Talk:Phillip Hughes

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was} PAGE MOVED per discussion below. Disambiguation seems to be covered by the hatnote. -GTBacchus^(talk) 15:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

---

• Phillip Hughes (cricketer) → Phillip Hughes — (Discuss) — He's the only Phillip Hughes with a double L, already a hatnote in place linking to the single L disambiguation page — Jpeeling (talk) 12:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
• The difference between "Philip" and "Phillip" is not obvious, and likely each is sometimes misspelt as the other. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
• Isn't that the whole point of hatnotes, to link to same/similar named articles. Phillip Hughes has redirected here for 16 months without anybody redirecting it to the disambiguation Philip Hughes, I don't see why it's particularly controversial to simplify the naming. --Jpeeling (talk) 12:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Support move. Phillip Hughes already redirects here and has for some time. Qualifiers should be avoided when not necessary. Any reader confusion with similarly named persons is properly handled by the hatnote. Station1 (talk) 06:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Article Section Heading

The section of this article titled "Australian Selection" is no longer valid. Yes, the section contains details of his selection for the Australian Test team but it has now moved on from that to detailing his Test career. Given that he is being spoken about as being chosen for both the Australian T20 and ODI teams I will be changing this section heading to "Australian Test career" - "Australian ODI Career" and "Australian T20 career" sections can come later if required. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 02:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a need for the Australian? He hasn't and almost certainly won't play Test cricket for another country. --Jpeeling (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

True. But... (scratches head as he searches for a way out) ...if we have the following section headers (later, of course) -"Test career", "ODI Career" and "T20 career" - we'll need a descriptor of either "Australian" or "International" on the T20 section or else we'll get confused between the international and domestic levels of the T20 game. Actually it's probably better if I just look at Michael Clarke or Ponting for a pointer here. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The best batsmen in first class cricket

The following article is a citation: [1].

I propose that we add the following to the lede of the article based on this citation:

"Phillip Hughes is considered to have one of the best first class batting records in cricket for a young player by Australia test and ODI captain Michael Clarke."

Either this or something similar to the effect would be good, I think. He's certainly got the best first class batting record in Australia for a player under 30 with at least 50 first class matches. So that could be added as well. ESPN cricinfo is a source.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.216.12.253 (talk) 07:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it would be unreasonable to add something along these lines to the lead. Just on the basis of the article you provided, I'd slightly tweak your suggestion to say, "In December 2011, Australian captain Michael Clarke stated that he considered Hughes' batting record to be one of the best by any young player in first-class cricket." That might still need more tweaking, but I think it's important to note the date because at that time Hughes was under fire from the media for his Test performances and Clarke was defending a player who was currently in his side. Regarding the stats, cricinfo is a reliable source, but could you please show a link? Jenks24 (talk) 07:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I have multiple problems with this proposal. Firstly, I do not consider Michael Clarke's opinion, nor any other single pundit's opinion, whether cited or otherwise, to be relevant for the lead section of the article. As far as I'm concerned, you can put whosever opinions, cited and plainly worded, in the main body of the article; but I do not believe it belongs in the lead section.

Additionally, just as well documented as appraisals about Hughes' promise and junior success are criticisms about his batting technique and how that has hindered his test career. These are equally well documented and equally notable. Considering the brevity of the lead section of this article, providing the positive appraisal without giving due weight to the criticisms leads to a serious issue of POV by omission.

I see the only two solutions would be to write a lead section which gives due weight to both aspects, or retain the lead section with no reference to either. My preference is for neither neither, mostly because both the positive and negative aspects are speculative about the impact on his career (a fairly weak application of Wikipedia:Crystal ball). Aspirex (talk) 07:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Plenty of FA articles have cited opinions in the lead; as long as we are clearly showing that it is an opinion, I'm not sure what the problem is. I also agree that we should add some information about the criticism his technique has received to give a NPOV description of his career. To be honest, the lead at the moment is very poor – it tells the reader practically nothing about Hughes – and I think almost any expansion would be an improvement. Jenks24 (talk) 07:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Id be happy to see an expanded lead with a quote from Clarke, paired with some balancing comments regarding ordinary form after sAfrica. Moondyne (talk) 13:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Still a bit unconvinced about quoting Michael Clarke in the lead. As the captain, he's basically compelled to "toe the company line" when it comes to talking about players. Does Wisden or Cricinfo have something, perhaps? Aspirex (talk) 09:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

FA articles with assessments in the lead that I'm aware of, have been of whole careers, not the early part of a career. This is especially undue for Hughes, whose early achievements are now substantially called into question by subsequent poor performance. --Dweller (talk) 13:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hughes' international record is better than a young Hayden as quoted by the article I cited at this stage of his career. Moreover, the question isn't about Hughes' international record but rather about his FIRST CLASS record. He's always performed rather consistently at first class level barring a few matches.

I don't understand the criticism conceerning the ordinary form after SA. Hughes played four international innings after SA and had a lean "two test match" series. It happens to everyone. He's done very well in most test series except the Ashes and the SA tour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.216.12.253 (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

In the context of modern cricket, a player's international career is so far more notable than his first class career; to present his first class figures and include no mention of his test career is not appropriate for any modern cricketer.

The facts of Hughes' career are: dominant for two years at NSW, dominant in his first couple of tests, struggled at the Ashes, fringe player for a while, dropped due to poor technique. His "struggle" and "fringe" periods make up more than half of his career to date. That can't be passed off as just a "lean two test series" – it's notable. It's at least as notable as his first class average - and it's clearly bias by omission to only include his first class average without providing some explanation for why that hasn't translated into a regular test spot and similarly strong test average. Aspirex (talk) 06:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed page move

In English media, I only ever see him referred to as "Phil Hughes", not "Phillip Hughes". If this is the same for Oz sources, we should move the article to Phil Hughes (cricketer), per WP:COMMONNAME.

We should then sort out some of the mess around the redirect and disambiguation between Phil and Philip and Phillip Hugheses, including a discussion about whether the baseball player currently occupying Phil Hughes really fulfils WP:PRIME. --Dweller (talk) 08:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, changed my mind. A quick scan of the sources in the article shows a preponderence of Phillips. The disambig and redirection mess needs some thought, though. --Dweller (talk) 08:30, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

"Forbidden" source

My attempt to access the article's first inline citation (at Fox Sports News. 22 November 2007) resulted in a "forbidden" message. Imho, this doesn't rate for WP and should be removed or at least marked "restricted to subscribers" or "dead link". I have not acted on it in case another editor has a better idea, or a more valid link. Is this player's nickname "Boofa", per the citation, or "Hughesy" per the infobox? Bjenks (talk) 05:36, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi protection

I have semi protected this article because the speculation on Hughes' condition including some edits saying he has died all of which violate WP:BLP please endeavour to use reliable sources, with any changes in his condition please ensure its in multiple sources first or discuss its inclusion here. Any admin can remove the semi protection without contacting me should they choose to. Gnangarra 10:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Nice work. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Excellent idea. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Death

It has just been announced that Phillip Hughes has died from his injuries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.20.20.202 (talk) 04:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
  This comment moved from top just before Gnagarra's where the IP editor appears to have just 'stuffed' it without regard for the threads topic. :-/ --220 of ^Borg 18:02, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

BBC has reported his death, here. The ABC has also, though it's on their blog, not their main news section.Hotchips (talk) 05:04, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

There is no question as to whether he has died or not, as others have noted. Apparently I'm restricted so I couldn't edit. My concern is that at this point in time the name of the bowler who delivered the ball that felled Hughes ought to be deleted. Perhaps some might view this as tantamount to 'ought to be suppressed', though that is not my intention. Rather, I request that the name be deleted out of respect for a young man who must be undergoing significant psychological trauma. While no-one in Australia would consider the bowler culpable, the one exception might be the bowler himself. I therefore request that his name be, at least temporarily, removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dralexian (talk • contribs) 12:50, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

@Dralexian: No, that's not done here. See WP:notcensored. This issue was also already addressed/mentioned further down at Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2014. I can understand why people want to do this, and I feel for the guy, but 'everyone' knows, and any time Hughes death is mentioned, Sean Abbott being the bowler is almost certainly stated as well. Regards, 220 of ^Borg 18:19, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

ITN - admin attention needed for a home page blurb

If there's an admin watching this page, could you go over to WP:ITN/C and see if you can post the blurb and also copy his image locally, protect it and add it to the ITN template. There's been a discussion already and I believe there is a consensus to post the item (but you should determine this independently because I participated in that discussion). Thank you. Jehochman ^Talk 05:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2014

Out of respect for Sean Abbott, it would be best if he wasn't identified as the person who bowled the bouncer. We all know it was him, and it's just completely irrelevant at this time, if not ever. I'm sure him and those close to him are going through enough at this time, this tragic incident should not be attributed to him in any way.

58.6.238.98 (talk) 08:01, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but it's not something we'd remove, unless there were BLP issues. If anything, Sean Abbott's article should be semi-protected as well. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:08, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

• He was the bowler who delivered the ball. It's neutral, factual, accurate and verifiable. We aren't (and shouldn't be) attributing blame, but I sincerely doubt that Wikipedia including the information will cause Sean Abbott any more trauma, nor will it change anything. It's widely documented elsewhere and should be included. Audigex (talk) 10:48, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

• it is included there, the problem was the commentary that was occurring and the choice of wording to wasnt inline with WP:BLP Gnangarra 11:28, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

#putoutyourbats

Is it worth mentioning the #putoutyourbats social media campaign? This has received widespread media coverage around the world.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] 203.9.185.136 (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I am usually very sceptical about hashtags etc, but these images are very widespread and moving. It certainly deserves a place in his article. WWGB (talk) 05:55, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

ITV reports that 100,000 people have taken part.[10] 60.242.1.97 (talk) 02:25, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Could someone who's able to edit the article help

Could someone please add the following edit to the article:
(under the Australian international career section)
Personal life
Hughes had a passion for fashion and breeding chickens—which along with cattle breeding, he planned to return to pursue on the family farm following his cricket career.Jamie Pandaram (28 November 2014). "Phillip Hughes dead: His smile took the world to a happy and fun place". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 28 November 2014.
I think a more personal insight is needed in the article. Cheers.58.106.224.21 (talk) 06:04, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Another addition to Personal life:
A year before his death, he bought a 90 hectares (220 acres) property in his hometown, with 70 angus cattle on it.Damien Murphy (28 November 2014). "Phillip Hughes: Hometown Macksville mourns hero's loss". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 28 November 2014.
Cheers.58.106.224.21 (talk) 06:21, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Partly reverted as unencyclopaedic. We don't require 'personal' insight. Moondyne (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't see what makes this personal insight any less encyclopedic than the info in the personal life of many other athletes and people. He deserves a personal life section that gives a bit more clarity of his love for the country and farming - at least greater than 1 sentence that just states he bought some property. Cheers to you.58.106.224.21 (talk) 13:09, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a bad argument. "A passion for fashion" is journalistic claptrap and innapropriate language for a encyclopedia. Its also a copyvio from the cite given. Repeating a quote about wanting to work with dad on the farm (and who doesn't?) contravenes WP:NOTNEWS and is unnecessary in this subject's biography. Moondyne (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Just wanting to say that Hughes cattle breeding got a fairly long mention during the eulogies for him at his funeral. Perhaps more extensive sourcse will come to light to possibly allow this aspect of his life to be added in greater detail, in an encyclopaedic manner of course. I do recall it being mentioned that he intended to be a cattle 'farmer' after his cricket career. --220 of ^Borg 05:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Cricketers who died while playing

Please see this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:56, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Discussion has been closed and the category reverted to its former title. The person who "jumped on a bandwagon" and changed the category name without consensus is a crass, insensitive individual to say the least, IMO, and should leave WP. Jack | ^{talk page} 22:19, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

The other similar incident

"CRICKET FATALITY". The West Australian (Perth, WA : 1879 - 1954). Perth, WA: National Library of Australia. 6 April 1946. p. 6. Retrieved 29 November 2014.. I don't want this to go into the article, but the cite may be of use to someone, elsewhere. Moondyne (talk) 08:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Moondyne, I've copied this source over to Talk:Subarachnoid hemorrhage#Phillip Hughes death, where I started a discussion yesterday about whether Hughes death should be included on that page as an example or 'Notable' case. I gave credit for the source to you. --220 of ^Borg 11:08, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, good idea 220. Moondyne (talk) 05:11, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! @Moondyne: They had quite a 'blip' on their page views there since the accident. [11].--220 of ^Borg 05:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

And I've sent the link on to John Townsend, The West's chief cricket writer, the University Cricket Club and others. How did you find it, User:Moondyne? I found a photo of Jeffrey Gibbings too, from the front page of The Sunday Times on the day after his death, obviously before they knew what was the cause of death. http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article59350365 The-Pope (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

One of Karen Tighe guests (Sandy Gordon?) mentioned Gibbings' name on Sportstalk yesterday, so I doubt its completely unknown. I just did a name search in Trove. I'm glad its of use. Moondyne (talk) 05:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Categories

Regarding this addition of two supercategories, which reverted my edits [12][13] ...

If, as User:Lugnuts asserts, "all cricketers have these parent cats", could someone please add {{Non-diffusing subcategory}} to Category:Australian Test cricket centurions, Category:Australia One Day International cricketers and {{All included}} to the relevant parent category. I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to agree or disagree with Lugnuts' assertion - but there is a clear discrepancy between the current category inclusion and WP:SUBCAT's

A page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category

that we ought to resolve. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's in the MOS for the cricket project, although I can't find it right now. I'll drop a note on the Project's talkpage. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:16, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

All cricketers have the following categories given to them, for example: Category:English cricketers, Category:Hampshire cricketers, Category:England Test cricketers, Category:England One Day International cricketers, ect, ect. It is the WP:CRIC MOS for all cricketers, because cricket is a funny game which rates its matches according to status, so including the nationality of the cricketer is a good way of quite accurately detailing how many cricketers have played in a match of status (first-class, List A, Twenty20 + their international equivalents), such as Category:English cricketers, which has 10,611 players who played in a match of status. PinchHittingLeggy (talk) 13:56, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm okay with most of that. What I can't figure out is whether a particular player should be a included in both "Category:English cricketers" and "Category:England Test cricketers", or just one? I'm finding the same question coming up with cricket lists, e.g. include in "Category:Cricket-related lists" or "Category:Australian cricket lists" or both? Perry Middlemiss (talk) 21:28, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi protected

There's been a fair amount of vandalism on the page, some of which was potentially libellous/defamatory. I've semi-protected it for a while. I'd really rather not fully protect, but happy to if needed. --Dweller (talk) 16:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Good move. I was puzzled as to why the protection was removed so quickly TBH. Take a look at the harmful IP edits between the two article protections. Thankfully, they've been reverted, but this will help things at least until Hughes' article goes off the main page. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Phillip Hughes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130602105038/http://www.cricket.com.au:80/teams/australia-men/the-squad/phil-hughes to http://www.cricket.com.au/teams/australia-men/the-squad/phil-hughes

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:37, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Tributes

There are mentions of "tributes" to Phillip Hughes by various players when they reach the score of 63 (the score he was on when he received his final delivery). However I submit it is debatable these are tributes to him, but rather the score of 63 has now become "bad luck", and players are simply performing simple rituals to ward off the "bad luck", and are not tributes at all. Thedoctor98 (talk) 09:24, 28 March 2018 (UTC)