talk page of the Adelaide leak is claiming that it "re-hashes" the Bodyline article. Any comments there would be welcome. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Good cricket biography

I've exhausted my store of cricket biographies. Can anyone recommend a good one? Something really gorgeously written, with the flowery phrases of Neville Cardus and the eccentricities of Bearders and Blowers. Don't really mind who it is of, provided they're not too obscure. Any good ideas? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 23:38, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

If you want a writer with a style reminiscent of Cardus, I'd suggest A. A. Thomson. I've read and enjoyed a number of his books, but haven't read any of his biographies. IIRC, he wrote three: of WG, Hirst and Rhodes, and Hutton and Washbrook. I imagine that it should be easy to find a second-hand copy of any of those. You might also enjoy Ronald Mason's biography of Jack Hobbs - see Hobbs' article for the full title. JH (talk page) 09:02, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

What bio of the Don would you advise? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 12:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Definitely Jack Fingleton's Brightly Fades the Don for one. I'd also recommend Ray Robinson's most famous book, On Top Down Under which is a cavalcade of Aussie skippers with an excellent chapter on Bradman. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 14:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I confess that I'm not at all familiar with Australian cricket writing. I know that Fingleton is highly thought of as a writer, but bear in mind that Bradman and Fingleton never liked each other, going back to their playing days, so that Fingleton's biography may be coloured by that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Every history is biased. --Dweller (talk) 07:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah but what is history? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 14:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

As a Somerset man, I presume you'll have read David Foot's biography of Harold Gimblett. Foot writes really vividly, though the subject matter is often sad. Johnlp (talk) 07:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Another Foot one worth reading, if a little too vivid in places, is his Wally Hammond biography. Also, Christopher Douglas' biography of Douglas Jardine is very good. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Am reading Fingleton's now. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 22:45, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Excellent choice. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 17:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Spirit of the Game

I think there should be a separate article for the Spitir of the Game. Bineet Ojha |BINEET| 18:31, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Which is what exactly? – PeeJay 22:14, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Presumably the "preamble" (Spirit of the Game) to the Laws of Cricket. It could possibly go into the Laws article, where it is only mentioned in passing:

"In 2000 a new Code, which for the first time included a Preamble defining the Spirit of Cricket was approved on 3 May" and "The Preamble is a new addition and is related to "the Spirit of the Game;" it was introduced to discourage the increasing practices of ungentlemanly conduct."

—User:MDCollins (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

The original poster may also have had in mind the annual "Spirit of Cricket" lecture given by a prominent person in the game, at the invitation of the MCC. Apparently the latest one was just the other day, by - try not to laugh - Tony Greig. JH (talk page) 19:49, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I certainly wasn't impressed by it. (Excuse the plug) Andrew nixon (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Haha Tony Greig doing the lecture! 90% of those present probably fell asleep from the sheer boredom of the man, while the other 10% heard something which was probably as far from the "Spirit of Cricket" as it's possible to get. I see he based his "lecture" on his arrogant narrow view of the world game... "Spirit of Cricket" indeed. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:50, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Harwinder Singh

Claims in the article that Harwinder Singh played in the Ranji Trophy, but nothing matches in Cricket Archive, and there is not enough detail to check for spelling variations. Should we allow it to be nuked, or is this worth saving? The-Pope (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Without wishing to violate WP:AGF, this looks a lot like someone writing an article about their friend/relative. There are three Harvinder Singh's that I can find, but none that match the dates. Delete. Andrew nixon (talk) 15:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

"This Article is about Mr. Harwinder Singh" and is absolute nonsense! Think it qualifies for speedy. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Laughable

Some more laughs from a "poor, cheated, innocent, honest man". Disgusting. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

List of cricketers banned for match fixing

Should this page be renamed? If so, should it be renamed to include spot fixing in the title? Or should it be renamed to something like List of cricketers banned from playing cricket (crap title, but hopefully get the gist), so it includes those banned not only for match/spot fixing, but also those banned for drug taking or any other reasons? Also, should it include a section for international cricketers banned by the ICC, as well as a section for cricketers not banned by the ICC, but by a national board (such as Westfield and Kaneria)? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I think the list should be all-inclusive. Any cricketer who cheats, by whatever means, should be included. But I would exclude William Lambert who was stitched up by Lord Frederick Beauclerk. :-) ----Jack | ^{talk page} 21:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I think I suggested List of cricketers banned for corruption. Andrew nixon (talk) 21:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I like Andrew's title and I think Lambert should stay because, even if he wasn't guilty, he was still banned, which is what the title says. Johnlp (talk) 08:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Should any list include all those banned, for whatever reason, or have seperate lists for fixing, doping, ect? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

How big would the list be for every international cricketer ever banned by the ICC? Hack (talk) 03:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Australia v Afghanistan

Ohhh another match to look forward too! I for one look more forward to these types of matches than matches between full-members. Anyhow, will this match be included in a single article on Australia's tour of the UAE, although the title "Australian cricket team against Afghanistan and Pakistan in the UAE in 2012" seems slightly long winded. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Estonian cricket

Has anyone else been intrigued by the ICC Division 3 Championship in Estonia? I was mildly surprised to find the matches are streamed live, I was even more surprised to find that watching to the competition on day one, none other than Shane Warne was in attendance! Estonia have been impressive, putting teams like Canada and UAE to shame by not fielding teams of totally expats. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I might be going there later this year. Let me know where to go and I'll see if I can get some photos. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 23:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The action took place at Tallinn's hippodrome, which made for an interesting sight with horses racing round the boundary. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Apparantly the rule in the local leauge is that if you hit a horse, you get 12! Surely it should be six and out? My two CricketEurope colleagues who were there thoroughly enjoyed themselves. Shane Warne, by the way, was there as both he and the Estonian side are sponsored by 888 Holdings. I would like to see more ex-players get involved in development rather than rubbishing it as they usually do! Andrew nixon (talk) 14:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Is that horse rule for real? I imagine it would count as a "prevailing custom of the ground" under Law 19.5... Hack (talk) 06:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

One of the more random questions!

While on facebook I came across Tajik Cricket and the Tajikistan Cricket Federation. Both claim that Tajikistan was recently given membership of the Asian Cricket Council, but I can find no mention of this on the ACC site (under either news or members) or in any other reliable source. I'm wondering if anyone else can dig something up? Anyhow, an interesting new frontier for cricket. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Reminds me of when I was living in Seoul a few years back and I spent some months trying to track down members of the South Korean Cricket Association for an interview. I eventually came to the conclusion the Association was probably one bloke who wanted to fluff his CV. --Roisterer (talk) 02:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

They announced it on their twitter account, but that's all I have at the moment. Andrew nixon (talk) 05:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

They have an active women's team, which it seems defeated Afghanistan women yesterday (safe to say they're not as good as the men!). @Roisterer, I think judging by this photo there's at least five members, four more than your Korean chap! Thanks for finding that Andrew, seems that's all there's going to be about those new members. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I think Cricket Cambodia wins the award for best logo ever. I♦A 11:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll try and find some more info out from my ACC contact and knock up an article for CricketEurope, which you then may be able to use as a reference! Andrew nixon (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Haha very good, think that just about replaces the Seychelles one which looks like I drew it!. I look forward to the article, will be a most interesting read! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Rept0n1x

User:Rept0n1x has been kind enough to take some pictures of the remaining cricket grounds in Cheshire which have held first-class/List A and which didn't have photos taken. Thanks to him! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

On his talk page as well. extra999 (talk) 10:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Tarun Nethula

Following his inclusion in the Black Caps ODI, the article must be revamped, infobox and more information is needed. Anyone, extra999 (talk) 06:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I've tidied the article up a little and added an infobox, but I haven't expanded it at all. Harrias ^talk 12:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

NPA except against cricketers on the main page of wikipedia

Some time soon, "Did you know that Mitchell Johnson's bowling is shite?" will appear on the front page of wikipedia. WTF? Barmy army chants with a few tabloid refs are notable topics now? I was about to nuke the article by merge/redirecting it to Mitchell Johnson until I noticed it was a successful DYK nom. Am I missing something? Can we stop the DYK? The-Pope (talk) 16:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't do it myself, because I'm just leaving the house, but I've left a note at WT:DYK. Harrias ^talk 16:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I've removed it from the DYK prep area. Honestly, how is having "Mitchell Johnson's bowling is shite" on the main page not a BLP vio? Jenks24 (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

As true as it is, yes I do think in wiki terms it is a BLP vio! Amusingly, Johnson said he takes it as a compliment. A bowler proud he is shite! *note to Aussie selectors: please pick him for the Ashes!* Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

"As true as it is"???? Well how shite must the 190 test batsmen he's got out be then? Sledges belong on the field or on twitter or forums, not here, neither on mainspace nor talk pages. The-Pope (talk) 13:51, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Tailenders or batsman having an off day while he's having his one good day followed by 364.24 bad days. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Batsmen most dismissed in Test cricket - 6 - Bell; 5 - Amla, Kallis, Smith, Duminy; 4 - Dravid, Collingwood, Cook, Ganguly, Sehwag, Bravo, McKenzie, Southee. Not too many bunnies in that list... Hack (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

It was the old Bell, to be fair. And Bravo is a bit of a hack. :P S.G.^(GH) _ping! 17:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

In the interest of fair play I think that Johnson should be able to bowl an over at these nobodies from the Barbie Army (which one is Ken?). "They'd bleed from the left ear, break a finger on the right, what's that running down their leg, why aren't their pants white?" The-Pope (talk) 02:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That's fine, but he'd have to hit us first. I'll just leave the ball while he bowls to the right and bowls to the left. Quite a fitting video from none other than an Aussie! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Reminiscent of someone? :) Jenks24 (talk) 10:29, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

This is not a unique issue and BLP does not apply. If you've not eaten recently, see Campaign for santorum neologism and if you're really tough, check its talk page for links to the vast quantities of discussions about it. Notable things, even if scatological and thoroughly offensive, are notable. --Dweller (talk) 10:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

@Jenks24, haha indeed, England's Johnson. "He bowls to the right, he bowls to the left, that Steve Harmison, his bowling is shite". Doesn't quite have the same ring to it! At least, for one very brief moment, Grievous Bodily Harmison was the best bowler in the world... briefly! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:National cricket association

Template:National cricket association has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Frank Chester

done
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Politician, or umpire? Or neither? I have posted on the talk pages of the relevant articles. -- Ferma (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Cricket at the 1896 Olympic Games

I saw an original Thomas Cook flyer advertising tours to the 1896 Olympics, which included cricket. Our article on that games doesn't mention it, and Cricket at the Olympics diverts to an article about the 1900 Games. Was the competition envisaged, but never played? --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be ,the event was apparently withdrawn for shortage of teams . Read here [3] Sumant81 (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks --Dweller (talk) 21:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Was the 1900 game considered first class? And why wasn't the Australians or South African team present? extra999 (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

No, and no idea. Andrew nixon (talk) 16:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Something to do with availability or something. I think the British team was a cricket club from Somerset which happened to be touring France, while most of the French players were infact English! I think Belgium was meant to take part, but never appeared for whatever reason. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

See Cricket at the 1900 Summer Olympics for fuller info. The article also covers in passing the failure of the proposed cricket event in the 1896 games to take place. JH (talk page) 20:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Alan Isaac

• Don't we have an article for the new ICC (International Cricket Council) chief, or I'm missing it? The redlink already has 284 viewes in the last 30 days. Can anyone create it?
• Is Dave Richardson the same as David Richardson, as the ICC article points out [in only once in whole article I could find the CEO's name]. The David link is a disambig. As a general, my observation is that the article is really poorly maintained. extra999 (talk) 14:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I've made a super stub. Just off to bed. Night! S.G.^(GH) _ping! 22:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Stats in Infobox

‎User:Ghajinidetails is changing stats in many cricketers infobox have a look at the contributions he has made. If this was discussed and agreed here previously then please ignore this.--Vyom25 (talk) 12:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

It hasn't been discussed here, or anywhere else. Other than being hugely annoying in having to revert all the cricketers he's changed, I think this is one user who won't listen. He has no consensus to change and his irrational logic that one T20I appearance outweighs 550 List A appearances is laughable. I have posted to his talkpage, but he has ignored the message to come here and discuss changes, so I've sent The Rambling Man a message to see what he can do. Could go to ANI or whatever it's called, but that'll take all year to be sorted! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

This is crazy. The speed with which he is editing is amazing. He has posted his reasoning below...--Vyom25 (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Peter Kelland

I'm currently creating an article on this guy. A google search of a Peter Kelland also came up with this article about a peadophile teacher at Highgate. The article says "The prosecution said allegations of indecent assault had also been made against Highgate School senior house master Peter Kelland, Bliss’ superior, who has since died." The article was January 2012, with Kelland's death in October 2011. Also, I seem to recall a Peter Kelland as being credited with spotting some kind of cricketing talent in Tuffers when he was at Highgate. So given the cricketing connection, plus the short time between the court case and his implication shortly after his death, would people agree they are the same person? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that's too circumstantial, given how serious it would be to be wrong about something like this. Perhaps there is also an obituary of the schoolmaster in the "Ham and High", and if the middle name and date of death are given in that and match then you'll be on much firmer ground. JH (talk page) 08:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

That's why I didn't want to include something so seriously grotesque as that without being 100% sure it is the same guy. I wonder if an obit in this years Wisden exists? Anyhow, I'll have a look some more and see. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 09:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Found this so I'm now fairly certain that they're the same person. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 09:47, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a moderately-long obituary in the May 2012 "Old Reptonian" newsletter (PDF here), which confirms that he taught at Highgate, and also provides a lot of background information. (edit conflict) Beat me to it. Not sure whether those allegations warrant inclusion, particularly with only a sentence mention in the article. I♦A 09:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm unsure whether to include it as well. If people think it will add something to the article, I'll add it, but if consensus is against, then obviously I won't. Ah consensus... something the clown from yesterday could learn from! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to leave it out. It appears to be an unsubtantiated allegation, and since he seems to have been already dead he had no opportunity to repudiate it. JH (talk page) 18:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Ireland in world cup

What has been the final [or current] decision of Ireland in Australia and New Zealand, 2015? extra999 (talk) 14:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

They're currently playing in the first stage of qualifying. Andrew nixon (talk) 17:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

See 2011–13 ICC World Cricket League Championship, which Ireland currently lead ahead of Scotland and UAE (who I really don't want to qualify so ignorant people can say "oh look a team of expats, so cricket must not exist outside of the full members, so we'll bar Associates". The top two in that qualify, while the rest plus some others from World Cricket League Div 2 and 3 will take part in the 2014 Cricket World Cup Qualifier. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Umm, leave UAE, I feel the English team represent one from the whole world, some are Indian or Irish and half are South Africans, but never really understood what so many South Africans are doing there. extra999 (talk) 04:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Irish and South African, maybe, but Indian? If you are thinking of Ravi Bopara, he was born in London and has lived all his life in England (apart from overseas tours). As far as I'm concerned he is as English as I am, whatever country his parents may originally have come from. JH (talk page) 09:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, no Indian born players since Nasser Hussain. Owais Shah was born in Pakistan, yet has lived here since he was at least 12, so learnt his cricket here. I think full members shouldn't poach players from associates, hence Morgan should be helping Irish cricket. KP, Strauss and Prior. Prior's father is English and he learnt his cricket here, having moved to England when he was 11. Strauss' parents are both English and he learnt his cricket here. KP has an English mother. I think the only true Saffer is Trott. What I mean by the UAE and their selection, is there are few players who were either born there or learnt their cricket there. Take Canada's recent ODI against Scotland. They gave debut's to: Zeeshan Siddiqi (a 35 year old former Pakistani domestic cricketer), Jeremy Gordon a Guayanese player, and Damodar Daesrath, a 31 year old former captain of Guyana. That's poaching and not developing. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 11:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Dont forget about Keiswetter - British national due to a Scottish parent, yes, but played for South Africa Under-19s, as did Trott. The annoying thing about Canada is that they've actually gone backwards. At the last World Cup, the majority of their squad, whilst born in Asia, moved to Canada as young children and were very much products of the Canadian system. Not the case now. The whole eligibility rules need a serious overhaul, preferably with some sort of "homegrown" quota put in there. Andrew nixon (talk) 17:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Sadly, the same is true of the Netherlands, which seems to have become a South African/Australian XI of late with the likes of Cooper and van der Gugten, though I noticed they did field some Dutch born players against the UAE. But the rules defo need an overhaul. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

International cricket has more priority,Remember always

As you said supremacy of formats, it goes: Test, ODI, first-class, List A, T20I, T20, but the international cricket includes only 3 format:Test ,ODIs,T20Is,after that any domestic format comes.international cricket has more priority that domestic cricket.Remeber a player calibre is known by its international record ,not by dumb domestic cricket including List a and first class matches.Remember. Refer to ICC and Cricinfo .Remember international is more important.dont go on huge waste figures data in domestic cricket.(talk) 06:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

So do you mean that only international cricket statistics should be added to an article? If yes, then you are completely wrong. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 13:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Really so? So one T20I appearance by Tendulkar in which he scored 10 runs outweighs his 550 List A appearances in which he scored 21,999 runs? Haha laughable. You are not the sole authority of this wikiproject, which is fairly democratic in that we debate and decide on widespread wholesale changes to articles. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Your latest edit summary already discussed.dont see huge waste figures of domestic cricket,international cricket figures are always important to see a cricketer's calibre so whom you discussed this with and a person appeared for 550 FC games itself shows his caliber. Who the hell are you to decide.? "Ban this guy."--Vyom25 (talk) 13:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

With this guys logic, Jack Hobbs' 56,350 domestic first-class runs are "huge waste figures of domestic cricket". Including one T20I in which Tendulkar scored 10 runs really shows his calibre far more than 21,999 runs in List A??? He must have broken the 3RR rule by now. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I have reported him here anything else we can do?--Vyom25 (talk) 13:41, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

At least four of us have tried to get him to discuss, that was the first thing I did when I came across the edits. His edits to Glenn McGrath are laugable with that logic too: 5 T20I wickets outweigh 835 FC and 463 LA! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Nah..he is not listening. He is still editing with same speed. I am tired of rolling him back. I think we will have to let him do the damage now and start repairing after he leaves or gets himself banned.--Vyom25 (talk) 13:52, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Pretty sure he'll have himself a ban as he's not listening or discussing. When that happens I think they can nuke his "contributions". Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

he and his IP have just broken 3RR on Ricky Ponting so he can be blocked for that, regardless of his other issues. I'm on a phone so can't do a proper report easily. The-Pope (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Blocked Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Now back but has not tinkered with stats as yet, just added a table and an image to the Tendulkar article. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 19:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

With regards to this diff how can Ponting have played in 17 T20s and won one? What happened to the other 16? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Not to mention how he's won 234 ODIs and lost 200 despite only playing 375. Andrew nixon (talk) 09:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I didn't see that. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 10:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Please note I've reverted this edit where he has put a T20 in Tendulkar's infobox again as it pushes out the List-A format. Seeing as he has played only one T20 international I hardly think it's more important than his LA career. Anyone disagree? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

No argument from me - Test, ODI, FC, List A, T20I, T20 then anything else to fill out four columns (ICC Trophy, WCL, Under-19 Tests/ODIs, etc) is our established order of priority, as he's already been told. Andrew nixon (talk) 09:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Its pretty clear that no one is opposing this. If that guy starts mass distruption again, I think it has to be an infinite term. extra999 (talk) 11:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Has he done the same thing to Jacques Kallis? His table only shows Test, ODI and T20 but I can't find an edit that changed it. Admittedly I'm just shooting out to work so I didn't look too closely. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 14:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

And I've just had to give him a final warning for adding copyrighted material to another article. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:47, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

The Kallis infobox was altered a long time ago by an IP per this diff. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 12:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

And I've restored the consensus format with latest stats from CA. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 12:58, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I've reported the user to ANI as he is started to violate copyright. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 13:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Frankly, this episode reveals how little the T20 brigade know about cricket. Without the two innings game played over more than one day ("first-class" or otherwise), there would be no cricket today except as a minor local activity. T20 is a current craze that already shows signs of inevitable decline, especially in England. Here today, gone tomorrow. I suggest we continue to resist such recentist tendencies as our goal is to provide coverage of the game as a whole and the format priority must be Test, LOI, F/C, ListA which is a long-agreed principle on the site.

Just a thought, but why do people bother to maintain career statistics within infoboxes for current players? I updated Kallis' figures earlier as part of correcting the format but they will all change next week. A current player's infobox should be restricted to photo, personal, international and domestic team information. The career stats should be added after he has retired. Okay, as I rarely get involved with current player articles, it doesn't matter to me but it all seems such a waste of time and effort. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 22:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Because even if it is out of date, it's nice to get any idea of how good a player is (at least statistically) at a glance. I often refer to the pages on my mobile while at a match to find out a little bit about opponents for example. Harrias ^talk 06:25, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

We should have stats on articles, if they're slightly out of date, then all it takes it a few seconds to change. I try and do England and Hampshire cricketers as and when I can. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. And even if they are out of date, at least it's indicated by the date at the bottom of the infobox. – PeeJay 18:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The ANI thread has been archived but that positive reception to the idea of a block - my vote would be that we watch for now and another transgression, or certainly another copyvio, results in a block. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 09:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Ghajinidetails/User:Rajnikanth1

User:Ghajinidetails is now User:Rajnikanth1 - identical edit summaries, and one starts editing the day after the other stops. Same topics, same articles. Obvious WP:DUCK. Opinions? The ANI thread was archived with little consensus. I have asked the new account to explain his/her connections with the old account. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 09:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, when I saw the new account, I immediately thought it was the other one too. I haven't looked deeply though. If we block one, the other's got to be blocked too, enough of this I think. —SpacemanSpiff 09:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Clear that he's the same person, first edit on the same hour the latter's last edit. Well, we may have two Daft problems in the near future. extra999 (talk) 10:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this guy has quite the level of insanity Daft has shown in the past! Has this new account carried out the same mass changes without consensus or any copy vio stuff the last one was up to? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

No does not seem to be. I've checked a bunch of them and there appear to be no copyvios. Still adding those team win/loss tables to cricket articles but I don't know what consensus is on them. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 00:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Is this a copyvio of [4]? Seems to be the same wording for the lead sentence or two but is that enough? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 18:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

It looks like those sentences have been in the article since at least 9th July, so therefore predate the Times of India article. It's not uncommon these days for newspapers to lift stuff from Wikipedia (almost always without attribution, of course). JH (talk page) 19:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Free image of Sunil Gavaskar

Has anybody come across a free image of him? —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 12:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Upload problems

I've been having problems uploading to the commons for the last few days. I'm not too sure how long the problem will persist for, but I've been itching to upload this picture to the commons! Would someone be able to do so, provided of course I'm the only one having issues uploading. Thanks. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

KP dropped and Usain Bolt for Melbourne Stars?

What an odd day! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah! ECB is going silly, I just learnt that it was the ECB who kicked KP out of the T20I WC squad. As of Bolt, I have added this information on his article. I won't be surprised if this becomes true and both KP and Bolt plays for DD. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 16:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Part of England's central contract deals state retirement from one one-day format equals instant exclusion from the other, although that I believe is a policy based in the past (perhaps because I'm not a fan of 50/40 over cricket). I think the whole saga is rather silly, Pietersen trades a blow, then the ECB return one, and so that cycle repeats over and over again, with neither side particularly handling themselves well - with Pietersen doing his best Ronnie O'Sullivan impression (talented but loses the plot) and the ECB attempting to mirror the farcical WICB. As for Bolt, he was a handy cricketer in his youth, if this video is to go by, his bowling could give the likes of Rampaul and Sammy a run for their money! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, getting Gayle out and then hitting a six on him is not an easy task. Seeing his bowling style I think his bowling angle can be crucial, and I think that Pakistan and New Zealand will get some serious competition for the 5th rank, but still my stand is "wait and watch". :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 17:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how he will get the time off if he signs for Manchester United. Seriously, this is pr/marketing at its best (or worst). Hack (talk) 02:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems that he is not much serious about Man United. But really, I would prefer him to play for Real Madrid instead of err.. a losing team. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Bolt was actually an cricketer before track and field. It was his coach or sports teacher in his school that forced him to track and field seeing his speed. Leave his bowling, Bolt's sixes could well break the records, and run outs are out of option. extra999 (talk) 15:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but there exists fielders like David Warner and Suresh Raina. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 16:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Dwain Chambers tried his hand at rugby league and American football, sucking at both. It would be quite the step up for Bolt, he too would probably struggle, like Andrew Johns did going from rugby league to Twenty20 for New South Wales; I even think requiring 13 off the final over, NSW captain Simon Katich refused to give the strike to Johns, with such little trust in his abilities. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

There wouldn't have been too many NSW captains booed in their own state, though denying a hometown hero like Johns wouldn't have helped. Hack (talk) 02:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

@KevPietersen24

Anyone have any guesses as to who this is? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Apparently Pietersen suspected that it was one of the other England players, which has caused some disharmony in the dressing room, but the England management has now asked the players if it was them and they've all denied it. JH (talk page) 20:38, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Aggers said that someone pointed out that a number of tweets came out while England were fielding, lessening the chance it was an inside job. --Dweller (talk) 20:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

The humour was very Swann like, but my money is on Nick Knight. Such a shame with KP, extraordinary batsman, but always seems to have ronnies. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Twitter has deleted the page. extra999 (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Uncovered as @Bailsthebadger, rumour has it, a close friend of Stuart Broad. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

So this has taken an interesting turn of events. So if Broad knew of the account, then the ECB must take the same action as they did with KP. Given he's the T20 captain, very interesting indeed! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Apparently Broad is one of @Bailsthebadger's followers. I wonder if the rumour that they are close friends is based on any more than that. Whether they are friends or not, Broad should only be in trouble if it could be shown - or if he admitted - that he had passed information about what went on in the dressing room on to @Bailsthebadger. AFAIK, there's no reason to suppose that Broad has done anything that he shouldn't. JH (talk page) 17:15, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2008 Champions League Twenty20 teams

Template:2008 Champions League Twenty20 teams has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. SocietyBox (talk) 12:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Australian Aboriginal cricket team in England in 1868

I was somewhat surprised to see that only two of the team - Johnny Mullagh and Dick-a-Dick - had articles. I've added Twopenny (and the somewhat later Albert Henry, aka Alec Henry), but there is still Bullocky and others.

While I am here, could I request some kind person to do infoboxes for Twopenny and Albert Henry. Thanks! -- Ferma (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, upgrading the articles on the 1868 cricketers and the tour is on the to-do list. Happy to try to work with you to build on this (I pencilled in Dick-a-Dick as the first to-do). --Roisterer (talk) 00:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Some decent candidates there for Wikipedia:Unusual articles, for interesting names and the parent article meets the "odd juxtaposition" criterion. --Dweller (talk) 07:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Unusual articles

The section above prompted me to notice that there seem to be no cricket articles in the list. As well as the aboriginals (above), I can immediately suggest Ted Alletson (journeyman batsman turns world record breaker for one afternoon only) but we must have loads of potential. Suggestions? --Dweller (talk) 07:34, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Bodyline A tactic in cricket causes diplomatic difficulties between England and Australia. --Dweller (talk) 07:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
• Googly Also known as a Bosie or a Wrong'Un. --Dweller (talk) 07:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
• Nelson (cricket) Superstitious cricketers lift their feet off the floor when the score is 111. --Dweller (talk) 07:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Maybe Six & Out and Mongoose (cricket bat)? ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Peter, the Lord's cat and the Surrey poet. JH (talk page) 17:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

How about "South Africa A defeats South Africa B [5]to win the World Test Championship"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.74.176 (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

[6] Now here's the look of a poor fellow who lost the golden baby's rattle. Nice to see him going with the knotted piece of leather around the neck, fashionable c1989. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.74.176 (talk) 03:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Ho ho ho, hilarious. Never heard that before. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Biggest laugh is their ignorance toward the nationality of one of their parents. I think, with the exception of Trott, all of the "South Africans" in England's team have at least one English parent. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Twenty20 stats in career infoboxes

I may have missed something along the way but running through a random bunch of current players I've noticed that their Twenty20 stats (international or domestic) are not included in their respective infoboxes. Is that the result of a specific decision made here? --Roisterer (talk) 09:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It was agreed when the infobox was designed, and has been re-agreed (if that's a word) since that the priority for statistics in the infobox should be Test, ODI, First-class, List A, T20I, List A T20 followed by any other stats that can fill up the four columns if not already done. Andrew nixon (talk) 09:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, so maximum of 4 columns per infobox but if player hasn't played Tests, you can use that spare column as eg. domestic T20? The article I was working on when this arose was Friday Kasteni, who hasn't played Tests of T20I but has played LOIs, first-class, List A & domestic T20. So I could just swap the blank Test column for domestic T20? --Roisterer (talk) 13:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah - no point having a blank column. Andrew nixon (talk) 13:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

List of England cricket captains

Please air your views at the RfC at Talk: List of England cricket captains. Should the article cover all forms of cricket, men and women, and adult and youth, or should we have separate articles? Once this is decided, we can work on the relevant issues in the lead - and the recentism. --Dweller (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Highest score by a number eleven in List A

Paul Hindmarch recently scored 50 batting at number eleven for the Unicorns against Warwickshire. I can't remember the last time I saw a number eleven pass 20 in a List A match, let alone 50! Does anybody happen to know the highest score by a number eleven in List A matches? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't know but the highest in odi's is Shoaib Akhtar's 43 off 16 against England. [7] [8] Blackhole77 ^{talk | contrib} 15:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps because there's now been 22,099 List A matches, it is a statistic which has never been recorded. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Data must be recorded, its yet to be analysed, most of the data of first class matches are recorded. List A came a lot afterwards, I am pretty confident that statistics are there, maybe CricketArchive has the records. extra999 (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I tried CA and statsguru on CI, neither had any records for the highest score in that position in List A. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Latest joke from the states...

So T20 in USA a threat to English season!!!!! Haha, I'm nearly in stitches. Matches played in baseball stadia, on artificial pitches, watched only by expats and "organised" by a disfunctional USACA. When will they get it? American's aren't interested in cricket, but to say it would threaten English season has to be the biggest cricket related joke I've read in a long while. Pro Cricket-ja-vu! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 13:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

ECB needs a check-up I guess. I can never understand English cricket. I was just wondering that in case cricket comes at the Olympics, the likes of Cook, Broad and Swann may have to make space for the Scottish players. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 15:41, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

A check-up? Like some gimmick tournament in America would be any threat to domestic cricket in a full-member nation. The state of cricket in the USA is an abject joke.[9][10][11][12] [13][14][15] I'd expect any cricket in the Olympics would interest national boards of major nations as much as the cricket at the Asian games does: India didn't take part, Pak, SL and Ban all fielded third XIs. Too much cricket as it is. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Liverpool and District

Thread revised per WP:BAN. To summarise, Category:Liverpool and District cricketers was referred to CFR due to a typo. In addition, there was no article about the L&D team. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 13:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

ACS notes on L&D teams

I have an ACS booklet published in 1982 called A Guide to First-class Cricket Matches played in the British Isles (second edition). It lists all matches played by occasional teams like L&D and provides notes about each one. Note that more matches could have been unearthed since 1982 re some teams but the same 14 L&D matches from 1882 to 1894 are currently in CricketArchive at this location. You might also find the ACS notes interesting. These are on page 26 of the booklet:

Liverpool and District

G. A. Brooking's booklet on Liverpool and District Matches printed in 1931, together with the article printed in CQ no.5 p.18, covers the history and background of these matches.

Of the five Australian matches in the schedule, all but the 1882 game are rated first class by the annuals. As the Liverpool side in 1882 was stronger than any of the later teams (all eleven players appeared for Lancashire in 1882), there seems no reason why this match should not also be ranked as first class. Three of the Yorkshire matches, namely 1887, 1890 and 1894, are ranked first class in Wisden. There being no significant difference between these three and the games played in 1889, 1891, 1892 and 1893, all seven are included in the schedule. Yorkshire statisticians only accept the 1887, 1890 and 1894 games as first class. At least one of the other four matches (1893) was not in fact organised by the county and should be entitled 'L. Hall's XI'. The 1889 Nottinghamshire game was ignored by Wisden and Cricket. The Nottinghamshire team was organised by Sherwin and was almost the county side — Shrewsbury being absent injured — according to the Nottingham Daily Express the Liverpool XI 'left little room for improvement'. This match would seem to stand equal to the Yorkshire games and is therefore included. In 1894 Liverpool played Cambridge University after the University match. This match is ranked first class by Wisden and Cricket. In 1895, MCC was asked to give a ruling on the status of the 1895 match v. Cambridge University and declared it not first class. From that date no matches played by Liverpool have been ranked first class in Wisden and the schedule follows this precedent.

In 1904, the Liverpool authorities applied to MCC for first class status for their matches v. First Class Elevens. MCC ruled that no Liverpool matches should rank first class (see MCC Minutes May 1904).

This ACS booklet is quite a useful source for teams like L&D so if anyone wants information about other teams, just let me know. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 08:49, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

New stub created

I've created Liverpool and District cricket team to fill the gap. I daresay there a few other occasional teams still without articles so I'll look out for those when time allows. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 09:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Occasional first-class XIs to 1946

Following on from the L&D discussion above, I've listed other occasional teams that have been recognised as first-class to 1946 (MCC ruling on first-class was in 1947). Some of these might already have articles but I suspect the majority, if not all, do not:

• A. E. R. Gilligan's XI (1925)
• A. E. Stoddart's XI (1895 – 1898)
• A. J. Webbe's XI (1885 – 1901)
• A. Shaw's XI (1881 – 1885)
• A. Shrewsbury's XI (1888 – 1893)
• A. W. Ridley's XI (1879)
• Army & Navy (1919)
• Army (1912 – 1939)
• C. B. Fry's XI (1912)
• C. I. Thornton's XI (1882 – 1929)
• C. de Trafford's XI (1896)
• Cambridge University Past and Present (1882 – 1890)
• Cambridgeshire and Yorkshire (1864)
• Capped v. Uncapped (1923, at Hastings)
• Civil Service (1927)
• Combined Services aka Services XI (1920 – 1946)
• Demobilised Officers (1919)
• Dublin University (1895 – 1926)
• Earl de la Warr's XI (1896)
• East v. West (1892 – 1927
• F. S. G. Calthorpe's XI (1926)
• G. J. V. Weigall's XI (1904 – 1914)
• G. L. Jessop's XI (1911)
• G. N. Wyatt's XI (1886)
• Gloucs & Yorks (1877)
• H. D. G. Leveson-Gower's XI (1902 – 1946)
• H. K. Foster's XI (1912 – 1919)
• H. Philipson's XI (1891)
• H. T. Hewett's XI (1892)
• Hambledon XII (1908)
• Harlequins (1924 – 1928)
• Home Counties (1899)
• Hon. M. B. Hawke's XI (1885 – 1930)
• Hurst Park (1890)
• J. Bamford's XI (1907 – 1909)
• J. R. Mason's XI (1913)
• J. Sharp's XI (1923)
• Kent & Gloucestershire (1874 – 1876)
• Kent & Nottinghamshire (1864)
• Kent & Sussex (1902)
• Kent & Yorkshire (1913)
• L. H. Tennyson's XI (1923 – 1926)
• L. Hall's XI (1885 – 1891)
• L. Parkinson's XI (1933 – 1935)
• L. Robinson's Team (1912 – 1913)
• Lancashire & Yorkshire (1883 – 1909)
• Left-handed v. Right-handed (1870)
• Lord Cowdray's XI (1923 – 1924)
• Lord Londesborough's XI (1886 – 1913)
• Lord March's XI (1886)
• Lord Sheffield's XI (1881 – 1896)
• Lyric Club (1890)
• M. Sherwin's XI (1889 – 1891)
• MCC Australia XI (1904 – 1937)
• MCC South African XI (1910 – 1931)
• MCC West Indies XI (1935)
• Married v. Single (1871 – 1892)
• Midland Counties XI (1896 – 1899)
• Navy (1912 – 1929)
• Nottinghamshire & Lancashire (1883)
• Nottinghamshire & Yorkshire (1872 – 1883)
• Old Oxford University (1881)
• Orleans Club (1878 – 1883)
• Over 30s v Under 30s (1879 – 1937)
• Oxford & Cambridge Universities (1910 – 1911)
• Oxford University Past & Present (1888 – 1899)
• Oxford and Cambridge Past & Present (1874 – 1893)
• P. F. Warner's XI (1903 – 1938)
• R. D. Walker's XI (1866)
• R. Daft's XI (1870 – 1880)
• R. G. Barlow's XI (1883)
• R. Pilling's XI (1889)
• S. H. Cochrane's XI (1909)
• Second Class Counties (1893)
• Sir Julian Cahn's Team (1932 – 1936)
• Smokers v Non-smokers (1884)
• South Wales (1912)
• Southgate (1864 – 1868)
• Staffordshire England XI (1886 – 1890)
• Surrey & Middlesex (1868 – 1912)
• Surrey & Sussex (1867 – 1900)
• Surrey Club (1865 – 1873)
• T. Emmett's XI (1881 – 1883)
• V. W. C. Jupp's XI (1926)
• W. G. Grace's XI (1871 – 1907)
• W. H. Laverton's XI (1890)
• Wembley Park (1896)
• Woodbrook C & G (1912)

Hope it's useful. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 11:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

There is British Army cricket team, Royal Navy cricket team, Combined Services cricket team and Dublin University Cricket Club. The combined Oxford/Cambridge team mentioned is really the same as British Universities cricket team. The personal XIs can be discussed in the player articles rather than in their own articles and the combined sides can be discussed in the county team articles. The less said about the Left-Handed v Right-Handed, Married v Single, Smokers v Non-Smokers the better - they're a real black mark (one of many, including my favourite "Players whos surname begins with B") on the first-class record book, and I don't think we should be in any rush to create those articles. I think players to have played for their country several times are more worthy of inclusion than players with one first-class appearance back in the 1820s though, so what do I know? Andrew nixon (talk) 11:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Andrew, I think a couple of the existing articles might need recategorising. I'll have a look later on. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 13:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

For completeness, one that BlackJack missed but which again we already have, is Royal Air Force cricket team. JH (talk page) 17:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Tour categories

In reference to the above list, I'm wondering if the following articles should be included in Category:English cricket tours of Australia, Category:English cricket tours of India, Category:English cricket tours of North America, Category:English cricket tours of Sri Lanka, and Category:English cricket tours of West Indies:

• CG Howard's XI cricket team in India in 1956–57
• Lord Hawke's XI cricket team in Ceylon and India in 1892–93
• Lord Hawke's XI cricket team in North America in 1891–92
• DH Robins' XI cricket team in Sri Lanka in 1977–78
• Sir Julien Cahn's XI cricket team in Ceylon in 1936–37
• R. A. Bennett's XI cricket team in West Indies in 1901–02
• Lord Brackley's XI cricket team in West Indies in 1904–05
• Lord Hawke's XI cricket team in West Indies in 1896–97
• R. S. Lucas' XI cricket team in West Indies in 1894–95
• A. A. Priestley's XI cricket team in West Indies in 1896–97

I'm not even sure about the MCC tour articles being in those categories, since I think those categories should be reserved for tours by the proper England team. What does everyone think? – PeeJay 15:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure I recall a discussion about this some years ago, probably when we decided on a naming convention for tour articles (i.e., X cricket team in Y in ccyy-yy). The thing is that they are all English teams, albeit there might be some non-English players, and so they comply with the categorisation "English cricket tours of Y". ----Jack | ^{talk page} 15:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

They may all be English teams in that they originated from England, but I still think that the "X cricket tours of Y" categories should be reserved for tours by the proper national teams. – PeeJay 16:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Taking Category:English cricket tours of North America as an example, I see it was created six years ago and I'm sure we agreed at the time that the word "English" should be used instead of "England" so that we included all touring teams going to a particular country (obviously there is a notability aspect to this). We don't see many patron's XIs going on tour now but we have to be mindful of the historical context and the need for consistency. I see that the example has the qualification "This category has been created to hold articles about cricket tours made by English teams to North America" which bears out what I have said. Only one "England" team has visited North America and that was the original English touring team in 1859, before Test cricket began. The strength of that team was such that it should be considered a true national team. The thing is that if you take the "unofficial XIs" out of the touring categories, where do they go? We did originally create the categories based on a consensus which has worked well ever since. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 17:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

List A

Does anyone know how the term 'List A' came into use? extra999 (talk) 02:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, extra. It's partly explained in the List A cricket article. The original matchlist was compiled by Philip Bailey of the ACS and later recognised by the ICC. Bailey also had a List B, though not sure offhand what was in that (Minor Counties, perhaps) and so the List A name stuck. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 16:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Gyanendra Malla

This article on a player who meets our notability requirements has been nominated for deletion. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

2012 Luke Pomersbach molesting charges

This article was recently created, just wondering whether people think it meets WP:BLP. Hack (talk) 10:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

It's not clear-cut, but I think that it probably does. It seems to use reputable sources and says "alleged" several times. But I'm not sure that it merits its own article. I would have thought that a paragraph or two in Pomersbach's article would be sufficient. JH (talk page) 10:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

It's very confused and confusing, and mixes he/she and his/her pretty randomly, so I have only a hazy notion of what happened. I agree with JH that this should be a paragraph in the Pomersbach article, and not a separate piece. Johnlp (talk) 12:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Hack, you should take this to AfD and ask for merge and delete. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 16:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

AA's retired

Maybe the biggest effect of the problems caused by Daft, User talk:AssociateAffiliate, User talk:BlackJack#Retiring! extra999 (talk) 04:24, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Good news. He's back. See his talk page. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 19:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Categorisation of T20 cricket

Is there a generally agreed term for the "List A" version of Twenty20 cricket (ie the level below T20 international cricket)?. Hack (talk) 03:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

List A Twenty20 is the official term, but most websites seem to drop the List A part. Andrew nixon (talk) 05:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Would someone who had played only List A Twenty20 cricket be considered notable under WP:CRIN's notability criteria? Hack (talk) 06:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I always thought Twenty20 was the name, seeing as the higher level is referred to as Twenty20 International. Tony2Times (talk) 07:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

That's ambiguous to the casual reader, though (not that List A means much to most people). Hack (talk) 07:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

List A Twenty20 is definitely the official name, and there is a document on the ICC website that confirms it. And yes, someone to have played just List A Twenty20 cricket would be considered notable under our notability criteria. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Got it - "Classification of Official Cricket". I can't seem to access it on the ICC website at the moment... Hack (talk) 08:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Well done, Derbyshire

I think all us Yorkies thought the Division Two title was in the bag before today's play began but all credit to Derbyshire who have finally made it back into the top flight. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 19:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

2012 ICC World Twenty20 (Warm-up matches)

Needed? Seeing as these can be adequately covered in the main tournament article, beside which they're just warm-up matches. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The warm-up matches have no official status, so no, it's not needed. —Raven42 (talk) 05:58, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

And it is wholly covered in the main article. extra999 (talk) 06:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

AfD here. Also, there is this one which has been up for a few weeks. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hants v Warks today

Brilliant final. One of the best limited overs games in a long time. Getting Bellie out with three overs to go was the key moment, I thought. No doubt a certain Hampshire lad is celebrating the double tonight? ;-) ----Jack | ^{talk page} 19:05, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

A tremendous match. It was good that Kabir Ali managed to redeem himself for his earlier drop of Bell with that fine final over. Another key factor (if not exactly a moment) may have been Woakes not being on strike for that over. JH (talk page) 19:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Good to see some success for Hampshire, as it's been a tough few years. However, I still believe Shane Warne is the best man to coach Hampshire, but for now we'll have to put up with Giles White and his yearly swansongs to the West Indies which lead to crap starts to a season. County Championship would be nice, which we'd have won in 2005 if it were not for a certain pie-eater at Kent. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Duplication?

I don't get the thinking behind these articles:

• English cricket team in Australia in 1946–47
• English cricket team in Australia in 1954–55
• English cricket team in Australia in 1958–59
• English cricket team in Australia in 1970–71
• English cricket team in Australia in 1974–75
• MCC tour of Australia in 1946–47
• MCC tour of Australia in 1954–55
• MCC tour of Australia in 1958–59
• MCC tour of Australia in 1970–71
• MCC tour of Australia in 1974–75

The English cricket team articles are supposed to be about the whole tour but it seems they are only about the Test series while the MCC articles are about the tour as a whole. This looks messy to me but what does everyone else think? ----Jack | ^{talk page} 19:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

If you go to User:Philipjelley's user page, you'll find he has worked on more than just these for each series. I think the project on the 1948 Australians in England perhaps set a bit of a precedent... Johnlp (talk) 22:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree that we don't need all those articles. While I can just about see the reason from a cricketing viewpoint (at a stretch!) to split the tours like this, I can't see non-cricketers being too impressed with such duplication. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

David Kendix

Notable??? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think he probably is, though it's not absolutely clear-cut. A Google search for him produces plenty of hits. Apparently he's the ICC's official statistician and also a member of their Cricket Committee. But at present his Wiki article is possibly the most inadequate that I've ever seen. JH (talk page) 20:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I did PROD the article (yes, lazily having not done a search). After the PROD was removed, I did do a google search and noticed several hits. An inadequate article, but I've seen worse! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Have done some work, please cross check. extra999 (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

That's much better. I've made one small modification. "...before being contacted by the ICC..." Did you mean "contacted" or should it be "contracted"? JH (talk page) 19:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I think contacted should be a better word, and Gulfnews source mentions contacted only, however if you think it's wrong, then correct it. And the Cricketnext source indirectly lists his birth year as "Kendix, 45, has been..." and the article was written in 2011, is it safe to infer his birth year from this? extra999 (talk) 04:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

The trouble with his age being 45 in 2011 is that you don't know whether his birthday was earlier or later in the year than the date of the article, which means that he could have been born in either 1966 or 1965. JH (talk page) 08:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Is this the same man? extra999 (talk) 05:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd say it's the same person, as Kendix is the scorer for matches at Lord's. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 08:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

A 'David Colin Kendix' search yields interesting results. A few more results, I have noticed a involvment to Middlesex. extra999 (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Catchy Shubby Cricket

I've put this article up for AfD here. Input appreciated. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Jsca International Cricket Stadium

Can any admin move this page to reflect proper capitalization (JSCA)? extra999 (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Unless it's recently changed, you don't need to be an admin to move a page. (Though if it's moved the old page will remain as a redirect to the new one, and you would need an admin if you wanted it deleted.) JH (talk page) 18:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Something's preventing me to move. extra999 (talk) 19:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

International career

There is a discussion currently going at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Dennis Lillee/archive1 regarding the inclusion of Five wicket hauls in international career. Need your valuable inputs before the proceedings. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/requested infoboxes

Knocked a couple off Zimbabwe, still thousands to go though! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Northamptonshire County Cricket Club...

... has been visited with some pretty creative IP editing in the past couple of days. Some of the edits were probably valid, but some were also patently vandalism (quite funny stuff at times, though). I've reverted it back to what I think is the last trustworthy version, but it may be worth others watching it too, or even a degree of protection. Johnlp (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Wrong!

Not to say of the '80' score, the super eights table in Cricinfo and the wiki article is different! extra999 (talk) 17:29, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Done now. All IP editing. extra999 (talk) 18:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

80 all out... wonder if England are missing a certain someone? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

And that man's in the studio commenting about 80 all out, [would like to hear that]. England just narrowly avoided the lowest T20I score ever mark, if it was not the last wicket partnership it could have been one their most prized dubious distinctions. Last wicket partnerships are really valuable though, if you remember the Aus vs SA test, 2011. And the test match where Australia lost by 2-3 runs against England. extra999 (talk) 06:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The best citation?

Can somebody please look at the page for Corpsing - specifically the quote concerning Michael Holding and Peter Willey? Perhaps I'm crazy, but weren't the names the other way round? I can't be certain myself and the two combinations receive very similar Google search results.

Could someone also provide the best possible citation for the quote whichever order it falls in? Bobo. 01:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

See Test Match Special#Light-hearted style, which provides a citation from a book by CMJ. JH (talk page) 08:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Harry Pilling

Harry Pilling's death has just been announced, which is sad news. His article is shockingly inadequate at present for such a stalwart of the county game, so I hope that it can be improved. I'd do something myself, but I am off on holiday on Wednesday. JH (talk page) 17:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added an infobox and changed the lead around a little. Bit before my time, so I'll leave his article to you! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 18:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Slightly before my time, but wasn't "Standing just 5 feet 3 inches..." one of Jim Laker's favourite descriptions of Pilling? And "he had the distinction of being the shortest English cricketer of modern times" seems a bit flimsy. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

In the first Cricketers' Who's Who (which tends to be written by the players themselves), Pilling is identified as the "smallest player in first-class cricket". And he's in there as 5'3". Johnlp (talk) 21:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Stands up, but could be worded better! Mentions height here and some comparison here from the late Bill Frindall. I remember hearing of a response from a bowler after having an LBW turned down against Pilling, the ball having struck him too high. The bowler retorted back to the umpire, "It would be going for the stumps if it hit him on the head!" Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Sad news

Simon retires from umpiring :( extra999 (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

At least Daryl Harper or Russell Tiffin aren't umpiring in Tests these days. Over to Bob Willis... Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Lawson

I have moved Joseph Lawson -> Joseph Lawson (cricketer), to distinguish him from Joseph Lawson (trainer) (new article). Hope this is ok with you.  Tigerboy1966  19:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Ball tampering

I've been hacking OR and BLP breaches out of this article. While doing so, I noticed Ball_tampering#Anderson_and_Broad_2010_incident. I'm not sure whether allegations that were never pressed as charges should be included in the article, on grounds of BLP/UNDUE and, to an extent, how notable the incident is in ball tampering history (which is similar to UNDUE, but marginally different I think). --Dweller (talk) 11:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it's better left out, and I agree with Dweller's reasoning on the grounds of UNDUE and that it is hardly of earth-shaking relevance in the grand scheme of things. But I'd say the same about the Shahid Afridi incident in the same article, and would question why there is nothing on the huge controversy during the 1992 Pakistan tour of England when everyone was claiming ball-tampering in the days before English bowlers discovered how to make the ball reverse swing! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Womens 20:20 warm-up matches

Further to the section some way above, I've nominated the equivalent women's article for deletion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 ICC Women World Twenty20 (Warm Up Matches) --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Infobox height

Just bringing this project's attention to Template_talk:Infobox_cricketer#Height. Cheers.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 02:48, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Some more input on this would be useful. Gibson Flying V is suggesting a switch to use centimetres as the metric value for height in infoboxes, rather than metres. The basis for this is that fact that with the exception of Cricinfo and CricketArchive, which both use metres, the vast majority of sites, particularly those in Australia, South Africa and Asia, use centimetres. Harrias ^talk 10:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Jack Bannister

I can't decide if this is snarky and should be reverted, a BLP breach and should be reverted, a dodgy claim that needs a cn tag, or just fine and I'm being too fussy? --Dweller (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

There was a single line mention of it (the commentating at home, not the sofa bit) in the Daily Mail a couple of years ago. I've added it as a ref in the article but a better quality source would be good. Hack (talk) 03:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've refactored the article a little and amended the tone of the statement. Does anyone know if the claim about eating a piece of cardboard is verifiable? --Dweller (talk) 08:04, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I'd never heard of him before but now I want to know why someone who took nearly 1200 f-c wickets at under 22.00 couldn't get a game for England. --Roisterer (talk) 04:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Contemporary of Trueman, Statham, Tyson, Bailey, Loader, Moss, Flavell, Coldwell etc etc. Les Jackson didn't get a single England game between 1949 and 1961 and was arguably better than any of them on his figures, and Derek Shackleton hardly played for England either. Johnlp (talk) 07:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox non Test cricket team

I was wondering if there would be consensus for a minor change to Template:Infobox non Test cricket team to show an additional level of official cricket. Currently, the box has options for ODIs, T20Is, FC and LA, but no option for just T20. A whole host of teams recently played their first official Twenty20 matches in the T20 World Cup Qualifier, a few years ago the Turks and Caicos Islands, the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands took part in Alan Scamford's T20 tournament. Perhaps the number of T20 matches played and wins/losses could be shown in the infobox? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any reason not to include it. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

 Done added to the infobox. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Dead references incoming

This was spotted by User:Rumping so credit goes to them. BT Internet are closing their customer webspace and deleting the content. Which means that all references that end with btinternet.com or btinternet.co.uk will become dead links on 31st October 2012. This project has a lot of references that are based on btinternet sites, so it may be worth getting busy with www.webcitation.org. The following are lists of all the articles that use btinternet.com and btinternet.co.uk. - X201 (talk) 13:03, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Richard Compton

Should the main article be about the apparently relatively minor American actor and director, who is surely little no more notable than the cricketer? Probably Richard Compton should be moved to Richard Compton (actor) or something similar (or perhaps even Dick Compton, although there also appears to be an American footballer of that name) and then Richard Compton (disambiguation) moved to Richard Compton? -- Ferma (talk) 19:56, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

USACA fun

In case anyone wasn't already aware of the delights of the USA Cricket Association. Enjoy this. Andrew nixon (talk) 22:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

"Peter Della Penna continues his unethical journalistic bias by writing yet another scathing article on USA Cricket's internal affairs." How can one be anything but "scathing" when describing that circus? Their big T20 tournament, going to be huge, huge names, massive auidences... but played on artificial pitches. Stick to baseball. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:02, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I can't stop laughing on some of these comments! Have you been sued yet Andrew? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 18:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Even the real Ian O'Brien offered his services to USA cricket! Brilliant! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

What does this suggestive picture and American women's cricket have in common? Answers on a postcard please. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Fun Continues

According to the USACA "USA Cricket is the most lucrative cricket opportunity in the world of course the ICC will pay our CEO's salary." Delusions of grandeur. Languishing in WCL Div 3, with half a dozen proper cricket grounds in the entire US, hardly any home produced players, no national tournaments for an age, taking to attacking ESPNcricinfo and referring to the editor of The Cricketer as a "small fish". Lucrative? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:50, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

and that is after declaring earlier that the ICC has no authority over USACA and the USA is boss. I thought the arrogant, oblivious of how the come across to others and "trust me, I'm American" types were just a Hollywood creation. If I hadn't seen it for myself, I wouldn't have believed it. But what would I know, I'm not even a blooger. Feel sorry for any Americans who are truly interested in developing the game, and not just developing their own profile. Surely the ICC must step in now and sack the lot of them. The-Pope (talk) 00:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This somehow reminded me of the book Netherland. Hopefully with a happier ending... Hack (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

People coming to laugh at your clowning about makes a good circus? How on earth did NZ cricket end up in bed with these amateurs? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Practice matches?

While going through List of Delhi Daredevils cricketers, I just noticed that the cricinfo statistics were not updated after the Daredevils vs Sydney Sixers practice match (played prior to the CLT20 business end). I then removed the class perimeter and came to this, in which the statistics were updated. Then I went to CricketArchive, and I saw that they have categorized that match as "Other Twenty20". Since DD is a T20 team, the list is not specific to any format (as in List of Afghanistan T20I cricketers). I am confused as many (possibly including me) won't consider practice matches to be matches, as they follow many different rules. So my question is - Should the practice match statistics included to this list? ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 15:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I'd keep the stats to official matches only. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

What should be included in Featured Lists

Currently, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Dennis Lillee is at FLC. It has been suggested that the Packer Supertests should be included in this list. Given the implications for other players' lists and articles, featured and otherwise, I thought it worth bringing up here. Furthermore, if WSC internationals were added, should other internationals also be included? For example, the World XI games held in Australia and England in the early 1970s to fill gaps left by South Africa. Unofficial Tests such as this match, or this? Or should these lists stick to official Tests and ODIs, which is the current practice? Sarastro1 (talk) 18:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Stick to official Tests and ODIs, I see nothing wrong with the current content of the lists. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Seconded. It is a standard practice for cricket lists to include only Test/ODI. Haven't seen WSC in any such international lists. However, I feel that WSC inclusion has no problems, if anyone wants to add, it is good. extra999 (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

The list is about international cricket fifers and Packer Super Tests are unofficial so they shouldn't be in the list. I suggest to add his Packer Super Tests statistics to Dennis Lillee. Zia Khan 00:55, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, having created this list a while back (which I notice is barely linked to other articles), perhaps just mention Lillee's WSC career in your list and link to this one? --Roisterer (talk) 01:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I like that idea. It may be worth putting a note saying something like "Lillee took x fifers in WSC but these are considered unofficial... " or similar and as Roisterer suggests, link to his list. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Me too. A paragraph or so could be worth including. extra999 (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

As the person who requested that the full and complete list of International matches be included, (note it doesn't say ICC/MCC approved internationals) I will add a properly referenced, noted, explained and suitably detailed list of the "other" international matches that Lillee took 5-fors in. For most players, the World XI/Supertests are a minor part of their international career. For Lillee, however, he had one of his best bowling performances ever against the World XI and he was the most successful Supertest bowler (thanks Roisterer for the list!). If it wasn't for the stubbornness of the MCC/ICC back then, those matches would be considered as Tests/ODIs, as inexplicably the more recent World XI/Asian XI matches have been given full status. And as I mentioned on the Featured List page, Glenn McGrath didn't consider himself the most successful Australian fast bowler when he got to 355, he wanted to get to 459. The-Pope (talk) 14:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I think there are a few problems with this idea. First, who is deciding which matches should be included in a list of "international" achievements? Well, basically ... us! Which is not good, to be honest. Are there any reliable sources which include WSC matches in their lists of international achievements? While we may not agree with the ICC giving or withholding ODI/Test status for certain games, we can only report their position. If a reliable source decided that these were not deserving international status, we could report that, (for example, Wisden never recognised the ICC's decision to strip "rebel" South Africa matches of f-c status) but we cannot change or decide for ourselves. And, in my view, if WSC matches are included, why stop there? What makes them more worthy of inclusion than the matches I linked above, or the "World XI" games from the 70s? In these World XI games, the participants regarded (and some continue to regard) them as full Tests. Who decides, and where do we draw the line? I think the safest course is to follow official Tests and ODIs and leave it there for the purposes of the lists. And I'm afraid that I am unconvinced that Glen McGrath should be an authority for the status of international matches! Perhaps the link to Roisterer's list is the way forward, and I don't think there is a problem with adding the information to other articles as Zia Khan suggests. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

The English language defines what is international. Cricket archive supplies the data. We just filter out the international from the domestic. To me this highlights the advantages of wikipedia over cricinfo or cricketarchive. We can filter, explain and keep adding sections to give a complete picture, rather than their database driven structured approach. It may or may not be relevant for other players. I believe it is very relevant for Lillee. I've started the addendum to the list in my sandbox, when I'm finished, I'm sure it will help define Lillee international career completely, not selectively or in part. I'm not going to try to present it as the equal of tests or ODIs but as a separate other cricket section. The-Pope (talk) 22:50, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Using such a loose definition of "international" would make most West Indian cricket part of these lists, and could even include matches played in the Champions League Twenty20. It would certainly include any figures gained in Under-19 and by international A-teams. Lilliee took six wickets in this match: the touring Australians against New Zealand Under-23s. Using a dictionary definition of "international", along with CricketArchive, this should surely be included too? I agree with Sarastro1 that if we start writing the definitions and boundaries ourselves we are heading down a slippery slope. In my opinion the list should only cover Test/ODI/T20I achievements. If a seperate artice "Dennis Lillee in World Series Cricket" is justified, then the details should be included there. But at the end of the day, it was a tournament organised by one bloke, with no official national representation, which is why I don't think it should be included. Harrias ^talk 07:06, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

If we take User:The-Pope's argument to its logical conclusion then the article on Brian Lara's international centuries should include the 106 he scored against Ireland (before Ireland had ODI status) in 2004. And whilst the rest of the world was waiting for Sachin Tendulkar to score his 100th international century, we would have been pointing out that he was already on 100 international centuries because he'd scored a century against Bermuda during a tour of the Caribbean in the mid 90s that everyone else was ignoring. Andrew nixon (talk) 08:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree 100% with Harrias, couldn't have written it any sweeter myself: official Test/ODI/T20I achievements in lists only. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm quite surprised by two things here. Firstly the near complete opposition, and then secondly how you are all pulling out these "exceptions" to the lists, but all think that no one else should know about them. I'd say include most of the "what about the innings against Foo" mentioned above, not in equal tables to tests and ODIs but in a separate section, maybe in text only, explaining to everyone else why a century vs Ireland doesn't count, or why Jamaica vs Guyana isn't international. Otherwise we are just being a cricinfo/crickerarchive mirror. They are stuck with tables. We have text. (and yes, I did know about and was going to mention Lillee's junior 5for vs NZ.) The-Pope (talk) 23:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment to The-Pope We shouldn't consider Glenn McGrath's statement seriously. Cricinfo and Cricket Archive are more authentic than him. The MCG website which outlines his achievements in the WSCI, says that he has only 355 wickets. There are many RS [16], 2 showing his tally as 355. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

His official tally is 355. No one is disputing his official tally. But the greatest Australian fast bowler since Lillee doesn't think that the official tally is the most relevant number. So yes, I do tend to follow the player's opinion on what is important (not official) over a bunch of bureaucrats. Let me finish my sandbox addendum and then you can consider if it is suitable for inclusion. I just checked to see if Gary Sobers 254 for the World XI is mentioned, but his page is list of first class centuries, not international centuries. The-Pope (talk) 06:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid, we don't go by individual players' opinion. If multiple sources say that he has 355 wickets, we should only consider that figure. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 10:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I pretty much agree with The-Pope. If we have reliable sources covering them, and they were international, let's put them on the page somehow. Perhaps mark them as of lesser significance or not acknowledged by the ICC, or discuss them in the text only. Cricinfo and the ICC have to adopt strict exclusion criteria, but we don't, we can tell our readers about anything that's sourced. --99of9 (talk) 00:19, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Just me?

Is it just me or has someone somewhere screwed around with the cricketer infobox? Take John Rose (cricketer), the infobox is hidden, why???? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 11:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

How weird, it has gone :s Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 11:18, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#New look?. —SpacemanSpiff 11:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah a bug. I did initially think someone had edited the cricketer infobox without consensus from here! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Twenty20 Cup and Friends Life t20

Is there any reason why we need separate articles for the English T20 competition? I know that ECB launched the FL t20 as if it was a new competition, but what changed apart from the name and (for a while) the number of groups? The T20 Cup had three groups, the FL t20 used to have two, but they have reverted to three, meaning that the format of the 2012 FL t20 is exactly the same as the one for the 2009 T20 Cup. Don't you think the article should be merged? OrangeKnight (talk) 09:15, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree they should be merged; there aren't separate articles for the old 60-over Natwest Trophy and the Friends Provident Trophy, or the Sunday League and the Pro40. Perhaps just a section within the main article which gives the history would be enough. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

F. S. Jackson

Does any of you own a biography of F. S. Jackson? I would have a question or two to ask to whovever has one. Thanks a lot! OrangeKnight (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't have one, though Alan Gibson's "The Cricket Captains of England" - which I do have - naturally has a fair amount about him. His cricket feats are pretty well documented in lots of books, but I suspect that his political career may be harder to research. JH (talk page) 18:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

AB de Villiers and JP Duminy

Just to let people know there are discussions ongoing as to whether these articles are in the right places, or (for example) whether the pages should be entitled "Abraham de Villiers" and "Jean-Paul Duminy" or "A. B. de Villiers" and "J.-P. Duminy". Talk:JP Duminy and Talk:AB de Villiers. Harrias ^talk 22:59, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

move: Structure of international cricket → International cricket

International cricket currently redirects to Structure of international cricket, but I think it makes sense to move the latter to the former (i.e. the article should cover all aspects of international cricket, not just structure). However, the presence of the redirect means that an admin is required to do the move. Are there any objections to this move, before I request it? Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 16:14, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

No objections after 10 days, so I went ahead and moved the page. I was wrong, no admin intervention was required. --Jameboy (talk) 20:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Correction - the page move seemed to be successful but only the talk page got moved. Have flagged for admin attention. --Jameboy (talk) 23:47, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Ronnie Hira and Roneel Hira

I found two articles on the one cricketer which need to be merged. I think Ronnie is the WP:COMMONNAME but thought I should get the opinions of others. What does everyone else think? Gizza^{Talk ©} 11:12, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly there is a The Cricketer article this month where he says people keep calling him Ronnie. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 18:37, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Is this this interview? OrangeKnight (talk) 20:34, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Barracking

While working on Ranji's article, I discovered that this is a redlink. I'm surprised. I can't find an article on general crowd abuse to redirect the page to, either. A bunch of questions... I have my views, but let's hear yours:

1. is barracking [by crowd] a distinct concept from sledging (cricket) [by players?]?
2. is it a notable concept?
3. should we create an article on barracking in cricket or one on general abuse of players by sports fans (if none currently exists) and make barracking a redirect?

Cheers --Dweller (talk) 11:42, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd say create one on the general Crowd abuse and redirect barracking - with regards to football, be good to include racist abuse of players, sources already available at Racism in association football. GiantSnowman 11:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I've started doing this. Help welcomed. --Dweller (talk) 12:31, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Kind of covered by Heckler#Sport, although that article's probably written more from an American perspective. It would be good to mention "barracking" has a slightly different meaning in Australia and New Zealand. IgnorantArmies – 12:57, Wednesday November 7, 2012 (UTC)

Further to that, something like crowd abuse in cricket would be interesting – covering early events like the Sydney Riot and popular figures like Yabba up to present-day crowd violence, bomb threats, etc. IgnorantArmies – 13:05, Wednesday November 7, 2012 (UTC)

Expanding on IA's comment of "barracking" has a slightly different meaning in Australia and New Zealand. - for those that don't know, barracking in Australia is normally "good" support, not just "bad" support. Cheering, yelling for your team etc is barracking. It is almost never used in a negative/heckling/sledging sense.The-Pope (talk) 13:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

That's interesting. In British sport, barracking means booing, slow-handclapping or abuse by the crowd. JH (talk page) 18:19, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

We should concentrate on the main article before considering any sport-specific spin-offs. GiantSnowman 13:41, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thats fine - but redirecting barracking to crowd abuse is grossly misleading for Australian readers as The-Pope says above. This should be fixed. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 09:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD and convert it into a disambiguation. It's not an issue. GiantSnowman 10:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I've had a stab at it. Feel free to amend. --Dweller (talk) 10:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

West Indies cricket team category.

This needs fixing. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 13#Category:Guyanese cricketers. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 05:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Infobox help, please

Can someone work out what's wrong with the place of birth at Mushtaq Ahmed? Thanks --Dweller (talk) 12:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

A "countryofbirth" parameter was missing. Fixed now. Johnlp (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Tyvm. The recentism tag could be added to with a "weird concentration on county cricket" tag. --Dweller (talk) 13:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I was looking for one, but couldn't find it! It's a terrible article for such a prominent player, but to be honest, a lot of articles on cricketers that aren't from England, Australia or India are like that I guess. Harrias ^talk 18:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

On the plus side, the article has improved a lot in the last 24 hours and at least it no longer looks like his greatest achievement in life was playing for Sussex and being called "Mushy" by Sussex fans. --Dweller (talk) 10:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, that fanzine-type edit was only in the article for six years. --Dweller (talk) 10:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I've given the article something of an overhaul. It is very much a summary, nothing more, but hopefully it is a bit more balanced and reflective of his career than before. Harrias ^talk 15:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Bill Lockwood

Does anyone know why the page on Bill Lockwood is at William Lockwood (cricketer)? Unless I'm missing something, he was universally known as Bill. However, there are redirects and disambiguation pages involved, so I'm not sure what should be done in this case. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree that he was always known as Bill. Presumably whoever originally created the page for some reason thought that William Lockwood was appropriate. (Unless someone moved it subsequent to its creation.) JH (talk page) 18:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Faf du Plessis

In honour of getting hit for six in his first Test delivery, I have listed a Requested Move at Talk:Francois du Plessis#Requested move. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 02:56, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

We do seem at times to move in rather contrary directions on this with, some years ago, people such as Plum Warner, Shrimp Leveson Gower and Monkey Hornby being moved from nicknames to proper names, and I suspect most England and Australia cricketers are now treated this way. Lots of South African and West Indian cricketers, though, are under nicknames (Nummy Deane, Tufty Mann, Foffie Williams). It probably matters very little so long as we are rigorous about creating redirects so that anyone wanting information arrives at the right place no matter where they started from. Same probably applies, in my view, to the Bill/William Lockwood discussion above – it's a bit of a red herring to say "this is what he was always known as" because there won't be many of his contemporaries looking for his article now ("I wonder what happened to Old Bill: haven't seen him since the summer of 1903?"). Think, rather, what search terms people might use and make sure that those then lead to the right place, no matter what the article is actually called. Johnlp (talk) 09:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

While I agree with all of that, in the case of Lockwood those searching for his article will presumably be doing so because they've read about him, and I can't remember any cricket book that mentions him calling him anything other than "Bill Lockwood". That's the big difference from, say, Hornby, who in books was almost always referred to as "A.N. Hornby". JH (talk page) 10:01, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is fairly clear, but there are occasions when it's hard to be sure which is right. Looking at the names above, I think du Plessis and Warner should definitely be at the nickname and Leveson Gower and Hornby at the more formal - the others, I'm too ignorant to have an opinion on. --Dweller (talk) 11:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

While agreeing with everything that is written here, I think there are a couple of other points. Firstly, I'm often a little uncomfortable with using nicknames such as Plum, Shrimp or Monkey for the simple reason it seems none too encyclopedic. For example, the ODNB article on Leveson Gower does not call him Shrimp, nor does the same source refer to "Monkey" Hornby. Few reference publications would use nicknames in this way. However, I think an abbreviated name like "Jack", "Bill" or "Don" is slightly different, and in my view quite acceptable for an article title. Also, we are rather beholden to CricketArchive here, as Cricinfo tends to follow its naming procedure. Just because one source goes for a particular name does not mean that it is right. One example would be Dodge Whysall, which was recently renamed as no sources (that I'm aware of) other than CA go for "Dodge". There are several other examples which escape me for the moment. I do think we need more than just CA's say-so to agree what the WP:COMMONNAME is. Having said all that, as Johnlp says, maybe it doesn't matter if all the redirects are good. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

When some years ago I created the article for Harry Parks I looked him up on Cricinfo, and was surprised not to be able to find him. It turned out that they had him as "Henry Parks", which nobody ever called him. JH (talk page) 20:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

There may be a degree to which nicknames are more acceptable as a common name while a cricketer is playing, becoming less so as they fade into history (unless they join Test Match Special as a commentator, in which case the nickname will become preserved or even embellished). "Stiffer" less informal history books, among them Wisden, often use very few forenames, preferring the initials and surname, and I don't know that we are very good at picking up those kinds of link – though when I tried W.H. Lockwood it does indeed go through to the correct article (though W. H. Lockwood, which is the preferred WP form, does not do so currently). Johnlp (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Maybe somebody has changed things in the last few hours, as when I just followed your W.H. Lockwood link it unhelpfully redirected me to William Lockwood, which is currently a disambiguation page. It looks as if someone may have (very reasonably) moved the original William Lockwood to Bill Lockwood (cricketer), and set up William Lockwood as a dab page, without checking to see what linked or redirected to William Lockwood. JH (talk page) 09:48, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

You're right: I think the link went through the disambiguation page when I did it. That never bothers me a lot... as long as it leads in the right direction, I think people can and will follow it. It's when it's a redlink that it is irritating. Johnlp (talk) 10:33, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Adding another to the list, as per an IP request on the talk page, I agree that Garth McKenzie should be at Graham McKenzie, but as he was just before my time, I'd like done second opinions. The-Pope (talk) 09:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you. At least in England, as I recall he was referred to as "Graham" more often than "Garth". Having his article called "Garth McKenzie" would be analogous to Ian Botham's article being called "Beefy Botham". JH (talk page) 09:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Agree. Johnlp (talk) 10:33, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

We need to reflect common usage in the sources. So, Beefy Botham would be out, not because it's unencyclopedic, but because it's not how he's known. In a different field, it may sound more professional to have an article at Stefani Germanotta, but it's properly at Lady Gaga, because that's what the sources call her. It's easier to see this with nicknames that don't appear frivolous, btut nonetheless don't conform to 'firstname surname'. Would you suggest we move Grace's article to a disambiguation of William Grace? Should we have an article on Jonathan Bairstow? I suggest the answers are no and no. I struggle to remember Plum Warner's real first name and suggest his article, for one, is moved. Some are definitely arguable. I'm surprised there's no proper discussion at Talk:Garfield Sobers about whether there should be a move or not. For me, that one's a toss-up. But many others are not, no matter how unprofessional they may sound - see also the properly titled articles on sportspeople nicknamed after a tiger, a dog and bird. --Dweller (talk) 14:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

A problem with Sobers is that he's been commonly both Gary and Garry. At least Garfield is consistent. Johnlp (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

About Userboxes for this project

Isn't there any userboxes for this project which can be shown in a member's user page? And if not can I create one?--pratyya (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Try this one:

Johnlp (talk) 15:42, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

{{User WikiProject Cricket}} is what I think most people use. —SpacemanSpiff 15:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Ricky Ponting

Hi there, bad news for cricket, Ponting retires. Zia Khan 11:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Poor chipmunk. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 12:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Kind of random but he was out lbw in his first and last test at the same ground by umpires from the same country. Hack (talk) 03:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Watchlists

These are here for a purpose and there are still vandals around. I revisited the site this evening to check out a question someone had raised and almost at once I found suspect edits that hadn't been resolved. With AA having joined me in "retirement", you all need to exercise vigilance and remember that WP:BAN is completely different to WP:BLOCK, so you can be utterly ruthless with anything by a banned editor no matter where it is found and even if it seems to be bona fide. Bye now. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 23:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I had seen the edit to 1775 English cricket season‎ which BlackJack has reverted, and frankly I couldn't see anything objectionable about it so let it be. It didn't seem to make the article any better, but then it didn't seem to make it any worse either. The edit may have been by Daft, but if it was neither inaccurate nor harmful we surely shouldn't revert simply based on who we think the author might have been. JH (talk page) 08:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I find this interesting. The 1775 page has been attacked several times this year so one can perhaps understand a reaction to another IP edit, but it looks like a knee-jerk reaction. As JH says, the edit by 86.154.162.109 appears to be harmless, as does another edit by the same person which was reverted yesterday. I gather there is some history here but I think BlackJack should have followed the site's advice – in short, if you do find definite vandalism then revert and ignore. You can't just assume that an IP is a vandal and you have to be careful what you say even if you have some justification. There must be countless people who use the site as IPs (I know a few myself) and they are not vandals. Perhaps BlackJack's edits to these articles should themselves be reverted? --Old Lanky (talk) 16:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Question

I was sidetracked by the above but the real reason I've come here is to ask about the wide use of CricketArchive and CricInfo for citation. I can see that it is useful to cite CA re the fact that a match was played and that so-and-so scored a century but shouldn't the main sources be narratives? I believe CA is overused for verification though I must admit I use it myself for convenience. What is the normal approach to verification in the cricket project? Thank you. --Old Lanky (talk) 16:14, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I think the ideal would obviously be using prosaic pieces such as newspaper articles, Wisden summaries, club histories or biographies, but sometimes that just isn't possible. What we do have on more or less every player to have appeared in first-class cricket is a record of their scores in each match. It might create a very dry article that is purely statistics based, but if there is little to no other information available, it's the best we have to work from. Harrias ^talk 22:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

That's fine and thanks for your view, Harrias. I'm working when time allows on Johnny Tyldesley, arguably the greatest ever Lanky batsman, but he's not been the subject of a biography, which is disgraceful when you see a list of people who have. I'm really stuck for narrative sources, although Cardus did speak up, and I fear that I will have to rely mainly on the scorecards and seasonal summaries. As I say, I don't have too much time available right now (worked a 13-hour day yesterday!) but I'll try and develop the article in the New Year. Thank you again. --Old Lanky (talk) 07:20, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

There will certainly be lots by Cardus, and the books of A.A. Thomson would probably be another good source. Tyldesley will also have an article in Barclay's World of Cricket. And don't forget Wisden; there should be a Cricketer of the Year article as well as an obituary, and both should be available online via Cricinfo. JH (talk page) 10:12, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I've got all of these except Thomson. A guy at my cricket club has at least one of Thomson's books. Cardus wrote the article about Tyldesley in Barclay, by the way. I found a biography of Colin Blythe which talks about Tyldesley in the painting at Canterbury where Blythe is bowling to him. So there are snippets like that around. --Old Lanky (talk) 14:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I have a couple of Thomson's books myself: Cricket My Happiness and The Cricketers of My Time. Let me know if you'd like me to see what I can find in them. JH (talk page) 17:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Anything you can re Tyldesley,JH. It's very kind of you. I've found Thomson's War of the Roses on eBay at a very reasonable "Buy It Now" price so I've ordered that. Doubt if I'll see it this side of Christmas, though! Thank you. --Old Lanky (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Wally Hammond

There is a little bit of attention on this article after Cook broke his record; a couple of editors seem to believe that his scores in the 1928-29 series (and no other ones, bizarrely) should be listed in a table format. I've reverted a couple of times, so would appreciate a few more eyes on this one. Sarastro1 (talk) 12:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Note similar additions to Bradman and Laker's articles. I've removed the one from Bradman, left Laker's for the moment, as it adds information to that, unlike the other two. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I think Sarastro is right to remove the "table" from the Hammond article as it looked unsightly and out of context, especially as it should be used throughout if used at all. I work in the media and I make a lot of use of tables, per se, to provide information; golden rule is that they must be relevant and tick the boxes. The Look Look table does not do that.

However, aside from all of that, how good is Cook? Potentially the best England Test batsman ever? Time will tell but I'd certainly place him ahead of Vaughan and Strauss of those I've actually seen. Grace, Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Hammond, Hutton, Compton (Denis), Cowdrey, Gooch, Boycott, Barrington, May, etc. – well, you just can't compare, I suppose. But, looking at the first-class records and given all that I've read, it seems to me that Grace must have been the greatest English cricketer (all-rounder) and Hobbs the greatest English batsman. Oh, and some guy called Bradman was arguably the best Australian, yeah. --Old Lanky (talk) 22:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Spot check

Please give a quick look at this user's cricket contribs. She's been making wonderful tennis contribs, and is now working on cricket articles. Don't be stingy with the praise if she's doing well. Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:14, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The orphanage is overflowing

Thanks to a hard working bot, the cricket related orphaned articles list had blown out to over 2500 articles. The easiest way to get articles linked is to have lists of players by team. Is this likely to happen at first class level world wide or is that just to big a project? The-Pope (talk) 09:58, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Not sure we'll ever be able to clear this lot, but I'm sure in many cases there are links that can be made. I'll give it some attention when I can over the next couple of weeks and see where we get to. Johnlp (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I've produced two lists of players by team (South Australia & Wellington and can attest that they are long and laborious processes (and both are now out of date). And even then, we'd be stuck with articles like Samuel Morcom and anyone who once played a match for "The Rest" (or similar). But yes, I'll have a go at trying to find links for some articles. --Roisterer (talk) 01:35, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

It's a bit of a cheat, I know, but in many cases there is a list-style article at the player's surname of all people with that surname. Johnlp (talk) 09:09, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

2011-12/2012-13 Big Bash League

Hey guys, I would like to replicate the templates for {{Cr-aus}} which were used for the colours of state teams in previous years of the Big Bash, for the current Big Bash with the different teams colours etc., would someone give me a hand with this? Cheers. TJ1996 (talk) 08:34, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Could do; but I think it is unnecessary; why do colours need to be used alongside the words? I've noticed this in the Australian articles and considered removing it, so I'm not convinced that adding more is beneficial. There is some benefit to the inclusion of flags for national teams, but I don't think a rectangle of colour for teams is needed. Are these colours used on other websites / magazines to indicate the teams? Harrias ^talk 12:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Agree that it is unnecessary. It would be difficult to do with Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 June 7#Template:Cr-IPL/Flags setting precedence, anyway. --SocietyBox (talk) 14:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Image use

Any chance this image can be used under some license for Henry Holden's article? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

{{PD-UK-unknown}} (or the Commons equivalent) might be appropriate, if you can show that the image was published before 1942. Other than that, you might just have to use a fair use template. Harrias ^talk 12:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

My favourite part of Wikipedia has always been the discovery of interesting articles like that of Holden. This sentence particularly caugyt me eye "Bonnor by this point was being restrained in order to avoid a physical altercation with Holden." As Bonnor is still one of the largest men to ever play Test cricket, one imagines there would have only been winner if Bonnor & Holden came to blows. --Roisterer (talk) 06:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cricket Aus state flag

Template:Cricket Aus state flag has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. SocietyBox (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)