Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 95

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 90←Archive 93Archive 94Archive 95

Merge WikiProjects back into this project

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge to regional taskforces. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 03:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

There are a number of cricket-related WikiProjects that I believe would be best suited as taskforces of this project, which would enable collaboration whilst also understanding that articles on these tournaments need to follow guidelines of WP:CRIC. This was previously mentioned in 2021: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 90#Creation of task forces. Would be good to get a firm consensus on whether or not to implement this. These breakaway WikiProjects have caused numerous problems over the years including:

  • Frequent MOS:COLOR violations on articles and templates
  • Misunderstanding of how article ratings work, by rating categories as "high importance"
  • Violation of the WP:CRIC standard to only add teams to a player's infobox once they make an appearance (Allah Mohammad Ghazanfar being an example who was in IPL and LPL squads but did not play)
  • Creating clutter on article talkpages as if someone plays one match in one of these tournaments, they get added to the WikiProject
  • IPL project created templates for every match (60 per season), which led to a massive template clean up project a few years ago

All of these WikiProjects are for franchise T20 tournaments that run for 1-3 months a year, and their WikiProjects are dormant for the rest of the year, or are permanently inactive. They are as follows:

  1. Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh Premier League - looks permanently inactive
  2. Wikipedia:WikiProject Lanka Premier League - been inactive for around 2 years, despite only being created in 2021
  3. Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Premier League - looks to be inactive
  4. Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan Super League - looks to be inactive

In addition, I have separately nominated the recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket) for deletion, but would be okay with this becoming a task force here too (but no merge is required as there is no history to keep). This post aims to satisfy Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Merging WikiProjects#Establish consensus for a merger by getting a consensus for or against this. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
These seem sensible. I had hoped when I revamped the project page, that these would be started by new recruits from r/cricket and other cricket platforms, but I never really found the time. AA (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Agree per nom. I think task forces are much better than having a single WikiProject. For example, WikiProject Japan has many task forces under a single project which makes it easier to handle.
KjjjKjjj (talk) 13:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Agree per nom. task forces are much better than having a single WikiProject. For example, WikiProject Japan has many task forces under a single project which makes it easier to handle.
Spinin (talk) 03:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Looks like we do have a consensus to merge this WikiProjects back into Cricket WikiProject. Instead of creating taskforces for Full members how about ICC regions... So, it could also cover associate nations as well.

Additionally,

@Ankurc.17, AssociateAffiliate, Bs1jac, CarnivalSorts, Clog Wolf, Fade258, Godknowme1, Goodknowme, Hamza Ali Shah, Joseph2302, KjjjKjjj, Kumarpramit, MNWiki845, PEditorS10, Pkr206, and Sush150: What are your thoughts on this...? Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 13:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Looks good to me.Godknowme1 (talk) 15:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
I can definitely get behind with this. My only main concern is that some of the task forces might be inactive most of the time due to little coverage. KjjjKjjj (talk) 09:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Both options seem Ok to me. Wikibear47 (talk) 07:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Both options are fine with me, though continents are less likely to be inactive than country task forces (since they cover multiple countries). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Seems alright to me.  Hamza Ali Shah  Talk 16:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This merge has been managed incorrectly so far, wiping out useful pages with no links to their history, and creating pages with unattributed content. Please see this discussion for a few details. There are probably more pages that have been processed incorrectly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I have recovered all the discussions and put them in the archives of Asia tf. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

CricketArchive

Some scorecards link to Cricinfo and some to Cricket Archive. I've got no issue with Cricket Archive except it doesn't allow you to see the card. I don't imagine this is a new issue. What was resolved previously? MaskedSinger (talk) 09:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

They pay-walled their content 5-odd years ago, so the links are probably from before then. Liberal use of the escape key whilst the page is starting to load will let you see most stuff on there! Spike 'em (talk) 09:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks @Spike 'em! Should we switch over the links to cricinfo? MaskedSinger (talk) 09:34, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
There is nothing inherently wrong in using WP:PAYWALLed references, though it's obviously easier to verify using non-paid content such as Cricinfo. There are 100s of pages linking to CricketArchive so would be quite an undertaking to replace them all. Spike 'em (talk) 10:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Just in case if someone is thinking about switching,
Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 11:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
If switching from Cricket Archive to Cricinfo, editors need to be careful that we're not using verifiability. Cricinfo does not list all women's domestic cricket tournaments, whereas I believe Cricket Archive does- so for many women's cricketers, Cricinfo is not a valid source for all of their infobox statistics. e.g. Nat Sciver-Brunt has Women's List A stats listed in her infobox, and those stats are not on her Cricinfo profile, as that only lists a handful of domestic T20 tournament stats and no List A (50 over) stats. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

LPL & BPL categories

Both Lanka Premier League and Bangladesh Premier League appear to have teams that change their suffix every season. Looking at the cricketer categories for the LPL and we still have 'Galle Gladiators cricketers' even though the Galle team have had two new names since and probably a third on it’s way. To save future work of renaming and to remain accurate, would it make sense to simply rename the categories as Galle franchise cricketers, Galle LPL franchise cricketers or Galle (LPL franchise) cricketers? JP (Talk) 11:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Great proposal. I prefer your first option, without BPL/LPL/IPL, because even the leagues themselves get rebranded. We should roll it out worldwide, if necessary. ReturnDuane (talk) 22:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello all. As a project we have 321 featured works, mostly featured lists. Where do we all stand with increasing this number, particularly for non-list articles? Does anyone have any up-and-coming articles headed toward FA status? Any particular areas we should focus on going forwards? AA (talk) 16:41, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I've read several cricket articles which are either FA or GA, and haven't seen any significant difference in standard. I presume there are some higher bar FA criteria which some reviewers apply rigidly? I'd suggest the GA material (143 in total) is the best place to find FA candidates but, without knowing the criteria gap, I wouldn't be able to recommend specifics.
The trouble with classifications like these is that a good article is a good article, and it is someone's opinion whether it gets published (real world) or featured (here). ReturnDuane (talk) 07:29, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Sounds like the avenue to go. I also think there should be articles we need to prioritise. For example, Shane Warne, or W. G. Grace, so historically significant articles, or articles important to the game, such as Laws of Cricket. I'd bypass GA and head straight to FA. GA had me on hold for 5 months and a rather back and forth frustrating experience, which has put me off going back. AA (talk) 22:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
I see what you mean about GA delay. The oldest nomination there now is Atlanta Braves, since 22 February! I agree with your priorities, and Laws is especially important. Some major players including Bradman, Headley, Rhodes, and Hobbs are already at FA but, as you say, the likes of Grace, Sobers, Warne, Tendulkar, Murali, and a few others should ideally be there too. I might have more time for WP come the New Year so I'll think about adopting an article then. ReturnDuane (talk) 16:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi again, AA. I was in a secondhand bookshop yesterday and saw the Grace biography by Simon Rae. It's highly rated and, having read the first three chapters, I think it's excellent. So, I'll adopt WG and, time permitting, see what I can do to improve it, but the main problem is its size. It's a big article about the Big 'Un. ReturnDuane (talk) 22:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
I also have the Rae book, and agree that it's excellent. ISTR some years ago adding some stuff from it to the article. Checking, I see that Rae's name appears no less than 58 times in the article, so there must be quite a bit from his book already included, though most of it I think was not added by me. One surprising omission in Rae's book is that I don't think it mentions his football at all. JH (talk page) 09:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Source review request

Hello all. Would anyone be kind enough when they have a spare few minutes to source review my FLC? Much appreciated in advance :) AA (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Syed Mohammad Hadi

The Hadi article once had a screenshot of his obituary in Indian Express that got deleted for copyright violation - http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Upload?wpDestFile=Syed_Mohammed_Hadi.jpg If admins can still access it, can someone please share this picture (via web.archive, google photos etc). For reference; not for reusing in wikipedia. Tintin 16:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I can see the deleted image, and it contains nothing that would not be otherwise available in other reliable sources about Hadi. And no, I will most certainly not share it. For a start, please see WP:LINKVIO. --Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Introducing Let's Connect

Hello everyone,

I hope that you are in good spirits. My name is Serine Ben Brahim and I am a part of the Let’s Connect working group - a team of movement contributors/organizers and liaisons for 7 regions : MENA | South Asia | East, South East Asia, Pacific | Sub-Saharan Africa | Central & Eastern Europe | Northern & Western | Latina America.

Why are we outreaching to you?

Wikimedia has 18 projects, and 17 that are solely run by the community, other than the Wikimedia Foundation. We want to hear from sister projects that some of us in the movement are not too familiar with and would like to know more about. We always want to hear from Wikipedia, but we also want to meet and hear from the community members in other sister projects too. We would like to hear your story and learn about the work you and your community do. You can review our past learning clinics here.

We want to invite community members who are:

  • Part of an organized group, official or not
  • A formally recognized affiliate or not
  • An individual who will bring their knowledge back to their community
  • An individual who wants to train others in their community on the learnings they received from the learning clinics.

To participate as a sharer and become a member of the Let’s Connect community you can sign up through this registration form.

Once you have registered, if you are interested, you can get to know the team via google meets or zoom to brainstorm an idea for a potential learning clinic about this project or just say hello and meet the team. Please email us at Letsconnectteam@wikimedia.org. We look forward to hearing from you :)

Many thanks and warm regards,

Let’s Connect Working Group Member

Let's_Connect_logo Serine Ben Brahim (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Redbourn Cricket Club

Please source this. Bearian (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the club is in any way notable, so I'm surprised that the article has survived so long since it was created in 2009. So sourcing it would be a waste of time. (I imagine that in the reference to 1666 in the fist paragraph "country" is a typo for "county".) JH (talk page) 16:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

New Task forces at WikiProject Cricket

This message was sent to you because you have been added to the WikiProject Cricket's news mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject invite

@AssociateAffiliate and Joseph2302: Is there an invite template for the Cricket WikiProject, I tried searching but couldn't exactly find any... Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

There is one at Template:WikiProject Cricket welcome. JP (Talk) 18:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Review request!

Happy New Year all! I have a couple more Hampshire cricketers lined up for FA nom and wondered if anyone would be kind enough to review them? Any additions/suggestions much appreciated :)

AA (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, AA, and all the best to you for 2025. I'll try to find time to look at these. I have a full set of the original Playfair handbooks (1948–1962) and these guys feature in those so I'll see if there's anything that could be useful. For example, although I need to check, I think Roy Marshall may have been in one of their teams of the year.
On the subject of reviews, we were discussing key articles in need of improvement some weeks ago and I said I would look at W. G. Grace. I've been making occasional forays into it and have just completed a full restructure to give it some balance and remove repetition. I'd like it to go to FA someday if possible but it still needs more research, especially of contemporary sources like the old Cricket magazine. I don't suppose anyone will pick it up in the near future, but I've placed it in the WP:GAN queue as I think it's ready for a review in terms of prose, lead, sources, NOR/NPOV, images, etc. The only thing that will change, if more content is unearthed, would be just that—more content.
If anyone here can look at WG and make or suggest improvements, that will be great. Having said that, bear in mind it's still a very long article! ReturnDuane (talk) 12:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi @ReturnDuane, thank you and all the best in 2025 for you too. That would be great to see if there is any addition stuff for these articles, particularly Marshall, who I shall likely to take to FA in the next few weeks.
I must have missed that discussion a few weeks ago (I'm guilty of not really visiting here all that often!). I'd be happy to have a look at W. G. and see what I can add. It would be nice to aim for FA for at least 10% of England Test cricketers, ~ 80 or so. Wynyard has been promoted, so that's another one done! The GAN queue is quite the queue, have several I want to take there, but by the time the review is complete I can probably bring them to FA!!! AA (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Twenty20 competitions

A user (Csknp) has brought it up on my user talkpage that the {{Twenty20 competitions}} navbox is different from {{First-class cricket domestic competitions}} and {{List A cricket domestic competitions}} and it should be made similar as {{Twenty20 cricket domestic competitions}} as they did in this edit.

I am opposing this because, unlike FC or LA, T20 cricket includes multi-national competitions such as Global Super League, Champions League Twenty20 etc. which are not domestic competitions. I have brought this here for a wider discussion and inputs from other users. Read the discussion on my user talkpage as well (User talk:Vestrian24Bio#Template:Twenty20 cricket domestic competitions discussion). Vestrian24Bio 02:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

This should probably be discussed on the template's talk page. You may like to copy existing discussions/arguments there. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: courtesy ping. Vestrian24Bio 02:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Correct name format for English county women's teams

What should the English county women's teams articles be named? Reason I'm asking is that the Essex women article has been moved a couple of times recently from "Essex Women cricket team" to "Essex women's cricket team". I've raised Technical RMs to move it back (twice) but not sure if I am doing the right thing. There was a discussion on Talk:Berkshire Women cricket team in October but it was inconclusive and the existing names were kept. Essex are still officially called Essex Women, so would that be the correct name? Bcp67 (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

My view is same as I posted on that RM: wait for 2025 season to start and see what the WP:COMMONNAME for them is then. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I would say "Essex women's cricket team" to be WP:CONSISTENT with national teams, but in this case wait for the season to commence per Joseph. Vestrian24Bio 01:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Synth between cricketing disciplines

One thing that's popped into my mind recently - a long time ago I had an edit war with an editor after I moved a cricketer (I forget who) between categories on one of their team pages on the grounds that his own article listed him accordingly (which are more often than not backed up by a source for each player specifically). However, for team articles a link-to-the-team page seems to be overriding it all? For example, Ollie Pope is listed as a batter on his own page, Surrey, and London Spirit, but as a wicket-keeper on Adelaide Strikers. Spa-Franks (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I hasn't been paying any attention to BBL, but it does seem that Pope is 1st choice keeper for Adelaide, but does not fulfil this role for any other domestic team. Spike 'em (talk) 21:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
That's as maybe, but doesn't actually answer my query, only one example. Spa-Franks (talk) 17:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I realised after I replied that it wasn't too helpful to the overall question. If teams release a squad list, or maintain one on their website, that mention player roles then I'd go with that. Many players seem to be classified differently in different sources, particularly all-rounders and occasional keepers like Pope. Spike 'em (talk) 19:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Where was this image originally published?

Where was this image of James Lillywhite's 1876-77 touring team originally published? I can't seem to find where it originally came from, anyone have any ideas? Taking Southerton to FA and will inevitably be quizzed who the original publisher was! AA (talk) 00:49, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a difficult one but I would guess it was taken at Lord's, and so it may have been commissioned by MCC. I see it was uploaded to WP from Reddit, but there's no certainty it was ever published in print. Reddit might have obtained it as part of a collection. It is definitely public domain, though. Good luck. ReturnDuane (talk) 01:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, @AssociateAffiliate: by chance, I've seen the photo on page 13 of David Frith's England versus Australia compendium (published 2007 by Penguin). The caption gives the names of the players, plus A. Hogben (described as "tour financier", and looking decidedly shifty with the camera on him!). There are over 1,300 images in the book and David acknowledges a vast list of sources on page 4. A few exceptions apart, none of the 19th Century images including this one can be acknowledged, and David provides a caveat about them, saying: "All other illustrations are from the author's private collection of photographs, scrapbooks, postcards, cigarette cards, prints, books, and relics".

Which leaves us none the wiser, except that David obviously found, or even purchased, the photo somewhere and, as there was no copyright on it by 2007, decided to use it in his book. It does facilitate things for you, though, should anyone ask about it, because you can cite it as public domain and published by David in 2007. ReturnDuane (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Geoffrey Boycott

Geoffrey Boycott has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Note

https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:Csknp

(sock deserving ban) 93.140.145.117 (talk) 11:21, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Bob Willis

Hi - Can any one find books or offline coverage where Bob Willis's five-wicket hauls are covered, even partially? Gheus (talk) 20:39, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

CricketArchive workaround

As well as the escape key trick, it is possible to view pages on CricketArchive by other means. It seems any player / match / stats list is available via another domain (in basic form). If you have a link of the format cricketarchive.com/Archive/* then you can see the same page by going to stats.acscricket/Archive/*.

As an example if you wanted to view this random match (which may involve a member of this project!) https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/436/436049.html you can instead go to https://stats.acscricket.com/Archive/Scorecards/436/436049.html

Similarly for players, instead of https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Players/4/4263/4263.html try https://stats.acscricket.com/Archive/Players/4/4263/4263.html

It's particulary useful if you need / want to navigate aroud a player's stats / matches, removing the need for constant escaping.

We could also look into replacing any such links on pages, which would be a lot easier than trying to find alternative sources, as was suggested recently

Disclaimer : You could also just pay for a subscription! Spike 'em (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

It's useful, but would it work for all links... Vestrian24Bio 10:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
It has worked for everything I've checked, and it uses the same database. From ACS page : The Records Section draws on the unmatched database held by CricketArchive, and clicking on the name of a player or match will take you directly to the relevant page on CricketArchive. The ACS is pleased to acknowledge the support of CricketArchive for the Records Section. Spike 'em (talk) 10:59, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
That's really good. Vestrian24Bio 11:02, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Wellingborough

Main page: User talk:KJP1/sandbox10-DoB § Hatton Park

I have bad news for you, cricketists. Hatton Park, Wellingborough is not dead, and isn't just a cricket ground. And in the meantime an editor who has been giving Wikipedia a load of fake suburbs has created a fake suburb from a source that was about a match at the cricket ground. Uncle G (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Move

Hello everyone. I just wanted to ask if I should move English cricket team in India in 2024–25 to English cricket team in India in 2025. All the matches are in 2025, so it seems weird for 2024 to be there. I just wanted to ask if it's supposed to be like this TNM101 (chat) 14:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

It is taking place during the 2024-25 cricket season, which has long been the convention in naming such articles. Spike 'em (talk) 15:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, never knew of this TNM101 (chat) 16:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Cricket seasons for tours, years for tournaments. Vestrian24Bio 16:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Got it TNM101 (chat) 16:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
I have redirected said page to avoid confusion - we do tend to get redirects for such instances, albeit not always. Spa-Franks (talk) 12:17, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket/Archive_95&oldid=1276911607"