Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 94

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 90

←

Archive 92

→

}}

Frederick Jackman

Hi all. I'm still waiting on my access to the BNA to be rectified (been literally months now!), but just wondering if anyone with access could check the coroners inquest into his death in 1891 here. Might be a possibility his death was involved with playing. Cheers in advance, StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 22:38, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Here is the full transcript:

HORNDEAN.—DEATH IN THE CRICKET FIELD.—A sad case of death while at cricket occurred on Saturday evening. From the facts elicited at the Coroner's inquest, held at the Ship and Bell, Horndean, before the Coroner (E. Goble, Esq.), on Tuesday, it seems that Frederick Jackman, aged 49 years, a watchmaker and professional cricketer, living at Horndean; and William Coulting, a butler, were playing cricket at about 6 o'clock. The deceased had been batting for a few minutes, when some men came onto the ground. A match was arranged, and sides were chosen; that on which Jackman was to play going in first. The deceased was batting, and he had made eight runs. He struck a ball, delivered by George Chandler, and it run up his bat and over his left shoulder; but it did not appear to have hit him. Immediately afterwards he changed the bat to his left hand, and struck another ball, when, without saying a word or uttering an exclamation, he fell dead. Coulting, who was standing a few yards off, was closely questioned as to whether there had been any quarrelling; but he assured the Coroner there had not. The deceased made no complaint; and Coulting did not think he had over-reached himself. Dr. R. G. Strong saw the body; and, as a result of a post mortem examination, made in conjunction with Dr. Norman (of Havant), he attributed death to syncope due to fatty degeneration of the heart, and probably accelerated by over-exertion on a full stomach.—The Jury returned a verdict of "Death from natural causes."

_wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks, much appreciated. Note to self, don't play cricket on a full stomach! I also wonder if the George Chandler mentioned is this guy? Right era. Probably an unsolvable hunch! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 18:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dhanraj Parimal Nathwani (2nd nomination)

Hello, WikiProject Cricket,

I don't think we have a deletion sort for cricket so I just wanted to bring this AFD to your project's attention. Some interesting points have been brought up and I think discussion would be improved if we had some more editors who are knowledgeable about cricket participate. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:47, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Liz, I have mentioned my opinion there at AfD. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

@Liz: there is a deletion sort - top of this page has a link to the page where they get aggregated. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:57, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Desmond Eagar

Hi all. I've made a start on expanding this legendary Hampshire captain. His career and impact on Hampshire was quite substantial, leading what was one of the weakest counties to become one of the strongest by the end of the 1950s (paving the way for CC success in 1961). As such, if anyone has any written sources they would like to add to the article to expand it, that would be very welcome. I think he certainly has GA potential if enough can be sourced for a decent expansion. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 12:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) has an RFC

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. BilledMammal (talk) 06:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Specifically: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 205#RfC on draftifying a subset of mass-created Cricketer microstubs

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:22, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Charles Baldwin (cricketer)

Hello. Can anyone rescue Charles Baldwin (cricketer) listed at village pump by expanding it? Thanks. 2A01:CB1C:1339:FE00:8CC8:4AA2:6C87:D8A4 (talk) 15:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I confess that, even though I'm interested in cricket history and a follower of Surrey, I hadn't heard of him. But as someone who on at least one occasion scored a thousand runs in a season and whose highest score was 234, he's clearly notable. Only one of my three histories of Surrey mentions him, and that only in passing, but his Wisden obituary (always a good place to look) was helpful, so I've been able to expand his article a bit. JH (talk page) 15:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Have added some more details about his brief foray into minor counties cricket with Suffolk, plus his six first-class matches where he stood as an umpire. Also added an expanded infobox. I didn't look, but I expect the British Newspaper Archive might have some hits. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 19:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Also was reputedly recommended to Surrey by the umpire Bob Thoms. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 19:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

There's plenty there to take that one off the list. David Partridge (cricketer) might be worth a look. And Joseph Comber, who's not on the initial list, looks interesting. Cambridge, MCC, wartime service, married in 1943 in Baghdad and I suspect he was born in Berlin in 1911 with an Austrian father... Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

It's my biggest concern with this VP proposal, that notable players are going to be deleted en-masse and forgotten about. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 03:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, certainly. If we can ge targeted lists with team names I think it'll help a bit - 4,000 names to look through is impossible; 150 who played for Auckland is more doable. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

He should be removed from the village pump proposal, it just looks ludicrous that he is there. Has anyone tried to lift him out? Desertarun (talk) 10:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain the query will be re-run at the end of the process and people who no longer meet the criteria for inclusion will be removed. If anyone spots an article without a hyperlinked reference beyond CI and CA that would be worth noting here as those are maybe the ones that might slip through. If they did then a revert of the move to draft would be entirely justifiable Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

County Ground, Southampton picture

Does anyone have any books with a photo of the County Ground in it? I'm sure there are grounds to use such a photo on here under fair use, seeing as the ground was demolished over 20 years ago (hence we cannot just go and take a photo!). StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

How about using this one, maybe cropping out Banister Court Stadium? Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 08:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Good find. Do you know what licence to use? I rarely frequent Commons! I see the website has something about no cropping, but I'm guessing there is a fair use rationale to get around that? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Paywalls

I present this as a point of interest: the website 12ft works on many paywalled websites, including news sites and cricket stats sites.

I do not encourage or discourage anyone to use it but I've found it a useful way to check paywalled sources already linked on pages. Do with this information what you will. MsJoat (talk) 14:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Cheers for sharing this. There's one site I regularly use and I press 'escape' to view it, gotta be quick though! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 16:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

This website usually works on that one site too. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Women's cricket - page assessment

Over the past two weeks I've been plugging away at the Women's cricket page to make it more of an overview of the women's game. I'm far from done - see my Plan for Improvement - but it's got to be due for an upgrade from Start class. Can one of the assessment team look it over please? MsJoat (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that we really have much of an assessment team here. We're a small bunch of editors and I know assessing isn't an area I really go much into and when I have articles up for review, they often take many weeks or months to be picked up. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Nice work. I'll have a read through and make any cosmetic changes I find, then change the assessment for you. Desertarun (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

The assessment criteria are here -Wikipedia:Content assessment. I've updated it to C class. The bare minimum to go up to B is for more or less every paragraph to have a ref, and any statements to have a ref. And then the gaps currently missing as in your plan would need to be filled. Desertarun (talk) 18:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I wasn't expecting B Class yet. I've not yet touched any of the original text (only added) and there's plenty more still to do but, hey, it's progress. MsJoat (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I'll watch the article and re-assess later. If I have time i'll edit a little here or there but don't have the resources to add new content. Keep up the good work! Desertarun (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Nice work! I had a quick look at it a couple of days ago, when I was alerted to it by a notification that a wiki-link to the WCA v- an article that is on my watch list - had been added. JH (talk page) 08:37, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

If I have any energy left after I'm done, I'm planning on adding to the WCA - I've certainly got enough sources for it. MsJoat (talk) 11:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Merge needed

Indian Premier League controversies has had a consensus to merge into Indian Premier League since April, however this merge has not been done. I'm clearly WP:INVOLVED as I started the AFD that led to the merge consensus, but would someone uninvolved be able to look into merging this appropriately? Joseph2302 (talk) 14:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

There's also 2023 Women's Premier League Final which has a consensus to merge into 2023 Women's Premier League (cricket) since April too. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Out of curiosity (as the discussion took place before I was involved with cricket on here) did nobody really think the solution might be to just write more about women's cricket rather than leave the women's tournament without a final page?

(I'm not looking to reopen or rehash the discussion but where articles about women are concerned, I'd always rather see them expanded. Otherwise an already male dominated niche is just going to perpetuate Wikipedia's gender bias even with the WP:WCRIC. Also, a nom for deletion the day after the final, seems a little WP:TOOSOON.) MsJoat (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Not a gender bias from my side, as I don't think the men's IPL needs one either (nor almost any other cricket tournament other than World Cups, as none of them are necessary WP:SPLITs- you can see that said by me in the AFD linked). And WP:TOOSOON says the opposite of what you're trying to achieve- it says articles shouldn't be created when not enough information is known, it's not a rationale for keeping articles on recent events. All I'm asking for is help in implementing some consensuses by a non-involved editor, if people want to re-debate the merits of the AFDs, then WP:DRV is the correct venue. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

GA nomination for Christ Church Ground

Hi all. Whilst assessment seems on the forefront of discussion here, I wondered if anyone would be kind enough to review my GA nomination for the Christ Church Ground at Oxford. The review page hasn't been created, but I have provided the link here. Cheers in advance. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I've taken this one. Will post my comments as soon as practical. Desertarun (talk) 19:19, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Cheers Desertarun! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Another BNA request

Would someone with BNA access be kind enough to double-check if Bruce Lamb's death in March 1932 was a suicide by hanging? Article here. Cheers in advance, StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:41, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The coroner's jury recorded a verdict of "suicide while of unsound mind", and the death was by gas poisoning in his office. The evidence from Lamb's doctor, who had pronounced him dead, was that Lamb was suffering from "a severe and progressive form of heart disease. Mr Lamb's life was always on a hair, and he was liable to sudden death at any moment. In addition to that the heart trouble led to mental disturbances. Mr Lamb was liable to convulsive seizures and attacks of unconsciousness." The gas supply to the fire in Lamb's office had been turned on but the gas had not been lit. The headline on the article is "Inquest on Ald. Bruce Lamb." and there's a second heading in quote marks: "Life Hung on a Hair." It's in the Hampshire Advertiser, 26 March 1932, page 8. Johnlp (talk) 23:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

PS. There's a second straightforward report of the death in the same newspaper, on the back page (page 16), which records that Lamb had been elected to Andover Town Council in 1907 and had been made an alderman in 1923. He had been formerly chairman of the local Conservative association and was also prominent in two local masonic lodges. He was married (his wife sent people into his office when he failed to return home from work), but her name is not given in either report, and I cannot see any report in any later paper of a funeral, which is perhaps not surprising in view of the suicide verdict. Johnlp (talk) 23:45, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks John, much appreciated. Seems this sad suicide was missed by Frith in Silence Of The Heart: Cricket Suicides. A very boring looking stub turned out to be a quite interesting cricketer in the end! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

From reading the report, I was slightly surprised that a suicide verdict was brought in. The jury foreman asked if it was plausible Lamb knocked the gas tap on in an accidental fall, and was told that it was. And the doctor's evidence seemed to suggest that Lamb could have passed out after turning the gas on, but before he could light it. There was no record of what the coroner (actually, the deputy coroner) said, which would have presumably influenced the jury's verdict. And of course we have no other evidence to go on. But one would have thought that with a prominent and respectable chap such as Lamb, they'd have pulled out all the stops to avoid a suicide verdict if they could. Johnlp (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd suspect his mental health problems probably formed part of the deputy coroners summing up, which probably swayed the jury to return that result. Lamb himself was a deputy coroner, so I wonder if the deputy coroner was acquainted with him? It is surprising they didn't try to return a verdict which avoided that taboo. As you noted above, he doesn't seem to be mentioned very much following his death, which I agree is probably as a result of the verdict. Sad all round really, he didn't sound like he had a particularly pleasant last few years of his life. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

2023 W-Ashes article

in the 2023 Women's Ashes article, there's no mention of the three matches against Ireland, and rightly so, because it's a page for the Ashes. However, where should that be added? Clearly it's not worth its own page, but i guess it should be somewhere. The 2015 article has a title that accomodates both, but I saw the 2023 talk page and it has a discussion on exactly that. Thanks a lot! Nautilusblue8 (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

There is separate article Australia women's cricket team in Ireland in 2023 for these. Maybe the 2015 one should be split too. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I didn't see that somehow. no idea about the 2015 page, but thanks for this! Nautilusblue8 (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

As it's an Ashes tour rather than a standard one, I'm going to split it. Wouldn't bother if it was any other combined tour - women's teams do those quite often, I suspect because of funding - but Ashes is a Thing. MsJoat (talk) 09:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for moving the page. Couldn't work out why it wouldn't let me move it to "2015 Women's Ashes". *facepalm* Clearly haven't had enough coffee yet. MsJoat (talk) 10:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

The Hundred

(I can already hear the groans.)

However, @Blue Square Thing and I are having a discussion about stats tables at Talk:The Hundred (cricket) and would like to invite you to comment.

I'd especially like to invite members of WP:WCRIC, as this relates to one of the most covered women's tournaments rn. MsJoat (talk) 09:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

There are some general sorts of discussions going on that could impact the way that we do things like flags and colour in squad tables here btw as well as the way that we present stats. People might want to swing by and take a look if they have strong views about those sorts of things. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Peverell Park (or what's left of it) photo

Just wondering if any project members might live close to Peverell Park in Plymouth and would be able to get a photo of what remains of the ground? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Second XI (Australian cricket competition)

This competition, formerly known as the Futures League, hasn't received much love from Cricket Australia in recent years (so much so that, as I learned, they no longer even crown a champion).

Its WP page was outdated, inaccurate and needing a lot of love.

I've put a day or two's work into writing up some history, sourcing results and records from every season, and gathering the required references.

If anyone feels like they could lend a hand to my current revision and improve it in any way, feel free – information is scarce, but it is out there. Thanks! Gibbsy^spin 02:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Lofty Herman

Hello all. I've just began the expansion of this 322 FC appearance Hampshire cricketer (+ over 200 FC matches as an umpire). I was wondering if anyone has any written sources which talk about Herman, as I don't! With over 1,000 FC wickets, he should be quite a substantial article once expanded. Cheers, StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

County Championship table

Would anyone know how to fix the 2023 County Championship table so that Middlesex have the correct number of points, currently 87? I think the issue is their draw with Northants in July, which ended with the scores level. The team batting last gets 8 points for a draw in this case, rather than the usual 5 but I can't see any way of allowing for this in the table points setup. The table in the article (not updated for the most recent round) shows them on 81 points, which should have been 84. Does anyone have the knowledge of how to correct this? Thanks. Bcp67 (talk) 15:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

The module's permanently protected, so you'll have to raise an edit request over at Module talk:Sports table detailing this. Hopefully someone there can help out! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 14:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Thankfully the CricketCC style module isn't protected so I was able to edit it for this. There's now a drawbonus which will assign an extra 3 points without affecting the number of draws. The County Championship table should be right now. MsJoat (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you MsJoat, that's great of you to fix it. I've added a note on the table re Middlesex's points as well.--Bcp67 (talk) 18:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Another interesting Hampshire cricketer!

Hello all. A mystery to solve here! I have begun expanding and researching Edward Hemsted (1846-1884 - allegedly!). Firstly, he seems to be known more as Edmund in reports and in the Lancing College register. I have found a record of an Edmund Hemsted as attending the University of London, matriculating in 1865, which matches his age. He briefly plays for Hampshire for a few years (1866-1869). Next I have found an Edmund Hemsted in Belfast in 1872, studying medicine at Queen's. Newspaper reports in the 1890s show an Edmund Hemsted in Newbury practicing as a surgeon (the Hemsted's were from Newbury, so must be the same person). But, the cricketer (whose father is from Newbury) dies in 1884 in Weymouth? I haven't found any news articles reporting on this under either Edmund or Edward; however, a victim of crime in Weymouth by the same name is present in early 1884 news reports. There is another Edward Hemsted from Newbury knocking about on The Gazette, he is a soldier, but the date of his first commission would make him 17, so I'm thinking this isn't the same person as the cricketer as that seems too young to be commissioned (the soldier dies in 1903).

So the question is: which Hemsted is Edward/Edmund Hemsted?

A). The surgeon?
B). The soldier?
C). Or the Weymouth man?

If anyone might be able to spare some time to see if I'm looking at this all wrong, that would be appreciated! I think "A" and his date of death is for the wrong person, and that CA/CI have his first name wrong. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I think, with a brief look, that the cricketer is probably C and is neither a surgeon nor a soldier. And he is Edward Hemsted. His father, Tobias Rustal (maybe Rustat) Hemsted, was indeed part of a Berkshire family, but was a surgeon at Whitchurch (Hampshire, but not far from Newbury) by 1836 when he married. Tobias appeared in the 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses at Whitchurch and died in 1880. Edward was baptised at Whitchurch on 16 November 1846 and was in the same house as his father in the 1851 census, aged 4, and the 1871 census, aged 24, when he has no recorded occupation; in the 1881 census, he's still living with his now-widowed mother (Mary Ann) in Whitchurch and is recorded as a "brewer unemployed". On 21 August 1882, Edward Hemsted, aged 35 and with no profession declared, married Ellen Butler (aged 39) at All Saints Church, Whitchurch. Edward and Ellen Hemsted were living at Upway (Upwey) near Weymouth in September 1883 and the disappearance of some of their money was the subject of a court case in January 1884 reported in local newspapers. Hampshire burial lists have Edward Hemsted being buried at Whitchurch on 17 March 1884, with his "abode" given as "Upway, Dorset". What I can't do, with a 10-minute look, is to link this Edward Hemsted with either Lancing or London University, or indeed with Hampshire cricket. I'll see what I can find tomorrow, if anything else. Johnlp (talk) 23:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

PS. Edward Hemsted, aged 14 and born in Whitchurch, was a pupil at Chatham House School at Ramsgate in Kent at the time of the 1861 census. That correlates with his appearance for the Gentlemen of Kent in 1863 when he was described in a contemporary report as "a very young player, and a good one". Maybe more tomorrow. Johnlp (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this thorough look, John. Going to Chatham House School does answer my thought as to how he ended up playing for a Gentlemen of Kent side when no Kent connection seemed apparent. The Lancing College connection, would appear to be an error from Dave Allen at Hampshire (the Lancing Edmund Hemsted was born in 1846). Would appear that the one I thought least likely is the most likely! Thanks again :) StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't know where Lancing comes into this, if at all. The Newbury Hemsteds look like cousins and there is at least one Edmund Hemsted in that branch of the family: an Edmund was 16 in the 1861 census, also at Chatham House School in Ramsgate. There's also an Edmund Hemsted, "medical student" in the probate records, who died on Christmas Day 1880 in Islington aged 33: his widow, Sophia, outlived him by more than 50 years, and they had two daughters, one born in Islington in 1870/71 and the second in Cape Town in 1875/76. The patriarch of the Newbury lot was also a doctor. But I think the Whitchurch chap is your man and that he doesn't seem to have bothered much with earning a living. Johnlp (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I would say Lancing probably doesn't come into it, with the Hants historian having confused Edmund and Edward and merged the two into one! Somewhere along the lines is yet another Edmund Hemsted, who is a surgeon (likely specialising as a pathologist) in the 1890s in the Newbury area. What's the rule on here with using census information in articles? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 12:11, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Suspect this all counts as OR. Which it is, I suppose. If Hampshire CCC can be persuaded to amend their records to include his education and a few more facts about him, then we can quote them as a secondary source. But someone else has to do it before we can do it here. Johnlp (talk) 18:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I'll drop a comment on the Hampshire Cricket History site and see if Dave Allen picks it up. Thanks again for helping out with this one John! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 22:27, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket

We currently lack an article on the Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket, even though the publication of its report a few months ago was arguably the most significant event in English cricket this year - certainly going by the amount of media coverage it received. I don't think I have the time to write such an article myself, though I would happily proof read any article that someone else produced. JH (talk page) 08:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Well, I said I was going to read the report at some point... Don't count on me to do it but it does have important tie ins with what I've been doing on the Women's cricket page so I'll need to write something significant about it at some point.MsJoat (talk) 16:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I made it. Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket. Desertarun (talk) 18:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

That was quick! Thanks. I'll take a look at it, though that may have to wait until tomorrow. JH (talk page) 19:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Ehsanul Haque

A World Cup cricketer at AFD. Anybody able to find anything offline or in non-English language sourcing. Had a respectable domestic career also. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

ESPNcricinfo and umpiring stats

Anyone know why ESPNcricinfo doesn't count Tests as first-class matches for umpires? Example Hack (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

The people who code their database probably got something wrong. Do you know if the same applies for ODIs not counting as List A? – Pee Jay 15:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Looking at the Marais Erasmus article, the same applies for ODIs. [1] Hack (talk) 01:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Discussion about ESPNCricinfo and CricketArchive on WP:RSN

See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Reliability_of_cricket_databases.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Naming of Mehidy Hasan

Since the World Cup is currently on and this confusion seems to currently exist on a global scale, I want to escalate and revive a discussion I had no replies to in 2021 regarding the naming of this cricketer. We list him as "Mehidy Hasan" but I cannot find any sources using this name, and the article refers to Miraz as the shortname. Sources give the following:

CricketArchive gives "Mehedi Hasan";
Cricinfo gives "Mehidy Hasan Miraz" in the page title and "Mehedi Hasan Miraz" in the prose, using "Mehedi" as the shortname;
The world feed covering the World Cup seemingly changes every game, he was "Mehidy Hasan Miraz", shortname "Miraz" for all the games so far except against New Zealand, where he was given as "Hasan Miraz" as the shortname;
Cricbuzz gives "Mehidy Hasan Miraz";
His own Instagram and X accounts are "Mehidy Hasan Miraz" (@OfficialMiraz);
The ICC website gives "Mehidy Hassan Miraz" but very incorrectly gives his last test as being against England on 30 July 2023 and his last T20I as being against Nigeria on 14 October 2023.

So given the World Cup is on, and he will be experiencing a good deal of traffic at the moment, can we get a consensus on what to call him? Spa-Franks (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I believe his name to be "Mehidy Hasan Miraz". Everything else is a short/nickname or spelling mistake. I don't think this is a controversial page move, so you should wait a few days to see if there are any other comments here, assuming not then move it. Desertarun (talk) 19:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I cannot overwrite the redirect so I have made a "Requested Move" er, request. Spa-Franks (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Batsman/batter

Now that women's cricket is becoming more prominent, the term "batter" is increasingly preferred to "batsman". Do we start changing the terminology in existing articles? MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

There's been a few discussions about this before in the archives. As I see it, any articles relating to only men's cricket can use either. Articles referring to women's cricket should use "batter", and generic articles about the game and the laws should also use "batter". Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:47, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

OK I'll leave "batsman" alone. My main editing area is chess, where the literature has traditionally used "he" to refer to a generic hypothetical player, e.g. "Black must free his position with ...d5". It's a bit annoying when drive by editors with no chess knowledge come along and wholesale substitute a singular they/them/their for he/him/his without regard for style. So I won't do that to you cricket editors. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Iirc the general feeling is that for historical male players, we certainly keep batsman. Modern ones, we can use either Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense, not least because it would be a massive task to try to change every use of "batsman" in our past articles. JH (talk page) 15:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

This is the most recent of, as mentioned, several discussions - [2]. Blue Square Thing's recall is correct - leave the historic players as they were, and either usage is acceptable for modern male players. --Bcp67 (talk) 21:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

B-checklist in project template

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Determining the future of B-class checklists. This project is being notified since it is one of the 82 WikiProjects that opted-in to support B-checklists (B1-B6) in your project banner. DFlhb (talk) 11:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Glenn Maxwell's 201* vs Afghanistan, 2023

We don't have any articles on an individual innings - maybe this one could become the first. (I would argue Sobers' 365* and Dean Jones' 210, and Lara's 400* are individually notable as well - there might be a few others.) St Anselm (talk) 17:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

As the Glenn Maxwell article is not overly long, it would easily fit in the parent article at the moment. Potentially it could be split out in the future if his biography becomes unwieldy, but I don't think there's any need right now. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 20:01, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. It's a fantastic innings, but I don't think it needs its own article, in the same way that Oleg Salenko's five goals in a single FIFA World Cup match doesn't deserve its own article. – Pee Jay 20:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

One of the greatest ODI innings (wish I'd put £100 on Aus to win when the odds of that happening were 0.7% at one point!), but agree with the above, it can adequately be included in his article. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

This is all fair enough, but now an editor has added four paragraphs and about 650 words to Maxwell's article about it. St Anselm (talk) 04:36, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I shortened the article up last week after the other innings so I'll give it another go later today maybe.

On the more general issue, this one certainly needs to wait some time. If there are innings which have a longer-term significance then we'd be OK with including them - we have had Scorecard of A. E. J. Collins since 2006 (although I don't think it's ever had a reference in it and tbh it probably needs to be redirected) for example. The problem is, where do you stop? Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

— Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scorecard of A. E. J. Collins started. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 10:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. If you had an article for Maxwell's innings, your could make a case for dozens of others. Three or four Bradman innings and three or four by Stokes might qualify, for instance. JH (talk page) 07:54, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, there are lists kicking around: 30 greatest Test cricket innings of all time: from Botham to Bradman, Lara to Stokes and everything in between. St Anselm (talk) 15:14, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

How has this one...

How has this one slipped under the net for so long? I've removed the PROD tag from H. Mallawathanthre - I wonder how this initialled player has escaped. Y'alls know what I think. If this had been done 13 years ago I may have had the inclination and energy to put together lists of players for Indian and Sri Lankan teams. If anyone wishes to put together a group of "List of players for X Sri Lankan cricket clubs", please do. Too tired now. Other priorities. (For example, finding out how poorly and inconsistently biography articles are treated on the Simple English Wikipedia, especially those of sportspeople). Funnily enough - it was actually put to AfD under the argument "single source" - which as we know, is the easiest to fix...

On the other hand, this user is being criticized for over-zealous tagging. Sometimes I wonder how people come upon these articles after so long, seemingly at random. I'm surprised there are still some out there. Let's make sure the user doesn't put much more recognizable names to PROD. Bobo . 04:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

CWC Records FL Review

I have nominated List of Cricket World Cup records for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Nonsense in articles

I'm all for encouraging new users, but I think the one introducing "Google Doodles" to the CWC article and a whole range of other recent trivial stuff isn't really adding anything of substance or quality to the project? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm glad it was that one you spotted as I've just removed the mascot stuff that's unsourced. The Doodles were, I think, already in the article so I've reverted to that version. Feel free to delete the section as trivia, but there seems to be an awful lot of completionism going on just now - adding irrelevant detail or another (usually poorly sourced) table os stats or grounds or whatever. There are a few people reverting these sorts of things, but more eyes are better... Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Google Doodle thing is just WP:TRIVIA and isn't useful to an encyclopedic article. I've removed them. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

There does indeed seem to be an awful lot of completionism, several which I have managed to come across and PROD/AfD them (like some articles on individual World Cup matches appearing). The quality of contributions seems sadly rather poor at the moment :( StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

BNA request

Hello all. Another BNA request! Would anyone be kind enough to take a look at this article and let me know what it says? I think I have solved the mystery surrounding a rather prolific Europeans cricketer. Cheers in advance. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 00:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I've sent it to you on an email. Johnlp (talk) 08:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Emerging Ireland (cricket) and Ireland Wolves cricket team - same or different?

Hi all,

I've just noticed Emerging Ireland cricket tour of West Indies 2023-24, and ran a little bit of a check with my Magic Sysop Spectacles on to see if Emerging Ireland (cricket) or similar had ever been created or WP:AFD-'d, which it hasn't.

It would appear to me that this might possibly be a re-branding of Ireland Wolves cricket team?

Your thoughts about this?

Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:12, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Not entirely sure as the Wolves team played a match against Bangladesh on 5 May this year. Please see CricketIreland site. Can't see anything in that site to suggest a rebrand but will keep looking. Batagur baska (talk) 09:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Found this page at CricketEurope headed Ireland Wolves 2023 but reporting on the matches in Antigua as West Indies U23 v Emerging Ireland. So, it seems to be the same team operating under an alternative name, perhaps just for the Antigua series. Batagur baska (talk) 09:30, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Cricket Ireland is a bit of a mess administratively at the moment, but I'd say they're the same team. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Fred Grant#Requested move 10 December 2023

This discussion is of potential interest to members of this project. Hog Farm _Talk 19:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Discussion on 2023 American Premier League

Please review or update the page

Delete. A load of nonsense if you ask me! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I would class this as exhibition cricket that cannot be considered notable. The sources used are dubious, especially Instagram, and that issue will have to be resolved if we are to keep the article. If the series becomes successful in future years and can attract current internationals, it would then be notable, but in my opinion the upcoming edition is not. Batagur baska (talk) 03:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

The launch event of the league was attended by international cricket superstars including Chris Gayle (West Indies), Fawad Alam (Pakistan), Samit Patel (England), Ravi Bopara (England), Navneet Dhaliwal (Canada), and others.

The tournament will feature players like the Universe Boss Chris Gayle, Australian Ben Cutting, former Indian cricketers S Sreesanth and Stuart Binny, Englishman Dan Lawrence, Pakistani Sohail Tanvir amongst others. Vikas265 (talk) 07:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

And?! Doesn't negate it being a nonsense tournament. Surely there's more historical and noteworthy cricket which can be written about on here? PS: not sure Samit Patel, Ravi Bopara, or Navneet Dhaliwal (never heard of him) are cricket superstars!!! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

And Chris Gayle is now 44, so perhaps not quite as good as he used to be. Batagur baska (talk) 10:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

AFD started here, please feel free to contribute there. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Find it amusing how the Premium Americans have no American players and are captained by an Englishman :DDDD StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 18:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Infobox clutter

T20 franchise teams Aaron Finch has played for
Seasons	Teams
2009/10	Rajasthan Royals
2011–2012	Delhi Daredevils
2011/12–2022/23	Melbourne Renegades
2012	Ruhuna Royals
2013	Pune Warriors India
2014	Sunrisers Hyderabad
2015	Mumbai Indians
2016–2017	Gujarat Lions
2018	Kings XI Punjab
2020/21	Royal Challengers Bangalore
2022	Kolkata Knight Riders
2023	San Francisco Unicorns

Hi, all. It occurs to me that, for many modern players, there are far too many "domestic" teams in their infoboxes. This is because of T20 franchises. I came across this 2022 article which lists players who have appeared for several IPL franchises. Aaron Finch has played for nine and his infobox lists 16 teams in total.

Proposal 1. Restrict the domestic team information section in Template:Infobox cricketer to actual club or state association teams only, and exclude all franchise teams.

So, in Finch's case, his 16 teams would be reduced to four: Victoria, Auckland, Yorkshire, and Surrey. His twelve franchises, including one each in Australia, Sri Lanka and USA, should be removed. As for listing the franchises elsewhere in the article, I created a small table which you can see here, and also at Aaron Finch#Franchise teams, which simply gives you the same information. Finch is an extreme case and there are many players with only one, two or three franchises. They probably wouldn't need a table like this as it is easy to mention two or three teams in the narrative. But, seeing how these franchises can accumulate, I do not think even those players should have them in the infobox.

Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I think we should only have the current franchise or last one in the infobox. We should also get rid of the medal table, which is kind of useless. Desertarun (talk) 17:55, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The latest franchise only would be fine, and you are right about the medal table. Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 21:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 2. Restrict the domestic team information section in Template:Infobox cricketer to actual club or state association teams only, and include only the current or last franchise team. Medal tables are to be removed. Desertarun (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support Proposal 2. Allowing only one franchise resolves my original issue, and the medal tables add no value at all. Batagur baska (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Comment. San Francisco Unicorns (another dull stupid name!) games don't have official T20 status, so that can be removed from the infobox. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, SW. I was in two minds about that, but I have deleted it now. And you are right about these ridiculous names. Batagur baska (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Not as dumb as the Oval Invincibles who lost their invincibility the moment they lost!!! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 00:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose: In my opinion, the infobox works really well as a way of gaining a quick overview of a player's career. Yes, there are a lot of franchise teams nowadays, but that doesn't necessarily make them a less legitimate part of a player's career. Removing IPL teams in particular would be a strange move, given its status as such a huge competition, so it seems to me quite an arbitrary distinction being made here between "actual club or state association teams" and other teams. All this proposal is doing, anyway, is moving the table to a slightly different part of the article - it's probably much easier for editors just to keep domestic teams in the infobox rather than having to update two places (and easier for readers too!). The infobox is limited to 16 teams anyway, I think, so it can't get too unwieldy. For what it's worth, I don't think San Francisco Unicorns should be included in Finch's infobox, as Major League Cricket does not count as official T20s. Agree on the medal tables, however, they're wrongly used for World Cups etc., and seem to have proliferated recently - they should be reserved just for more "recognised" medals, such as those given to cricketers at the 2022 Commonwealth Games. Mpk662 (talk) 09:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi,Mpk662. We could maybe create a separate franchise section in the infobox? Or just an IPL section with other leagues excluded? One point I would make is that franchise teams are not strictly domestic in governance terms and there is a heavy international element. We certainly seem to have a consensus about the MLC. Batagur baska (talk) 09:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I still think creating a separate franchise section would be complicating the matter too much. There's also the issue of defining what a "franchise" team is, and I am yet to find something actually defining it! For example The Hundred teams are often called franchises but are all ECB-owned, and the Women's Cricket Super League teams were franchises but often weren't acknowledged as such. Honestly, I don't particularly see the issue of a long list of domestic teams in an infobox. They're reflective of player's careers, and therefore useful for a reader to understand a player at a glance. Mpk662 (talk) 10:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per Mpk662. In modern cricket, the "franchise" teams are often more notable than the "actual club or state association teams". Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Well, to be fair, that is true the way IPL has developed. For example, in Kolkata, franchise-owned KKR are certainly more famous than CAB-managed Bengal are now. Batagur baska (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Agree with this. Whilst I don't like franchise cricket much, the IPL and other similar leagues are big events, and so should be the infobox. And for many England international players, they'll have played more games for their IPL/BBL etc teams than the county they're contracted to (some England players only play 3-4 times a year for their county). Joseph2302 (talk) 11:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Now this is a good point. I was reading about Jonny Bairstow recently and the report said just that. Okay, I accept consensus is to keep the franchise teams in the infobox. I think it was worth discussing, but the arguments against are convincing. Thank you, everyone. Batagur baska (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

On your point of maintaining the list of teams in the infobox only as per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored, with exceptions noted below)

In many / most cases the only place that a player's teams are mentioned is in the infobox. If the list is to appear in only one place, it should be in the body of the article. Spike 'em (talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 3: Medal tables should be removed from infoboxes

Support as proposer. Desertarun (talk) 13:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Support with caveat suggested by Mpk662 that medals earned in a recognised Games tournament, like the Commonwealth or (dare I say it?) the Olympics, should be included. Batagur baska (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Support 3 except for tournaments that clearly give out medals like Olympics (1900)/Commonwealth Games. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. The use of medals in infoboxes has become a mess lately. Only should be added to the infobox in exceptions, like those suggested by Batagur baska and Joseph2302. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 19:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
I would remove all of them - the medal tables used to be added below the infobox in a separate bit. That's better. But if you're allowing some medals then you will get regional awards or other such silliness added (or bronze awards when there was no 3/4 place playoff). And there are so many which have been added that you'll be playing whackamole till the end of time Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I would also like them all gone. If a team wins bronze at the Olympics they do so together, not as individuals. This is a likely means of further clutter as you've pointed out. Desertarun (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Support Removal of medal tables certainly. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Fwiw, looks like medal template is used on 173 articles. Including some as the manager being awarded the medal. Two of those are 1900 Olympians. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Support Medal tables and squad numbers are the things I dislike the most in ib cricketer Spike 'em (talk) 11:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Support removal generally except for CG (and Olympic!) medals. St Anselm (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Comment I agree with removal generally, but do think that they should remain for any Olympic or Commonwealth Games medals. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Comments

If you really want to remove clutter in the infobox, you'd be better of doing one or both of:
- radically cut the stats section which causes so many issues anyway - matches, runs and wickets would suffice imo; anything else could be dealt with in articles
  - Could you elaborate? Desertarun (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
    - I'd cut the stas to be just matches, runs and wickets. There's an argument for reducing the number of formats to three as well - or maybe having three international followed by three domestic if people really anted to. Then, of people are really dedicated, you could have tables in articles to summarise top scores, best bowling and so on. These happen sometimes anyway - Joe Denly still has one I think. They can be problematic, but at least you'd cut the infobox down. And they're so often out of date. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
      - So if we have 3 international and 3 domestic teams where would they go from a formatting point of view. I mean is there room in the infobox for 6 collumns? Desertarun (talk) 09:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
      - There's not room for six - and on a mobile device I generally have to horizontally scroll for more than 3. I would use two banks of three - one set for international and one for domestic. That doesn't create huge problems if you really reduce the number of sets of data. Either that or just go with three - and modern players we'd only show the international stuff most of the time. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
        I can see where you are heading with two banks of three, its a reasonable enough concept but dependent on getting the basic stat line number drastically down, otherwise we'd end up with a bigger infobox when we really could do with shrinking it. Desertarun (talk) 13:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- cut the number of team slots to 10 or fewer - at which point you'll be in a never ending battle with stans who will add every team someone was ever linked to. Currently only 166 articles use club11 so it's not actually that many - and no one gets to the level of Jamie Cureton, for example.

You could then also remove squad numbers, cap numbers and the like if you wanted to. But anything that relies on people reading an infobox documentation document is doomed to fail I'm afraid Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

From the above discussion it looks like we can't have a limit to team numbers. Although personally I'd prefer this. Desertarun (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

There's a difference. If you restricted the number of teams then you'd force people to make intelligent choices about which ones to include in the 166 articles that had more than 10 at the start of this month. You *could* do that - we already limit the number of teams to 17 so there are already choices having to be made about which teams to include or how to manage the infobox. That's opposed to trying to get people to be sensible or read a documentation that is hard to find and not easy to follow. They won't do that, just like they won't read the MOS either most of the time. As an example, Jeevan Mendis is one of the 17 articles which currently use all 17 team slots: what would you change there? Other than marking his final match as being in 2020 for Tamil Union. You could remove every team he only played for in a single season - which probably isn't a stupid idea. That would be one solution. What about Rilee Rossouw who also uses all 17? He's bound to use some more fairly soon - so we'll need to find a way of dealing with him anyway. What would be worse: dealing with it at 17 or dealing with it at 10? If you removed single season teams there are seven for him, so it's effectively the same solution. Maybe. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

For franchise players, could a timeline template be created, listing the teams/franchises they've played for over differing seasons (similar to that used for various musical acts and bands) and then removal of the teams section from infoboxes for these players. For your everyday county cricketer who's had the odd overseas stint/franchise tournament keep them in infoboxes, but for the franchise road warriors, would this be a potential solution? Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- That's an interesting idea - although in lots of cases it'll be one team a year so I don't know if it would work. Andre Russell is one where there are just way too many teams to ever list them in 17 (I think, 23 at least). That would be a place to experiment if you wanted to. It won't stop people listing teams in the clubXX parameters though. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I've added a picture of a reduced stat section, most of the removed stats aren't useful and would be clutter I'd say, opinions? Desertarun (talk) 22:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment. It's important to retain the number of centuries/fifties and five-for/ten-for stats in infoboxes, as they are important landmarks. Same with catches too, for example James Anderson has a phenomenal catching record for a bowler in Test/FC cricket. It wouldn't be right to omit those. On another note, I've always had a problem with the "Competition" heading name. Why competition? "Format" would be a much more appropriate heading. Those FC/LA/T20 etc stats don't represent a competition, but a collection of format stats. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 23:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
I agree with Format (or Form) to replace Competition. I think averages should go as they are often misleading. I would retain matches, runs, wickets, ct/st, 100/50, and 5wI/10wM. There could be a case for HS and BBI, but I think they should be in the text. Catches and stumpings are key for wicket-keepers. Batagur baska (talk) 06:47, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Looks like we could lose top score, balls bowled and best bowling, reducing the infobox by 3 lines. Is it possible to condense the 5 wickets in an innings and 10 wickets in a match onto one line? Desertarun (talk) 09:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- Possibly - but you'd need to ask a bot operator. Tbh if it's only 3 or 4 lines being lost I probably wouldn't bother - just get the balls line deleted as that's the most obviously daft one to have (but check that hidedeliveries isn't contingent on it somehow). A case can be made for all the others to be kept. If people want to be radical and solve most of the problems associated with massively out of date infoboxes then this is the opporunity - but it means cutting radically. Seriously: matches, runs and wickets is all we actually need you know. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
  - I'd prefer a bigger cut so i'll put together two proposals, one for a big cut, one for a smaller one. Desertarun (talk) 12:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 4

Based upon a conversation above I think updating the infobox to have more formats but fewer stats may be the way forward. Something like seen in the picture.

Support as proposer. Desertarun (talk) 13:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

This looks good but I would include ct/st because it is essential for keepers especially. The international figures are also part of the FC, LA, T20 ones so the "Domestic" label might be confusing and should be something like "Overall" to indicate whole career. I would remove the link to wicket which is unnecessary. Batagur baska (talk) 04:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Similar point from me. Unless someone is going to work out the purely domestic figures in a way that does not breach WP:OR, then it needs to be labelled appropriately : first-class includes Tests, LA includes ODI etc... Spike 'em (talk) 11:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

For similar reasons as then ones I list below, I'm not sure that this is possible to automate - the column headings are so variable and it seems unlikely to be possible now that I've thought about it Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 5

Trying this one for size, a few lines are taken off and 5 wickets innings and 10 wicket matches merged onto 1 line.

Support as proposer. Desertarun (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I would support this except I still think we should drop the averages. As a minor point, I don't think we need any links in the side labels, but that's just a cosmetic thing. Batagur baska (talk) 04:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Comment. I like how the 5-for and 10-for stats are combined, but I would still keep all other stats in the infobox. They provide a handy overview for someone who might just be wondering what Bahir Shah's FC average is (infobox just updated!), or how many five wicket hauls David Warner has taken (none, as it happens!). StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 13:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

There are 3 stats removed from proposal 5 - balls bowled, high score and best bowling. I'd say high score and best bowling are one offs rather than stats per se, and so better mentioned in prose. The balls bowled stat I just don't understand, does anyone use that? And do you want that one to stay aswell? Desertarun (talk) 15:24, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

You may need to look and see if it's techncially easy to combine the 5wi/10wm stats. They're currently separate parameters in the infobox, so they'd need to be combined somehow. I have no idea if that's possible or easy. You'd probably want to do some jiggerypokery as well - get rid of any n/a and convert any -/- to just - (which would suggest they hadn't taken a wicket) and so on. I don't know enough about what might be possible with this sort of thing to know if any of that is possible to automate or not Blue Square Thing (talk) 22:28, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

My understanding is that the code writers will do more or less anything accepted in a voted on proposal. What they won't do is piecemeal changes requested by individual editors. I think the na and -/- look out of place but I'm struggling to envision the problem and possible improvements. Do you have some examples? Desertarun (talk) 06:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

n/a changes to an endash; -/- changes to a single endash; short dashes also change to endash whenever they occur. If that's possible. Those are very minor changes that need making hundreds of articles Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:44, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm currently mocking up the infobox and want to check were going to use endashes. They appear to be longer than a minus but shorter than an emdash. Its a little confusing. Desertarun (talk) 09:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the endash is best option for both length and display. A hyphen is too short and an emdash too long in a display like this. Batagur baska (talk) 10:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

That's exactly what endashes are supposed to be fwiw - they're the width of the letter n in the typeface being used (as opposed to an emdash which is the width of a letter m - hence wider). We should probably be using them rather than a minus sign wherever there is a stats parameter that can never be fulfilled. So:

if someone has never batted, their runs, top score and average should be an endash - and their 100/50 parameter should, imo, be a single endash - there's no need to go –/–, just – will do. For someone who has batted but never been out, an endash for average and then 0/0 (or whetever) for centuries. Jas Singh (cricketer, born 2002) as a T20 batter, for example
if someone's not bowled in a format, all the bowling stats are endashes; if they've bowled but not taken a wickert, then average, 10w/5w need to be endashes. Brendon McCullum, for example, does this right, as does Jas Singh (cricketer, born 2002) again

Does that make sense? I have no idea what's possible, but if it then this would all be jolly good to do at the same time Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Previous discussions

These discussions might be of interest:

[3]
[4]

There was talk years ago about an infobox with collapsible sections, i.e. separate international and domestic sections of the infobox. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 10:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The concept of using a drop down box is good, I think you're saying put the international and domestic sections into a drop down and leave the rest of the stats alone, is that right? (I think the infobox variations envisioned in 2010 would fall foul of WP:NOTDATABASE these days). Desertarun (talk) 11:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

That's right. So you'd have an international subheading and domestic subheading. It was a suggestion to solve the 4 column limitation with the infobox. I'll tag @Harrias as I think it was he who designed some draft boxes. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

It does look like there is a path through here, that as my best guess might satisfy enough people to get a proposal accepted... It would essentially mean leaving the infobox more or less alone, except hiding the teams played for in two drop down boxes. Dropping 'balls bowled' and otherwise only making cosmetic and tidy up things. I'll try to get another proposal ready in a day or two. Desertarun (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd remain happy to collapse teams and stats in the infobox if that's a solution that works for people. I'd also be very willing to remove squad numbers (given some the daftness that occurs with those)

Whilst we're at it, Spike 'em put together a test case for doing something better with the asterisk for not out - there are a pile of discussions at Template talk:Infobox cricketer and Template talk:Infobox cricketer/Archive 1 and some implementation ideas at Template:Infobox cricketer/testcases. They're rarely around anymore, but the ideas remain valid ones to think about. Given that we might be able to bundle a bunch of stuff together here and make a range of improvements. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy to help mock-up / implement improvements to the IB. For a few pet hates, I'd certainly remove squad numbers, and cut down on the stats. Spike 'em (talk) 11:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the new infobox will need to be voted upon, and potential support voters will be put off an overall good proposal if a stat they like is removed. So we can only really remove the very bad, and hopefully hide little used info in a drop down box. I'd say squad numbers counts as very bad. Desertarun (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

And there's also the nickname parameter which is probably the most abused one... Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I've seen a dozen or more nicknames in the Shane Warne article, it was kind of tiresome. What do you suggest? Desertarun (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Removing the parameter altogether. It's rarely used for the purpose it was intended for Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Agree, happy to see nicknames removed. Very rarely is a sourced nickname used, more often than not it's a random made up nickname an IP puts in there! Balls can probably go too. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Nicknames should definitely go. I would not have them in the prose either unless they are somehow significant and have been well sourced. I don't see the need for balls delivered and I think most people would consider those to be too much detail. Drop-downs should be achievable and might help. They are certainly good in the end-of-page templates. Batagur baska (talk) 08:23, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm rarely a participant these days and more an observer/reader. I'm happy to see nicknames go, as if they're long-term monikers they'll be incorporated in the main text anyway (eg Jim Swanton, Shrimp Leveson-Gower, with or without hyphen). Less happy with losing the number of balls bowled and highest scores and best bowling returns, and certainly not happy with losing the batting and bowling averages, which someone suggested, as I think that's a handy guide as to the quality of the cricketer in Test and FC matches, if less so in LA and T20. Surely the problem with all of this arises only with cricketers who are still playing: infoboxes for past and retired cricketers could be retained pretty much as is, as they won't change. And surely the way to treat franchises (as distinct from long-term teams) is to ignore them: we've never bothered, for instance, with adding "Col. L. C. Stevens' XI" or "The Rest" to team lists for players who appeared in end-of-season festival cricket, unless there was a specific reason for doing so. A long time ago, we had a template for something called "Infobox Historic Cricketer" or some such, as distinct from current players who would need updating every so often. Maybe time to revive that thought? Johnlp (talk) 17:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Given that articles such as 2023 Abu Dhabi T10, with it's, err, three lines of prose, now seem perfectly OK to have, I doubt we'll manage to ignore franchises - the stans will just keep on adding them, along with medal boxes and so on. There's too many moles to whack Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

List of possible changes

It looks like we're doing a spring clean of the infobox, so i've summarised the conversation above into bullet points. The only point not discussed is moving National team to the personal information section to replace nickname. If the international information is to be hidden in a drop down box the players national team should almost certainly not be hidden. I note Spike 'em has offered to help mock this up, and that would be most helpful, a collaboration may be the way forward.

Personal information section has nickname removed
International information loses squad numbers
Domestic team information loses squad numbers
Career statistics section loses balls bowled
Career statistics has 5 wicket innings and 10 wicket matches merged onto one line
-/- changes to a single endash; short dashes change to endash
Medal table section to be removed or limited to certain games

Thoughts? Desertarun (talk) 10:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm against hiding of content, as per MOS:DONTHIDE. National team is already in "International information" so don't need to duplicate it in the "Personal information" section. Apart from that, am happy with the rest of the changes proposed here. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

It wouldn't be duplicated, it would only be moved if we go ahead with a drop down box for international information. Desertarun (talk) 11:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Joseph, re hiding and national team. Hiding so much information for me defeats the point of an infobox, which is meant to provide key information at a quick glance. Personally I'd keep the stats section the same too, especially as the consensus now seems to be to only get rid of one or two lines, but not too bothered either way. As I've said before, I support limiting medal tables to Commonwealth and Olympic Games (and possibly other multi-sport events like the Asian Games? Haven't seen them mentioned), and I'm fine with that being hidden. Thanks Desertarun for trawling through the long discussion and summarising! Mpk662 (talk) 11:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

The original concern from proposal 1 was to remove the big list of franchises that players have been to, it can be enormous and is not very useful in my opinion. Do we really want a list of 17 franchises in the infobox? A drop down box allows the information to be hidden but quickly available if anybody wants it. What other games from Asia should we allow in the medal table? (if its kept). Desertarun (talk) 11:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

My argument for keeping domestic teams visible is pretty much the same I (and others) set out in the original discussion. I do find it useful for an overview of a player's career, and think the unwieldy nature of it is overstated - it basically comes down to personal preference, which I doubt will change for either of us! I was referring to the Asian Games, as well as the South Asian Games, which are the multi-sport events off the top of my head that include cricket, and can be seen as at least equivalent to the Commonwealth Games. Mpk662 (talk) 12:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

If they've legitimately played for 17 teams, then it's perfectly reasonable for them all to be the infobox. Or we could implement a cricket wide change for the teams e.g. they have to play for a team for at least 2 years so be added there (the current standard is they have to appeared at least once ever for a team). Hiding it (which doesn't actually work on some mobile devices anyway) doesn't provide any benefit, and can cause accessibility issues on e.g. screen readers. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Accessibility is as good a reason as any for not hiding things Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks like we need a vote to gauge support for hiding sections, so I've put that below. Desertarun (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Can we also lose squad numbers for domestic stuff please - they're only patchily used anyway - only 758 of the nearly 19,000 infoboxes with club1 in them use the squad number - as soon as you get to club6 it's in double figures. I'm happy enough with whatever from that list that people agree on and would be interested in seeing whatever mockups are possible Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I've added squad numbers from the domestic info section to the list, that was an oversight on my part. Desertarun (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 7

~~From the information box the following 3 sections - International information, Domestic team information and Medal record should be hidden by default in a drop down box.~~ Desertarun (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Support as proposer. Desertarun (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose per MOS:DONTHIDE. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 19:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Strong oppose MOS:DONTHIDE is clear about this, don't do it. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Neutral I see pros and cons, but I think I'd want to see some working test versions before I could be certain. The concerns about accessibility above suggest this might not be a great idea in the infobox - I've used accessibility as a good reason for making different decisions in the past and it's one of the best reasons we have imo for deciding on things like layout Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose, having read DONTHIDE. Accessibility is important. Batagur baska (talk) 21:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Withdrawn, looks like a non runner. Desertarun (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 8

I think we're ready to vote on the remaining items in the possible list of changes for the cricket infobox.

This proposal says for the cricket infobox:-

Personal information section has nickname removed
International information has squad numbers removed
Domestic team information has squad numbers removed
Career statistics section has balls bowled removed
Career statistics has 5 wicket innings and 10 wicket matches merged onto one line
Career statistics has -/- changing to a single endash; short dashes change to endash

Changes to the medal table have been voted on above. I will endeavour to get proposal 3 (on medal tables) and proposal 8 (this one) formally closed by an uninvolved party to read consensus and come to a decision. Desertarun (talk) 11:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Support as proposer. Desertarun (talk) 11:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Procedural oppose, this is six different items, let's split them up and decide individually. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea - it makes things easier to caveat and to get individual items through. I'll put a note on the infobox talk page alerting anyone who watches that to this discussion as well Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

It might also be worth thinking about implementing Template talk:Infobox cricketer/Archive 1#Asterisk as well if there are changes being made. At the same time it might be worth finding out if the Template talk:Infobox cricketer#Visual editor problem can't be fixed. It does make editing problematic if someone's used the visual editor. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to propose another removal which is all of the height parameters. From what I can see, these are rarely sourced and people could be entering guesses only. I don't think height is an important item in cricket. Thanks. Batagur baska (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

And I think we should remove family parameters too because this is wide open to abuse and breach of privacy. We have people seeking out children's names, for example, and I think it is very wrong to allow that sort of information. Batagur baska (talk) 17:12, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

The family parameter should only include notable people, ie those with their own Wikipedia articles. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 17:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree, but then I think that should be mentioned in the prose only because the parameter is being misused. It is a pity this software cannot reject any use of a parameter unless the variable links directly to an article. Batagur baska (talk) 05:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Pretty sure we can't remove parameters that are in personal information section, as they're inherited from {{Infobox person}}. Family and height parameters would need to have wider agreement to be removed, and a few people misusing the family section doesn't mean we should just remove it, as it's useful information to navigate between articles. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose we're straying away from the original aim of cleaning up cricket information in infoboxes to now trying to remove parameters that exist on every template for every biographical article. And 8 proposals of 8 very similar things is just getting unwieldy, notwithstanding the fact that this probably needs a formal WP:RFC to do any major changes anyway. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:47, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 9

I agree it is a good idea to handle the infobox problems individually. Given the importance of WP:BLP, I think the issue of nickname misuse must be the top priority. So, I propose:

Remove the nickname parameter from the personal information section of {{Infobox cricketer}}. If this cannot be done because of dependency on {{Infobox person}}, or for other technical reasons, establish a project rule that the parameter must not be used in {{Infobox cricketer}}, even if the nickname has an established usage (in that case, it should be mentioned in the main body of the article and verified by a reliable source).

A case in point is this example. Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 08:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Support. Often used for vandalism or they're well meaning additions without a reference and WP:OR. Desertarun (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Support removing nickname parameter, which is not really very much necessary. Removal of it can prevent from adding nicknames through WP:OR by new editors.Robo^Cric Let's chat 04:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Full list of players sold and unsold in the 2024 IPL Auction

Mitchell Starc, the Australian speedster, shattered records in a historic "IPL auction 2024" on Tuesday, when he was signed by the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) for an amazing Rs 24.75 crore.Starc outbid fellow Australian Pat Cummins, who briefly held the new record until being stolen by Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH) for a substantial sum of Rs 20.50 crore. Markwilliam8860 (talk) 06:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

This is covered at List of 2024 Indian Premier League personnel changes, and could also be mentioned at 2024 Indian Premier League. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Thoughts?

Well, is it a notable topic, I am in doubt. Robo^Cric Let's chat 07:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

More notable by WP:GNG criteria than many of the player pages we have. There are multiple RS articles used as references that are specifically about him. Spike 'em (talk) 07:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I read the WP page thinking oh no he is not notable. But the refs are solid, so he is notable. Desertarun (talk) 20:54, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Domestic cricket competitions by year

Why do we only create categories for the southern hemisphere summer seasons like Category:Domestic cricket competitions in 2023–24‎ and not generally for the northern hemisphere summer season e.g. Category:Domestic cricket competitions in 2022? I notice one does exist for 2023, and the 2021 one is currently at a CFD Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 21#Category:Domestic cricket competitions in 2021, so was wondering if there was a deliberate reason why these aren't created? In the 2021 season for example, there'd be all the English domestic tournaments, plus some Irish ones and probably a few others, which looks like it more than justifies a category in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the series was originally an Aussie-only concept because I added several Ranji Trophy articles a few weeks ago and before that there was nothing in them except Sheffield Shield. We should have calendar years, I agree, but the 2021 one has only a Hong Kong tournament which is at AFD, so we should add more to that category and do the same for 2022. I will withdraw the CFD and expand 2021. Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 12:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

My understanding is that there is no particular reason for this, and you should feel comfortable creating it. However given the ambiguous name steps should ideally be taken to make sure that people don't erroneously add tournaments from the southern hemisphere summer to that category. Sellyme^Talk 17:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Articles needing attention

Hi. There are some articles on domestic cricket in New Zealand, which need attention and significant improvements:

I worked a bit on the super smash, but the other two also needs to be updated. These articles nowadays are not being actually cared about. I would request the volunteers to look about this matter and edit the pages if you wish. Thanks. Robo^Cric Let's chat 17:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi User:RoboCric, just wanted to let you know that I've gone through and added the full fixture details for all upcoming matches for both the Plunket Shield and Ford Trophy. The former was fairly simple and only took a few minutes, but there were some serious errors which matches being linked to incorrect scorecards with the Ford Trophy so I just went and re-built pretty much every single match report there (with the added benefit of including points totals, time of day, and umpire info where they were missing while I was at it). I've tried to clean up after myself but it's probably worth looking at that one just to make sure I didn't break anything. I'll also note that I have not added fixtures in the Ford Trophy for the finals matches, since they should probably be out in their own section rather than clumped in with the regular season.

Feel free to WP:PING me for any other such cricket season articles where a user is available to build up prose, tables, and descriptions of any finals/divisions, but that need a lot of match reports or fixtures added to them - I have a lot of tools I've built to make adding them a lot easier, so I'm more than happy to do all of the grunt work so that other people can focus on making the articles a bit better than the barebones results list. Sellyme^Talk 18:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Haldane Stewart#Requested move 11 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Haldane Stewart#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Naseem Shah (cricketer)#Requested move 16 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Naseem Shah (cricketer)#Requested move 16 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

GA review

Hi all. I have nominated John Holder (umpire) for GA status. If anyone could spare some time to review the article, that would be much appreciated :) Cheers, StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I read through the article and a couple of things stood out, the first is that he is quoted in reliable sources saying that English cricket is racist. I know the topic isn't ignored but given that he is the only black umpire in the history of English cricket, and the ICEC report, this matter doesn't look to have been given proper weight. Or perhaps its just a matter of organisation. The other thing that stood out is that his coaching career isn't discussed in much detail, it could be that he didn't have much of a career, but often the value of cricket coaching is overlooked, so it might be worth a second look to see if that could be beefed up. Desertarun (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. I couldn't find anything where he directly calls the ECB racist. Included is when Holder and Ismail Dawood tried to sue to ECB, but later withdrew their claim. A couple of papers have construed this case as proof of racism, but that doesn't appear to have been how Holder worded it. Another is the Daily Mirror, but we tend to ignore that! Can you find any RS? With coaching, I don't think his coaching ever went much beyond club level. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

For my previous reply I didn't look past The Telegraph headline that says "Former Test umpire John Holder sues ECB for alleged racial discrimination". Reading the article just now it looks like there is a quote from him saying he was "discriminated against on the grounds of race". It could be that he's saying he was discriminated against, rather than him saying the ECB is racist I guess. Desertarun (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

OK, i dug up another ref from the telegraph that says Holder was suing the ECB for institutionalised racism, its here [5]. Desertarun (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I was thinking about reviewing this, but on reflection I'm going to pass. Nice article anyway, keep up the good work. Desertarun (talk) 16:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
No worries! Thanks for finding that link, I will incorporate it into the article (along with some others I need to add) in the next few days. I've just passed 40% Hampshire cricketers completeness, so fingers crossed a GA will be amongst them! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 18:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on 2024 One World One Family Cup

Please review or update the page

The charity match will be played at the Sai Krishnan Cricket Stadium in Muddenahalli near Bengaluru. On January 18, 2024, two sides, led by Sachin Tendulkar and Yuvraj Singh, will play a charity T20 match for the One World One Family Cup.

Between them, the two teams – One World (led by Sachin Tendulkar) and One Family (captained by Yuvraj Singh) – have cricketers from India, Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, England, and South Africa.

Organised by the Shri Madhusudan Sai Global Humanitarian Mission, the One World One Family Cup contest will raise funds for healthcare and education of the needy across more than 30 nations. Vikas265 (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Vikas265. I'm not really sure this exhibition match is notable??? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Cricketer ID

Before I redirect H.F. Russell, just wondering if anyone can have more luck than me in finding out the full name of this 1880s Hampshire cricketer. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 20:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Australia cricket team

Hello. Me and User:Therlinsideman have had a content dispute over the Australia national cricket team. We initially had a dispute as they kept listing Steve Smith as the ODI captain but they have agreed on keeping Cummins in. However, now they insist on adding the vice captains in without proper justification. They also keep adding Marsh as the ODI vice captain which I couldn't find a source for. They have provided a podcast as a source but I'm not sure if it is considered reliable for Wikipedia. Apart from that, I couldn't find any announcement naming him as vice captain except this, which states that there's no ODI vc. I'm listing this here as I wanted to get some opinions on this. Thanks, Hamza Ali Shah ^Talk 15:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:PUBLISHED Therlinsideman (talk) 15:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Therlinsideman: that's fine, now could you please point out where in the podcast Marsh is stated to be the VC as it's quite a long podcast. Thanks, Hamza Ali Shah ^Talk 15:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

You have the time to keep reverting edits so find it yourself ha Therlinsideman (talk) 15:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Therlinsideman: The burden of proving that the source actually states that Marsh is the VC is fully on you. You have provided the source, you show me where it proves your point. Thanks, Hamza Ali Shah ^Talk 15:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Therlinsideman:, @Hamza Ali Shah:. The infobox does specifically state "captain", therefore there is no need to mention who the vice-captain of the team is. So I've removed it. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 20:58, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Despite currently resting, Cummins remains permanent captain in all three formats and our article's infobox should reflect that. I've removed Marsh and I agree with SW that vice-captains should not be in the infobox. Batagur baska (talk) 21:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Split proposal

Hi, I proposed last month that Ranjitsinhji should be split into two articles (cricketer and ruler) because of its length. Post-deadline, there has been no response but it's occurred to me that I should have raised it here, so I'm leaving it be for a while longer. The proposal is at Talk:Ranjitsinhji#Article length. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. Batagur baska (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Category:Egyptian cricketers

Just had a thought while expanding a Hampshire cricketer who played for the Egyptian team. Is this category name misleading? None of the players in it are Egyptian, they just so happened to be British officials stationed in Egypt who played for Egypt. Should it be renamed, or deleted entirely as the team never played major matches? StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 19:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any issue with the status quo. The Egypt national team played games, even though these weren't internationals. Desertarun (talk) 09:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

It's more the assumption made by this being a nationality category. All the players who represented the team were British occupation officials, so none of them identified as Egyptians! AA (talk) 20:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I know, they shopped around their nationality in a brazen fashion, just like they do today. The England team could do with shipping in a few South African pace bowlers, we can give their batters a miss though! :)

I think I'd going to CfD it. The more I think about it the less it makes sense. At least England's SA 'mercenaries' actively changed their nationality by becoming UK citizens! AA (talk) 13:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

What are the bots up to?

The bots seem to be very busy changing cricket talk pages, what are they up to? Desertarun (talk) 20:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

They're applying a class rating to the banner shell only so that the same one applies to all projects. It's a good idea because you only have to type class=x once and you don't get four different ratings on one page. They'll be weeks or months changing every page, though. Doesn't involve importance ratings. Batagur baska (talk) 21:29, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

That does look a good idea, it'll save time and bring some some simplification. Desertarun (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Wish we had bots to update infoboxes! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

That would be brilliant :-) Batagur baska (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Was in the plans once upon a time I think. Considering we have in a given year several hundred cricketers to update, it would be useful! AA (talk) 13:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Kalyani Dhokarikar

I discovered this article by chance. All I can say is !!! JH (talk page) 09:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I particularly like the "Best Batswoman Woman Award" which links, naturally enough, to Batting (cricket). Johnlp (talk) 12:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I've removed a bit of the worst rubbish. But looks like most the junk was added by someone whose username suggests they're a media company i.e possibly working with her. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Where to start first? The duplinks, overlinks, peacock phrasing, unsourced personal details? Spike 'em (talk) 11:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Kate Heffernan

Hi all - User:Djln19 and I have been having some disagreements on this cricketer/netballer's article, would appreciate some other eyeballs on it rather than the two of us repeating the same arguments back at each other! See the talk page for the full explanations. I'm also posting this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's sport due to the multi-sport nature of the article. Thanks Mpk662 (talk) 21:20, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Clear case of WP:NOTLISTENING, as they don't want to follow WP CRIC wide infobox usage. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Arthur Carew Richards

Apparently was made an OBE, however I can't find his Gazette notification. Is this false information in the Eton and Cambridge registers? AA (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I couldn't find any Gazette reference either, but an obituary in the Portsmouth Evening News of 2 December 1930 states he received the honour in June 1919.https://britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000290/19301202/181/0011 RossRSmith (talk) 14:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look! I think I found it here by searching his middle name. Probably doesn't appear as a full name search because of the way it is gazetted. He was made an OBE in December 1919, antedated to June 1919. AA (talk) 22:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Infoboxes looking ugly?

Just wondering if anyone else is now seeing the year spans on two separate lines instead of one?

It should look like:

1950–1953 when employing a – or & ndash; (ignore the gap between & and n, couldn't get it not to format with nowiki!)

But instead looks like:

1950–
1953

This doesn't look asthetically pleasing and takes up unecessary space, making the infobox longer.

Just me? AA (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

It seems to depend on the width of the stuff in the infobox - you can sometimes get away with Kent or other short names. But otherwise, try {{nowrap|1950–1953}}. The long dashes look better than using a minus. Blue Square Thing (talk) 22:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the hack ;) All fixed! AA (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Clean up needed on Gujarat Titans

There has been quite a bit of disruptive editing on the the "Gujarat Titans" article, especially in regards to the captain and whether it is "Shubman Gill" or "Kane Williamson." I tried to clean up the article the best I could, and from what I can tell, it appears Shubman Gill is the catpain [6]. However, I know absolutely nothing about this sport, so I thought I would post here so someone who is more knowledgeable can clean it up and ensure accuracy. It could also benefit from temporary page protection after the clean-up as well. Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 13:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on 2024 Legends Cricket Trophy

Please update and review the page.

The 2024 Legends Cricket Trophy will be the second edition of the Legends Cricket Trophy (LCT), a Twenty20 cricket tournament featuring retired cricketers, many of them former internationals.

The tournament will take place from 8 March to 18 March, 2024 at Pallekelle Stadium, Kandy, Sri Lanka. The tournament will bring together cricketing legends from around the world for the first time to Sri Lanka. The tournament will be played in a 90-ball format.

Squads for the tournament were selected through a draft which took place on 15 February 2024

Yuvraj Singh, TM Dilshan, Aaron Finch, Chris Gayle, Harbhajan Singh, Robin Uthappa and Suresh Raina are named as the icon players for the tournament. Vikas265 (talk) 05:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

But why is this tournament notable? Just because they're ex-professionals doesn't mean the event is inherently notable. Our cricket coverage shouldn't be an indiscriminate collection of information. AA (talk) 09:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:NOTINHERITED, doesn't look notable as a tournament even if it has notable players. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

AfD here. AA (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding colour violation template

Hi Everyone! I just want to know that what is template for mos color violation that we need to add in any article section to rectify the color that has been added there. Fade258 (talk) 16:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any. AA (talk) 19:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Medals in infoboxes, again

It looks like Proposal 3 in this discussion got consensus, but I am involved and can't close it. I'm not particularly bothered if it isn't implemented, but it seems wrong to archive it and leave it hanging. St Anselm (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on 2024 Indian Veterans Premier League

The 2024 Indian Veterans Premier League (also known as IVPL 2024). is the inaugural edition of the Indian Veterans Premier League , a Twenty20 cricket tournament featuring retired cricketers, many of them former internationals. The tournament is taking place in India from 23 February to 3 March 2024. The entire competition is being played at the Shaheed Vijay Singh Pathik Sports Complex in Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh. The tournament is organised by the Board for Veteran Cricket in India (BVCI).

Six teams are taking part in the competition.

Chhattisgarh Warriors
Mumbai Champions
Rajasthan Legends
Red Carpet Delhi
Telangana Tigers
VVIP Uttar Pradesh

Vikas265 (talk) 07:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I think this is a quite a copy paste from its respective article. Please be clear what you asking about. Best regards! Fade258 (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I want the page to be reviewed Vikas265 (talk) 14:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

We are providing a review on here, but aren't being met with many answers! Why are these notable? They seem to non-notable events, with very routine sources which do not establish notability. AA (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on Indian Street Premier League

The Indian Street Premier League (ISPL) is a T10 cricket league which will have its first season take place from 6-15 March 2024. It is meant to help uncover emerging cricketing talent, with matches to be played using tennis balls. Vikas265 (talk) 08:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Vikas265, Please be clear what you are asking about? Best regards. Fade258 (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I want the page to be reviewed Vikas265 (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

This is the least notable of the lot. We are not an indiscriminate collection of anything and everything about cricket. I honestly think you are wasting your time making these. AA (talk) 15:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Jos Buttler GA

I've left some comments about whether Jos Buttler article is still GA-worthy or not (in my opinion, it's not) at Talk:Jos Buttler#Still a GA?. Probably the best people to work on it would be from this project, so giving you all a heads up. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree. It's a long way off what would qualify as being GA-worthy. Think back in the day this was @Harrias' baby, so dropping him a ping. AA (talk) 22:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not at GA level at the moment, and I don't really have the interest in working on an active England player to get it back there. Once he's retired, I'd probably take a look again, but active international players are too much stress. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 22:31, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly. Any active players are just too much aggravation to maintain to that level. AA (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Tom Atkinson - sources?

Tom Atkinson is an unsourced cricket article I've found while looking at Cumbria articles for WP:FEB24, the unsourced articles backlog drive.

The content is:

Tom Atkinson (27 September 1930 – 2 September 1990) was an English first-class cricketer who was born in Millom, Cumbria, and died in Glasgow. He played for Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club from 1957 to 1960 as an opening bowler and middle/lower order batsman. He was a right-handed batsman and right-arm fast medium bowler.

Can anyone here please find a source to add? Thanks in advance! PamD 14:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I've added a basic statistic source. It wouldn't be sufficient to save the article from an AfD, but it proves his existence at least. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 14:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, it's enough to clear him out of my WP:Petscan listings! I've added {{Refimprove}}, because as you say he needs more sources ideally. PamD 15:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

There's something here about him... though I can't read it as I gave up getting access! AA (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

For almost every man who's played for Notts, this is a good source of information - and will certainly indicate if there's virtually nothing known about a player. The chances are that it's based on Peter Wynne-Thomas' books in many cases - if it wasn't written directly by him. I'll add a little more in now from there are CricketArchive. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

If there aren't enough good sources to pass WP:GNG, then a redirect to List of Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club players#A would be the most sensible outcome (and this is the general outcome for cricketers not notable enough for their own article). Joseph2302 (talk) 12:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

There's a Wisden obituary, annoyingly in the "wrong" year's book. I've worked it up - I think there's plenty and there's lots to suggest that there would be a lot more in other sources. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Dharmaraja–Kingswood Cricket Encounter#undefined

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dharmaraja–Kingswood Cricket Encounter#undefined that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 15:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts on these

Just wondering what everyone's thoughts are toward the following linked articles found in the "List of Big Matches" section of the Big Match. To me, they seem to be a collection of match reports and stats which violate WP:NOTSTATS. They don't seem notable enough, anyone else agree? AA (talk) 23:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, seems to be a violation of WP:NOTSTATS and don't look to be notable. Feels a bit needless as well. Hamza Ali Shah ^Talk 23:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Create a page on Asian Legends League T20

Introduction:

The Inaugural edition tournament will see teams comprising of legendary stars from five biggest Asian cricketing nations Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, compete in a thrilling tournament, taking place from March 13 to March 21, 2024.

The tournament is scheduled to be held from March 13 to March 21, 2024. The league is organized by World Sports Group Private Limited and will feature five teams: Afghanistan Pathans, Indian Royals, Pakistan Stars, Bangladesh Tigers, Srilankan Lions

The Asian Legends League T20 (ALL T20) is a cricket league that aims to bring together legendary cricketers from Asia and provide an opportunity for fans to witness their favourite players in action once again. The league will be hosted in Dambulla Cricket Stadium (Sri Lanka).

Objective:

The objective of ALL T20 is to provide a platform for retired Asian cricketers to showcase their skills once again, while also giving fans and opportunity to relive the nostalgia of watching these legends play. The league will aim to promote the sport of cricket in the Asian region and provide a competitive platform for players to showcase their abilities.

Official Website: https://www.allt20.asia/index.php

Format of the Tournament :

The ALL T20 will feature four teams, each consisting of legendary players from Asia. The teams will play against each other in a round-robin format, followed by the Playoffs with the final.

The 5 teams will battle out each other in 10 league matches where every team will play once with every other team. The Rank 4 and Rank 5 team will play for Eliminator 1, Rank 3 and winner of Eliminator 1 will play for Eliminator 2. Rank 1 and Rank 2 will play for Qualifier 1 and Qualifier 2 will play in between winner of Eliminator 2 and Looser of Qualifier 1 and their respective winners will qualify for the final.

Vikas265 (talk) 13:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Rather not, thanks. AA (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like it will pass WP:GNG. You could always create a draft and use WP:AFC to see if people will accept it as notable. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

ICC Media Release citations

The ICC website has recently (in the last year) switched its url format from https:/www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/######## to https:/www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/name-of-article.

This seems to have killed plenty of citation links.

CarnivalSorts (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

FL removal discussion

I have nominated List of Indian Premier League seasons and results for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Men's cricket

(I don't know if this has been brought up before too; I'm sorry if it has and I'm just repeating)

I think it is about time we start using the term "men's" in certain article titles and prose text similar to how "women's" is used currently. I propose this to cover mainly series/tournament articles (e.g. Australia men's cricket team in England in YEAR) and stats articles (e.g. List of men's Twenty20 International records). There has been a trend recently to use more gender-neutral terminology in certain parts of cricket-related articles (like maiden century/five-for stat mentions in match summaries, usage of terms like "ODI" over "WODI" in series articles et cetera), and a progression from that to a slight addition in the main article titles/headings might be a welcome change. ICC and a number of leading cricket boards already mention either gender when applicable in their articles and other releases; articles about sports like field hockey and basketball in English Wikipedia have also been doing something similar for some time, and I feel like cricket can start going in that direction too. I'll be glad to know what others think about this. Thank you.

Pinging @Bs1jac, @Cric editor, @Godknowme1 মাশ্‌ফী※Mashfi (ETP) 18:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I certainly think things like List of Twenty20 International records, and the lists of umpires and grounds in each format should have "men's" in the title. Also team pages (e.g. Australia national cricket team) should have "men's" in the title.

I am not so sure about tournaments or series. Probably should treat men's and women's the same way though. Bs1jac (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I too agree about the "men's" to be appended to the national teams' titles. And about tournaments I guess we can make changes based on what ICC calls them, since the 2023 edition the Cricket World Cup too has gender specification in its title. Cric editor (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Generally, the men's team are the primary topic, which is why we have e.g. England cricket team not England men's cricket team. And this is also the case with most men's cricket series- they continue to get way more coverage in general than women's series. Adding men's violates WP:CONCISE and looks to be an attempt to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Generally but it cannot be assumed to be true by default. The Thai women's team gets a lot more coverage than their men's one, but we still have Thailand national cricket team and Thailand women's national cricket team.

Certainly agree that national team's titles should be separated, tournament names should follow ICC naming for each event. CarnivalSorts (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Frederick Capron

Hi, wondering if anyone has more sources on Frederick Capron - the notability claim is that he played 2 first class games for the MCC but in a period before "first class" as a term was officially used. Thanks. JMWt (talk) 11:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Scottish Super 10

Hi. A new T10 league has been launched by Cricket Scotland. Here's some coverage about the tournament, with the inaugural season in August 2024. Since it is not a league with T20 status, I'm just asking the WP:CRIC members whether the sources contribute towards WP:GNG or not. Can it be created as an article? I've created it as a redirect page for now and will decide if content can be added based on the opinions of cricket editors. Thanks. Robo^Cric Let's chat 15:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

This project shouldn't be an indiscriminate collection of hit-and-giggle competitions from all over the world. Keep it encyclopedic and based on the ICC definition of official cricket, otherwise we just devalue our overall content. AA (talk) 16:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:TOOSOON to tell whether WP:GNG will be met. There have been countless planned events like this that have never actually happened (e.g. Euro T20 Slam that was supposed to start over 4 years ago). As such, I'd say wait until at least August. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 20:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

FLC

I have nominated Ireland women's cricket team record by opponent for featured list. I think, it is one of the topics of interest of Cricket Project. Please join the discussion on whether this article should be promoted or not. Thanks. Robo^Cric Let's chat 16:06, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see my comments :) AA (talk) 11:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation AA Robo^Cric Let's chat 11:57, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

AFD

Hi. Even after 2 relists, this AFD is lacking participation. ~~While I am confident that it deserves to be deleted, but~~ it can't be closed as soft deletion is ineligible now. So, I invite the editors of this project to join the discussion. Thanks. Robo^Cric Let's chat 14:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

You're WP:canvassing for delete votes. In future you should ask for participation but leave out the bit about you being confident its a delete. Desertarun (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I didn't want to canvass, it is a proper notice. I'm sorry but I had no intention for canvassing. Just, I wanted to explain that soft deletion was not eligible even though there have been one participant in the AFD. So, I wanted to seek attention of editors to participate in the discussion. I'm happy to remove that part and rely on the neutrality. Thanks. Robo^Cric Let's chat 15:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Most of us have inadvertently canvassed at some point. In such a low participation discussion like this nobody will much care, but in a more animated debate people will get annoyed for sure. Desertarun (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Jos Buttler

Jos Buttler 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. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)