Talk:Don Bradman/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

Bradman Museum claim

The statement "he was the first living Australian to have a museum dedicated to his life" can do with some examination.

Percy Grainger created the Grainger Museum in Melbourne, which was opened way back in 1938 (when he was very much alive; he didn't die till 1961). The only issue is: was Grainger still "an Australian" at that time? He became an American citizen in 1918. I don’t know whether he relinquished his "British subject" status at that time (there was no "Australian citizenship" till 1949), but even if he did, he still retained many links with his home country Australia, often visited here, and to this day he is proudly claimed by music lovers as an Australian composer and pianist. Does the Bradman claim have a reliable citation, and are they aware of the Grainger Museum? -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 07:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request - opening sentence

In the opening sentence of the article, the phrase "widely acknowledged as the greatest batsman of all time" violates WP:WEASEL and WP:NPOV, particularly the "widely acknowledged" part. Also, the single source to that statement, ESPN Cricinfo, doesn't even use the term "widely acknowledged." Therefore, please make the following edit so that the lead follows WP guidelines.

CURRENT: Sir Donald George Bradman, AC (27 August 1908 – 25 February 2001), often referred to as "The Don", was an Australian cricketer, widely acknowledged as the greatest batsman of all time.[1]

CHANGE TO: Sir Donald George Bradman, AC (27 August 1908 – 25 February 2001), often referred to as "The Don", was an Australian cricketer. ESPN Cricinfo described Bradman as "unquestionably the greatest batsman in the game, arguably the greatest cricketer ever, and one of the finest sportsmen of all time."[1]

I added the rest of the quote from the source because it's certainly important, impactful and encylopedic. --76.189.114.243 (talk) 17:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. I disagree with you about using a specific opinion in the lead, so it would be better to get a consensus before I make the edit. Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 09:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Consensus on the current wording has been secured in two ways. See this link. --Dweller (talk) 09:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

While you may disagree with using a specific opinion, that's precisely what that quote is... the opinion of ESPN Cricinfo. By not attributing it to the source that said it, it is very deceptive and an attempt to force it down the throats of readers, instead of just properly stating the facts and letting readers decide for themselves if they agree with the claim. This is simply an issue of objective vs. subjective. And that statement clearly is not objective. The current text, based on the sources alone, is a clear violation of WP:WEASEL as well as WP:NPOV. I saw many comments via the link provided that state exactly what I'm saying. That phrasing seriously diminishes the credibility of this article. If ESPN said it, then say that ESPN said it. Don't hide that fact by just making a contentious statement without attribution. The NBA website says that "By acclamation, Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time". The Michael Jordan article correctly and admirably attributes that statement to the site, instead of hiding it like this article has chosen to do. Read the lede of the Jordan article. It says: "His biography on the National Basketball Association (NBA) website states, "By acclamation, Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time." THAT is the proper, encylopedic way to do it. It sounds like some editors here are afraid to tell the whole truth and to follow WP guidelines. This is an encyclopedia article for Donald Bradman, not a fan club page. Pretty sad. --76.189.114.243 (talk) 21:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The reference is not for that claim, the reference is for the biographical material. And even that's not strictly needed in a lead section. It is patently the case that he is widely perceived in this manner, as made clear in the (referenced) greater claim in the next sentence, and the (referenced) material in the article. --Dweller (talk) 14:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC) Some relevant sources if we really, truly do need em:

  • Times of India: "A 'scientific' analysis of batting achievements in Test cricket has found what most people already know - that Don Bradman was the greatest batsman in the game"([1])
  • The Independent "Why Bradman reigns as greatest ever sportsman... He was simply the best batsman and the most outstanding sportsman of all time. He was better at cricket than anybody else has been at any other sport." ([2])
  • India Today "an Australian remarkably known as the greatest batsman of all time

Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/why-sachin-is-compared-to-don-bradman/1/165482.html"

([3])

  • Daily Mail "Bradman, the world's greatest batsman" ([4])

The only reason we don't go further and say he definitively was the greatest, is that you'll find minor dissent. But even the dissenters would agree that they're a minority opinion. --Dweller (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice reply. I not only personally believe he's the greatest, I also already was well aware of the many sources you provided. However, my issue remains with the missing direct attribution to the "widely acknowledged" phrasing, which clearly violates WP:WEASEL. Michael Jordan, for example, makes no such statements without direct attribution. Articles should simply state the facts and let readers decide how they feel. --76.189.114.243 (talk) 06:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Broken link

http://www-uk8.cricket.org/link_to_database/PLAYERS/AUS/B/BRADMAN_DG_02000492/ARTICLES/BRADMAN_PAGES/BRADMAN_INTERVIEW.html is broken link number 71 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.42.121.52 (talk) 16:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Misspelling in quote in "Century of centuries and 'The Invincibles'" section

The section "Century of centuries and 'The Invincibles'" contains a misspelling in the second quote: "The result is a sense of freedom to give full reign to your own creative ability and personal judgment." While "full reign" is often seen, "full rein" is considered the official version. http://www.dailywritingtips.com/free-rein-or-free-reign/, in a discussion of the related "free rein", characterizes (correctly, in my opinion) the use of "reign" thus: "The spelling 'reign' in this expression is an example of the triumph of folk etymology over origin."

If this is a direct quote, it should say "The result is a sense of freedom to give full reign [sic] to your own creative ability and personal judgment." Otherwise it should be corrected to "full rein".

See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/give+full+rein+to, http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/rein, and http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rein for the dictionary definition.

Robtrodes (talk) 03:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

stealing the name of a legend for your lousy game is "Honoring" him?

- In 2014, Big Ant Studios honoured Bradman by naming their cricket video game after him.[187]

GTFO. Someone, please get rid of this bs and remove the reference which amounts to nothing more than spam for whatever worm-ridden malware these hacks deem fit to publish. Such drivel should of course have no place anywhere in wikipedia, but it's especially sickening to see such desecration on such a prevalent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.95.253 (talk) 17:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to this, but you can fix things yourself on almost any Wikipedia page, with or without an account! --Dweller (talk) 09:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 29 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 57 15:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Donald Bradman → Don Bradman – A Google search gives almost 300,000 more results for Don Bradman than for Donald Bradman. Furthermore, many of the instances where he's referred to as 'Donald' are actually referring to him as 'Sir Donald'. Without the honorific, he's known almost exclusively as Don Bradman. I'm struggling to find any times when he's referred to as 'Donald Bradman' without the 'Sir'. – PeeJay 08:43, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Support I've always wondered why this was at Donald. --Dweller (talk) 10:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support - most commonly known (in Aust at least) as "Sir Donald Bradman" in later life. Current name reflects this except the title was not allowed to include the honorific. Still, he was called "Don Bradman" during his playing career - which is what he is notable for. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
    • The title Sir is the honorific. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Where did I say otherwise? My point is that WP:COMMONNAME could easily have been "Sir Donald Bradman" except "Sir" is not allowed to be used in article titles. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Never heard or seen him referred to as Donald, except in official documentation e.g. scorecards. WP:COMMONNAME says it should be Don. Bradman. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Always "The Don" during his playing time Epistemos (talk) 11:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, clearcut case of WP:COMMONNAME. The name used at the top of the infobox should probably remain "Sir Donald Bradman" or just plain "Don Bradman" – "Sir Don Bradman" is never used. IgnorantArmies (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, the infobox should be "Sir Donald Bradman", but the article title should be Don Bradman. Zarcadia (talk) 21:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment Propose that when this article is moved (or even if this article is not moved), the bunch of other articles with Donald in the title are also moved. Donald Bradman in popular culture, Donald Bradman's batting technique, with the 1948 Australians etc. Donald as the title of this article is not too bad but 'Donald Bradman in popular culture' is very incongrous. Tintin 01:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Support all. Assuming that this article is moved, then this shows Don is his commonname, which should be reflected in the other articles. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support all --Dweller (talk) 16:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Obviously I support this idea. The bizarre thing is Donald Bradman in popular culture already uses the name "Don" in the lede section. – PeeJay 22:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Formal titles and introductions favour Donald, and Wikipedia should favour the formal. Ghits is biased to non-introductory uses, and to strip occurrences that also used "Sir" is a terrible bias. It is perfectly normal to shorten a name after first use, but first use was and should remain Donald. The high frequency of "Don" on popular book titles I put down to an attempt to convey familiarity with the subject. Important documents/sources, such as http://www.bradman.com.au/bradman-oval/, strongly favour the use of Donald in titling, even though the running text immediately adopts the familiar "Don". The most influencing counter-point is that his signature appears to be "Don Bradman", which almost brings me to support. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Where does it say that "Wikipedia should favour the formal"? We in fact favour the subject's common name. See the list there for guidance. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 05:14, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Don Bradman. 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:

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 04:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Don Bradman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Don Bradman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:33, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Don Bradman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Don Bradman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Don Bradman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Don_Bradman/Archive_6&oldid=1136668404"