Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 56
 | 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 50 | ← | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | Archive 58 | → | Archive 60 |
I don't think we have any Australian members, do we?
Well, that's one way of getting attention. A few months ago, List of Australia ODI cricketers was delisted as a FL, which was a shame as Jpeeling put in a lot of work to reformat the list and ensure it was up to date. The reason it failed though was the lack of a lead. I don't know enough about Aussie cricket to do anything useful, but maybe someone else does? It's just the lead that needs attention as a couple of FL reviews that were running at the same time said the table format and key used are fine. Nev1 (talk) 23:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Seems a bit hit and miss. May require that for numbers less than ten, you need to use "<span style="display:none">01</span>1.00" for example, to put numbers in the range 0-9 before 10. If you sort descending then ascending etc you get different orders anyway (aside from the reverse).—MDCollins 00:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Anyone good at cleaning up an old image?
I have uploaded this image of the Australian team for the Fifth Test against South Africa in February 1932 but as you can see it's not the best of quality. If anyone is able to tweak it to make the features less blurry that would be great. --Roisterer (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- User:Red Gown might be able to, she's a talented artist and image manipulat or, if you leave a message on her talk page. SGGH speak! 15:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Lovely article
I think many of you might enjoy this piece, concerning Harold Pinter's love of cricket and the time he discussed the game on a TV programme with Sir Learie Constantine and Alan Gibson: An Irishman's Diary. JH (talk page) 10:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Rohinton Baria Trophy
The Rohinton Baria trophy is the inter university tournament in India that has launched many future test stars.Infact there are references to Rohinton Baria Trophy in many of the cricketers articles.Can someone who has knowledge of the same form an article for it.It is far too important a trophy to not have an article.Sumant81 (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
South African team categories for the apartheid years
Does someone, like Rohan Kanhai for example, who scored some first-class hundreds for Transvaal (SACB) in the Howa Bowl, qualify for Category:Gauteng cricketers? It wasn't the same Transvaal that played in the Currie Cup as this was a non-white team for a non-white competition, but for categories and for linking to a team should we consider both to be the same? Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 07:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'd say that they are clearly different teams, and they all should have a separate article... OrangeKnight (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
ICC Elite Umpire scheduled appointments
Is it just me or is the scheduled appointments section on the Elite Panel of ICC Umpires page extremely un-encyclopedic? It seems to have been there for quite a while, so I thought I would ask first, cull later - and WP:NOT doesn't really cover this situation, maybe not a directory or not a crystal ball. It just seems like it would need constant updating, which isn't really what this WP should be about. Notable appointments (1st/50th/100th etc) might be useful, but not just a listing of where they need to turn up to for the next month or so. The-Pope (talk) 14:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- Agree. And as the present listing consists of ODIs where some of the umpires aren't from the Elite Panel anyway, it's all rather confusing. Cull, I think. Johnlp (talk) 14:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Cricket
Gavin Hamilton would be proud of this. --Dweller (talk) 10:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Dirk Nannes dual international?
He is going to play for Netherlands in a tournament, but some pundits keep on saying that he should be selected for Australia. Is he eligible to play for two countries because one of them is not a fully-fledged ICC nation? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 05:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Last I heard (which, granted, was last season), Nannes had turned down the opportunity to play for the Netherlands in the hope of making the Australian side (seeing that last season Nannes was considered a better chance of playing Test cricket than his team mates Peter Siddle, Andrew McDonald (cricketer) or Darren Pattinson, such hopes were not too fanciful). My understanding, such as in the Gavin Hamilton case, was that a player could play for a non-Test side until picked for a Test side, whereupon he would need to wait x years to play for the non-Test side again. This ruling may well have changed recently though. --Roisterer (talk) 06:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Nannes was named in the Dutch WCQ squad, and is reportedly keen to play for them, but with him being called up for the IPL, he's unlikely to play, despite mandatory release rules being in effect. As mentioned above, the ruling is that he can play for the Netherlands right up until the day before he plays for Australia, but once he plays for Australia he'd have to wait four years before becoming reeligible for the Dutch team.
- A teams don't count for any of the above, for example Eoin Morgan has played for England A but is still eligible for Ireland, and Ed Joyce will be able to play for Ireland again in 2011, four years after his last ODI, despite having played for England A in the interim.
- Note that the Netherlands are a fully fledged ICC nation and have been for over 40 years now. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Just created this article about a former Bihar cricketer. Have categorized under Category:Jharkhand cricketers - I assume this is the right thing to do. If anyone thinks otherwise, please amend as necessary. Bobo. 02:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Interwiki
I'm surprised, no astonished, that neither Googly nor Doosra have any interwiki links. --Dweller (talk) 11:35, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah well, I don't know how strong Afrikaans wiki is, but most of the Indian wikis are really bad. About 4-5 about 20k+ articles but most Indian wikis only have about 10% of articles that are longer than 2k. A lot of articles are created with no prose and only headers with nothing in them. On the Marathi Wikipedia a pile of iw's sprung up on cricketers and when I looked at them, they all had an empty infobox, and one sentence, which were all the same prose, and must have been nonsense, because they all linked to the Tendulkar page even when they were about 19th century Austtralians. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Ah. Less surprised now. :-) --Dweller (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Bill Frindall RIP
Just over a month before his 70th birthday.[1][2] -- Testing times (talk) 15:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Keith Miller
Does anyone know of any good full length biographies on Keith Miller that would cover his early and military years in good detail? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Blackpool Cricket Club
I am working on Bill Ponsford at present and have created a redlink for Blackpool Cricket Club. Is there any likelihood that this is a notable club? If there is not, I will remove the link. Thanks, Mattinbgn\talk 05:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Blackpool CC is in the Northern Premier Cricket League, which is one of the ECB Premier Leagues. When we decided on club notability, we thought ECB Premier League clubs would qualify, but those below probably wouldn't unless there were other circumstances. So at some stage an article can (and will) be created for Blackpool CC. Johnlp (talk) 10:22, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
New infobox creation tool
I have been idly hacking away and have made a tool for assisting the creation of infoboxes. Let me know if it's useful or can be improved to make it more so. [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 14:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi - nice idea. Haven't tried it all but the button for RHB/LHB doesn't seem to display "Right-hand batsman" (or anything at all)! If you say 'no' to international, will it let you put the domestic debuts etc in? (Ah - I see from the url that it says makeinfobox-international, so probably not!)
- Another idea may be to automate the selection of the columns to ensure a standard system and hierarchy (so on page one you could select via tick boxes/radio buttons Test, ODI, FC, List A etc (maximum of 4 obviously) then on the next page it will already have [[Test matches|Test]] etc, and auto sort them into the agreed order.—MDCollins 15:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Also, I wonder whether screen-scraping CA would be acceptable, as we are only copying from there anyway - I know we've got the agreement for updating current internationals, but a one-scrape per other player? Not trying to create more work for you though!—MDCollins 15:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can certainly make another tool for domestic players -- it is probably easier to do it that way than to incorporate both options into one tool.
- I have made the match-type selector a drop-down box for now -- I'll think about a way of doing it at the beginning
- I don't feel comfortable screen-scraping CA -- this is a tool for creating the infobox, not for getting the information from another website.
- [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 16:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- That's fine.—MDCollins 19:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
2006 Oval Test
Common sense has prevailed but it says little for the ICC and world cricket in general that the mess got as far as it did. Not sure where and what on wiki needs to be changed to reflect this, or should we wait for the next U-turn? -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep it as a win for England even if the ICC do change their minds again. As far as I can recall Cricinfo and CricketArchive always had their scorecard showing a win for England, and in any case the laws of cricket clearly state that a result can't be changed after agreed by the umpires and scorers, so it can't actually be changed anyway! Andrew nixon (talk) 10:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Anyone wanting to have a go at expanding this article? ([3]) --Dweller (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Milestone Announcements
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 21:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Archie Jackson
Archie Jackson has been scheduled for the main page on 5 February, some seven months before the 100th anniversary of his birth. Spare sets of eyes for errors, typos or any improvements to prose are keenly sought. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 06:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Any reason why Raul couldn't reschedule this for, erm, 7 months later? --Dweller (talk) 05:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Because I haven't asked and the whole procedure around what happens with Today's Featured Article makes my head spin, with points, dates, etc. I have always figured it was easier to let fate do as it will. Do you think it is likely to get a favourable response to a seven month delay? -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Definitely on this one, because of the urgency, shortcut the whole requests process and liaise directly with Raul. It may be too late to move it, but he's pretty flexible. Drop him a line that explains the urgency, summarises the issue and I'm sure he'll reschedule it if he can. If successful, you'll probably need to remind him in 6 months or so, before he creates the new queue. --Dweller (talk) 06:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Because I haven't asked and the whole procedure around what happens with Today's Featured Article makes my head spin, with points, dates, etc. I have always figured it was easier to let fate do as it will. Do you think it is likely to get a favourable response to a seven month delay? -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Now de-scheduled. I now have to remember to get Archie on the Main Page requests page when the window opens. Thanks for the advice. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Invincibles appeal and update
Invincibles
- Invincibles
Our future Featured topic:
- RO - Refs in # order?
- J - Jargon run?
Open Tasks (please add)
- Lindsay Hassett still largely incomplete
- main article, Sam Loxton need rounding off. Loxton needs info on political career
- Keith Johnson needs finishing off
Rest should be at GA standard and should only need polishing off. Improvements required are
- Formatting for consistency, references etc, eg score format consistency
- Ordering grouped footnotes in numerical order
- Wikilinking/explaining jargon etc
- Copyediting
- Tweaking/adding pictures and so forth
Please help! It's almost there! YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- I got the two Rons to GA, so I shall try a hand at fixing Mr. Loxton. SGGH ping! 17:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Who? Barker and Corbett? -- Mattinbgn\talk 21:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- I got the two Rons to GA, so I shall try a hand at fixing Mr. Loxton. SGGH ping! 17:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
At peer review. -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Bradman at FAC. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 04:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK
Not sure if we've had a cricket DYK recently, but this article I've just created has some good DYK potential:
Anyone (Blnguyen?) good at doing the necessary paperwork? --Dweller (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- It seems a bit short. They normally ask for 2k prose IIRC, and they might exclude the block quote. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- A new article should have at least 1,500 characters of prose including spaces (a newly expanded one should by 5x larger). This does not include references, titles, or block quotes, (see WP:DYKAR) so the article in question has about 1,100 characters. Close, but no cigar. Nev1 (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I've given it a further expansion, and it is 2300+ applicable characters. I'll create a nomination, and you (Dweller?) can freely alter it.—MDCollins 01:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Great work, everybody. Thank you. The infobox guys did some great work as ever and the DYK experts are also gratefully appreciated. --Dweller (talk) 11:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Now fighting the US "I don't understand cricket so I'll assume that all bouncers are illegal deliveries, such as chin music (baseball), and a sleight on a bowler's character". If anyone can take a look and help counter these claims, it would be appreciated.—MDCollins (talk) 15:46, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
A WP:CRICKET article? -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, "cricket culture" YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I know that WP:FOOTY covers many films with football, so it makes sense for this to be a WP:CRICKET article. DeMoN2009 11:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- Definitly yes. Cricket is not only bats and balls, it is history, controversies, society and culture, too. OrangeKnight (talk) 11:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- I know that WP:FOOTY covers many films with football, so it makes sense for this to be a WP:CRICKET article. DeMoN2009 11:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Sri Lankan cricket teams
I've just been looking through the articles (and I use that term very loosely) on the main Sri Lankan first-class teams, and I have to say I'm astonished. Most of the articles have practically no content, and all have section headers with nothing in them. See Badureliya Cricket Club for a particularly poor example. What astonishes me the most though is that regular WP:Cricket contributors have edited these articles but made no attempt whatsoever to improve them.
To be brutally honest, these "articles" should be deleted. If anyone has any interest in Sri Lankan cricket can they give them a quick once over - just one paragraph should do the job, most of them don't even have more than a sentence and a list of honours. Otherwise, the best place for them is AfD. Andrew nixon (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
To be honest, a lot of the other sub-continent countries suffer the same. Frequently when looking at infoboxes for Pakistanis, Zimbabweans, Bangladeshis, etc, the FC club articles are very poor - and that is where they even exist!—MDCollins (talk) 22:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I made stubs for many of the Sri Lankan FC cricket clubs almost two years ago and within that time most have barely had an edit to them. I was hoping that we'd have had a Sri Lankan Wikipedian try and expand them or at least someone with a good knowledge on cricket in that country. If you bring these articles to AFD then you'd have to bring WP:Cricket's 500 odd one/two sentence player stubs to it as well because they're of no better quality. Plenty of players entries link to these clubs and as long as each page has an honours section then I would have thought it would be of some value to the reader. Jevansen (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed it would be - but some of them had literally no content beyond an infobox, the example I gave above being one - that didn't even have any content in the actual article! What's the use of section headings if they have nothing under them? Andrew nixon (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- The Badureliya Cricket Club article aside, these section heading are often added by non cricket Wikipedians, the same types who loves adding all sorts of tags to the top of articles, sometimes three in one. Apparently this is productive. They add these subheadings to stubs 'in the hope that this will prompt someone to expand the article'. Jevansen (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- *shameful plug* meanwhile, there are several redlinks of former first-class cricketers for Badureliya Sports Club here if anyone wants to grab any? Several - namely Sajith Harshana, Janaka Sampath, Ramitha Perera, Buddika Sanjeewa and Thalaivan Sargunam had single-match first-class careers, and so it should be easy enough to polish off articles on them.
Cricket Grounds
How do you write a GA on a cricket ground. As in what layout do you use? Could anyone help? Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 23:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- An interesting question, a template for this type of article would be useful. I assume it would be important to talk about the development of the ground, such as when stands were built etc, and if there are any future plans. It would probably be useful to take a lead from football articles such as Old Trafford (FA) and Bank Street (stadium) (GA). I think a good approach would be to treat it like any other building (ie: the history is most important, developments of the ground, notable events) and maybe add in some ground records and stats at the end. Which ground were you thinking of? Nev1 (talk) 23:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's what i was thinking. No specific ground just many around the globe, particularly in the West Indies and Australia. Many stadium articles are without infoboxes. I'll base the articles on Aurora Stadium (York Park). Thanks for your reply. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 23:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Cricket Ground Images
Also if anyone has images of cricket grounds could you please upload them to wikipedia or commons? Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 23:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Relavent commons category —MDCollins (talk) 00:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have a look through to see if there are any images on there that aren't on article pages. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 01:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Adelaide Oval has a few. Also, probably you should see if there are articles on gold courses or motor racing tracks because the layout affects teh style of play, same as a cricket pitch or the shape of the ground in affecting hitting patterns. This doesn't apply in football as much. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- You took the images of Adelaide i suppose. Good Job. Haven't checked them out yet. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 04:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
It is maybe a strange request, but anyway... On Commons, we have only pictures of red cricket balls. Does anybody have a white one to photograph? And maybe the pink one that the M.C.C. tried last year? It could be nice to illustrate the cricket ball article to show alternative colors... I myself have only a red one, so I can't help... OrangeKnight (talk) 15:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well my photos of the RSA/AUS/IND teams usually involve white balls being bowled but the resolution is far from ideal. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Added three white balls, although used and discoloured. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's great! Thanks a lot ! OrangeKnight (talk) 17:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Dashing into RL - anyone who would like to help with this is welcome. Would be lovely to get it to DYK during the Test. --Dweller (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- Are we allowed to use Andrew McGlashan's cricinfo blog as a source for the article? From WP:SPS: "Some newspapers and other periodicals host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the organization's full editorial control." Nev1 (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated this article for deletion because I believe the subject, a minor club, fails notability. Someone else thinks it is notable. I think the cricket project should have a say so please follow the link if you are interested. --Orrelly Man (talk) 22:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
WP:CRIN
This does not cover Scottish cricket clubs under the Great Britain section. However, since Scotland is part of Great Britain, is this a mistake or are all Scottish clubs not notable? DeMoN2009 17:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know enough about Scottish cricket to have a view on this. Are there any Scots out there? Johnlp (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am actually a Scot, but although I live next door to a cricket club I don't know much about my local league, but from what I have seen, all the Wiki articles on Scottish cricket clubs are mainly disorganised and have no sort of notability criteria. There are three leagues, the highest of which is the Premier Division. That's all I've found out so far. DeMoN2009 11:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Infobox and Wisden
Just a heads-up to say that Sam Korn has implemented a function to the infobox so that for players who haven't bowled a ball at all, "hidedeliveries = true" will remove the bowling stats from the infobox.
Also, as cricketarchive and cricinfo now use "balls bowled" throughout, this has been hard-coded into the box, so that "deliveries = balls" can now be removed. I'll create a list of those 'boxes which still use "deliveries = overs" for conversion.
Thirdly, Wisden currently redirects to Wisden Group. I propose that the redirect is moved to its more often intended target Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. Incidentally the almanack doesn't even link to the small Wisden Group stub - could it be merged somewhere?
All the best—MDCollins (talk) 01:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- I support the changed redirect, per WP:PRIME. --Dweller (talk) 09:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- Optimus Prime? SGGH ping! 11:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Kensington Oval Capacity
Does anyone know what Kensington Oval's current capacity is? The capacity was said to be 28,000 for the 2007 World Cup. After the WC Final the 16,000 seat eastern stand was demolished for a grassy bank and pool. So does anyone have any idea of the current capacity? I'd image it would be around 15,000. I don't understand how the capacity was 28,000 for the world cup as only just over 20,000 attended the world cup final. You would think that because it was the final it would of been a sellout. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 06:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- No stands can mean an increase capacity. The Adelaide Oval record was 60k+ in the 60/61 TEst with Mackay and Kline, when everyone was standing and crammed together. Similarly for the other ones. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
...is the most poorly of the Invincibles whatsit drive. I took a stab at some initial improvements, it might just qualify for B class now? SGGH ping! 19:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, and I've recorrected some material which was introduced and which was wrong. ;-) Johnlp (talk) 20:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Expanded a bit more. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 02:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
...in Invincibles squad box
Johnson appears as "coach" in the collapsible squad template box, when actually he was manager, which was at that stage a rather different role. I tried changing the template, but don't know how to do it, and what I did wouldn't work. Can someone else take a look, please? Thanks. Johnlp (talk) 15:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Template:National squad, which is a protected template, would need editing to add a manager option in addition to the coach role. wjematherbigissue 17:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- In Template:National squad, there's a parameter "list" where you can put whatever you want. See for exemple Template:Australia Squad 2007 Cricket World Cup, where they use a list to put the players with their correct number. I think that we should not only have Johnson as a manager and not as a coach, but the players without squad numbers, too, as it can give the false impression that players had squad numbers in 1948. Using the list parameter, we could have :
Sid Barnes (details) • Don Bradman (details) (c) • Bill Brown (details) etc... Manager: Keith Johnson |  | |
What do you think about that ? OrangeKnight (talk) 20:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Invincibles update
Of the 42 articles, all are B or higher, and 20 are GAs and 7 are FAs. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 05:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Cricinfo's Twitter avatar
Anyone recognise the avatar at the top of this page? http://twitter.com/cricinfo_live— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen Turner (talk • contribs)
- I think he's talking about the cricket ball icon. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
THEY STOLE OUR CRICKET BALL! SGGH ping! 11:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Notation of scores
A quick question, what's the project's MoS on noting scores as 300/6 or 6/300? Also, does anyone know why some use 300/6 and others 6/300, out of curiosity? SGGH ping! 11:56, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- My understanding is that per WP:ENGVAR, we use 6/300 for matches played in Australia and 300/6 for all other matches. To answer your second question, I think it's because Australians walk around upside down on the bottom of the world. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- As an Australian, I wouldn't be particularly peturbed if WP:CRICKET was to mandate "300/6" notation for all innings scores. It does get confusing moving between the two. Note the notation 6/300 is only used in Australia; not in NZ or SA—who also "walk around upside down on the bottom of the world". It does have the benefit of being consistent with the normal way of writing bowling figures; i.e. Arthur Mailey and his 10/66 etc. but for whatever reason—like 8-ball overs—it hasn't caught on elsewhere. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- As an Australian, I would be particularly perturbed if WP:CRICKET was to mandate "300/6" notation for all innings scores. It is not up to Wikipedia to take a position against a well established convention within the cricket community—even if it is localised to one country. The spirit of ENGVAR supports this and argues more for consistency within articles, rather than between articles. Djanga (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- this comment from an experienced editor: "shouldn’t the format be judged by the host country?" is why I feel we should move to one system. How can we be consistent even within articles where they mention scores both inside and outside Australia? On what basis do we choose to apply a given notation, by the place the match was played, by the nationality of the player? What do we do in the case of Kepler Wessels, Albert Trott, Billy Midwinter (even Stuart Law) etc. Given that our main sources for scorecards (Cricinfo and CricketArchive) both use 300/6 format, it makes sense for us to do so as well, even if only to avoid confusion for readers checking our sources. I am as parochial as the next Australian (and that is very parochial! :-)) but I won't die in a ditch to maintain Australian format here. I personally do not feel it is an ENGVAR issue at all, it is more of a punctuation issue if anything, which is (at least supposed to be) pretty standard across the encyclopedia with very little variation. Using one standard notation in this encyclopedia isn't designed to try and argue against Australian cricket using whatever scoring notation they choose or elevating one system over another, it is merely choosing the most widely used scoring system as its standard for articles here. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- As an Australian, I would be particularly perturbed if WP:CRICKET was to mandate "300/6" notation for all innings scores. It is not up to Wikipedia to take a position against a well established convention within the cricket community—even if it is localised to one country. The spirit of ENGVAR supports this and argues more for consistency within articles, rather than between articles. Djanga (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- As an Australian, I wouldn't be particularly peturbed if WP:CRICKET was to mandate "300/6" notation for all innings scores. It does get confusing moving between the two. Note the notation 6/300 is only used in Australia; not in NZ or SA—who also "walk around upside down on the bottom of the world". It does have the benefit of being consistent with the normal way of writing bowling figures; i.e. Arthur Mailey and his 10/66 etc. but for whatever reason—like 8-ball overs—it hasn't caught on elsewhere. -- Mattinbgn\talk 12:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm easy on this and think the key is consistency within the article. I recall in one or more articles (possibly Bradman?) we've included a footnote to explain, along with a hidden message before the first usage to stop eager amenders. --Dweller (talk) 12:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Chest on/side on
Hi,
This has appeared on my watchlist - proposing a merge of Chest on (cricket) with Side on (cricket), possibly into one article. I actually proposed the move over 12 months ago and promptly forgot about it. Has anyone any ideas/thoughts?
Maybe split the articles into Batting stance and bowling stance, rather than a super article?
—MDCollins (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- That all sounds sensible to me, though I would say "bowling action" rather than "bowling stance". "chest on" and "side on" should be kept as redirects. One possible problem is that these two terms can refere to either the batting stance or the bowling action, depening on the context. JH (talk page) 18:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
In which case they should be left as simple disambigs, rather than a straight redirect. Would bowling action not encompass the different types of bowling (spin bowling action for example) - if that is the case, maybe it could be merged into the "bowling" and "batting" main articles.—MDCollins (talk) 13:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
The Dentist
To start addressing the orphan tag that appeared on the The Dentist's article, I've added some info about his exploits on that England tour of the Caribbean. The section is currently WP:UNDUE. If anyone fancies expanding it to cover the matches properly, that'd be a good result. --Dweller (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I have expanded his article from the obituaries, but there ought to be enough "meat" (and reliable sources) for a substantial article. Do we have any GAs or FAs for non-players? -- Testing times (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, for tours/matches/ovals etc. No reason why this can't be done for non-playing pundits and administrators. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- /me imagines a mainpage appearance for our FA article on 'YellowMonkey'.... wakes up, and returns to lunch :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
XXX cricket team in England
The current drive on the Invincibles got me thinking about this. On many, if not almost all, tours of England, teams include matches at the very least in Wales and often in Scotland and Ireland. So shouldn't we name them xxxx cricket team in the British Isles, as they now do on CricketArchive? As an extreme example, Australian cricket team in England in 1989 mentions matches that took place in Wales, Scotland, the Netherlands and Denmark! Alternatively, separate such matches into a separate section entitled "Matches outside England" or something similar. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think that would be over-pedantic. People always talk about "the Australian tour of England in 1948" or whatever, even though it's not strictly correct. The great majority of the matches, and all the Tests, are always in England. I think that putting "British Isles" in the title would tend to confuse people. And it wouldn't help when matches are also played in the Netherlands or Denmark. In the opening paragraph one could include something like "the team also played matches in Wales, Scotland and Denmark" or whatever. JH (talk page) 10:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Quelle surprise, I agree with Jhall. Furthermore, Gavin Hamilton, Simon Jones and many many other Scots and Welshmen have represented "England". It's another of cricket's glorious anachronisms, but these tours are only referred to as tours "of England". --Dweller (talk) 11:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fair point, but Jones did so as England is actually an England and Wales team and Hamilton had to qualify by residence. My point related to CricketArchive changing their tours to refer to the British Isles instead of England in almost all cases, except those where matches really were just in England. At the very least, as suggested, the lead should mention that matches were also played outside of England. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Putting something in the lead sounds like a good idea. I already did that with English cricket team in South Africa in 1948-49 and the 1956-57 tour where first-class matches were also played in what is now Zimbabwe. Johnlp (talk) 11:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Fair point, but Jones did so as England is actually an England and Wales team and Hamilton had to qualify by residence. My point related to CricketArchive changing their tours to refer to the British Isles instead of England in almost all cases, except those where matches really were just in England. At the very least, as suggested, the lead should mention that matches were also played outside of England. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Quelle surprise, I agree with Jhall. Furthermore, Gavin Hamilton, Simon Jones and many many other Scots and Welshmen have represented "England". It's another of cricket's glorious anachronisms, but these tours are only referred to as tours "of England". --Dweller (talk) 11:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Anyone want to take a look? Have shored it up a bit. Figured the first Australian Test captain ought to have a decent article. Hopefully together we can bump it up a grade. SGGH ping! 11:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Blacklisted
Someone has blacklisted any website that starts www.cricket.... this is rediculous as it nullifies any cricket archive reference. I have asked for a speedy whitelisting of cricket archive ASAP. Unbelieveable. SGGH ping! 11:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Where has this been done? I can't find it... [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 11:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at what I think is the blacklist, I see cricketfun.com blacklisted, but that's the only mention of cricket. Links to CA still work, and are still clickable, so what's the problem? Andrew nixon (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- They appear to have blacklisted anything that starts with "cricket..." and thus I am unable to add any links to cricket archive without being told its blacklisted and thus I can't complete my edit. This was yesterday, I will try again and see what happens now.... SGGH ping! 13:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- It appears to be working now, but I was certainly being refused edits as "cricket" sites were being blacklisted yesterday... odd. SGGH ping! 13:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at what I think is the blacklist, I see cricketfun.com blacklisted, but that's the only mention of cricket. Links to CA still work, and are still clickable, so what's the problem? Andrew nixon (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
POV Dispute: Outswinger
I have removed the contentious paragraph from the Outswinger article and replaced it with a list of "notable out-swing bowlers". This idea has been copied from the Off break article. I now believe there is no POV dispute here - if editors wish to add further names to the list they are free to do so. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Grahame Thomas - First Australian Aboriginal Test cricketer?
For no real reason other than it’s an interesting story, I notice that in the latest edition of the Koori Mail, it is posited that Grahame Thomas was of Wiradjuri Aboriginal descent, which would double the number of known male Australian Aboriginals to have played Test cricket. I have yet to see any confirmation of this, especially by Thomas, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there were more former Test players out there who are Indigenous but either weren’t aware of their background or, particularly in past decades, found it prudent not to mention it.
Indeed, Jeff Cook, the former Northamptonshire cricketer who once fielded as a substitute for England in a Test match, recently discovered he was of Kamilaroi descent.
The Koori Mail also notes the adventures of Badu Islander cricketer Morris Nona, who had been picked for the Imparja Cup for Cooktown and had to skipper a tinnie 42kms from Badu to Thursday Island to catch about four planes to Alice. Rough seas in Torres Strait were slowing Morris down so he caught a dugong, placed on the front of the boat for ballast and was able to get to TI in time for his flight. --Roisterer (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Certainly, I saw a picture of Thomas in Haigh and Frith's book, but he didn't look Indigenous American or black, as was claimed by his ancestors immigrating from the US and definitely more like an aborigine.....also in that book is an interesting anecdote about Bradman suggesting to Thomas to not tour RSA so as to not offend the aparthedists. Secondly, Jack Marsh and Eddie Gilbert should have played.... and I bet if Bradman was captain in 1932-33, he would have ordered Nash and Gilbert to retaliate. Although he always said he opposed Bodyline and got angry when Miller bounced him, Bradman wasn't so worried about Miller and Lindwall pelting Hutton/Compton/Edrich/Washbrook with all sorts, so I reckon Bradman would have pelted Hammond/Jardine etc... too many hagiographers around. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 05:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- Cricinfo says he was part American Indian. Does that mean that he was a bit of American Indian, a bit of Australian aborigine and a bit of Caucasian ? PS : Faith Coulthard is still the leader Tintin 10:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- I seem to recall reading that Jason Gillespie's grandfather was an aborigine. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- But of course if the above is true, he wouldn't be the first!! Andrew nixon (talk) 08:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Need more traffic here. Also a few people from non-cricket countries seem to want the article to be a cricket rules/tactics textbook as well....YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Restarted. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Cricinfo has him as a medium pacer, so do we. But is that correct? I see he opened the bowling for England Lions yesterday. I've been watching his stats for a couple of years now - he's surely got one of the best bowling averages for someone who's bowled a significant number of 1st-class overs and hasn't represented England yet. --Dweller (talk) 16:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have him in my Cricket Captain 2008 team, though he is listed as A Davies, and he's taken about 300 wickets! SGGH ping! 17:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
English cricket team in West Indies in 2008–09
I just noticed that the English cricket team in West Indies in 2008–09 article has been moved to English cricket team in West Indies in 2009, the reason being "Did not play in 2008". Shouldn't the previous name still stand, regardless of whether or not a game was played in 2008, as the series is played between September 2008 and April 2009, which is the 2008-09 International cricket season? Thanks, Schumi555 (talk) 19:42, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- That was my understanding of naming conventions, although it may seem confusing to people who don't understand cricket. Also, shouldn't it be England cricket team... rather than English in line with the way country articles are names (ie: West Indies cricket team and England cricket team)? Nev1 (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes you are right, it is confusing, but the use of English cricket team has probably been used to match other articles, for example Sri Lankan cricket team in Pakistan in 2008–09 and Australian cricket team in England in 2005. Schumi555 (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've seen tour articles using English, Australian, Indian etc, pretty much all the time, but should they? It's inconsistent with the team articles, the lists of cricket players (eg: List of Australia ODI cricketers) and categories (eg: Category:Pakistan Test cricketers). It would admittedly take a long time to correct. Nev1 (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- I see that the 1997-8 and 2003-4 tours have been renamed similarly to 1998 and 2004, though earlier tours have not. Whatever is done, it should be consistent. Incidentally, the "Mr Hall of England" who was been moving these articles is not me! JH (talk page) 20:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think we had a debate about whether it should be "English cricket team in..." or "England cricket team in..." on here a long time ago, but the debate somewhat got overtaken by practicalities because User:BlackJack, in one of his much-missed bursts of high-powered activity, created virtually the whole set of articles in stub form using the "English cricket team in..." format. It wasn't just his preference that determined it, though: there is the point that England tours were organised privately until around 1902, and then by the MCC, with the national name being used only in Test matches. It's only been in the past 30 years that England have toured as "England" for all matches. Johnlp (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Just noticed that prior to the 1997-8/1998 tour, England tours of West Indies often began in December, which is an argument for adopting the 1997-8 format in all of the article titles to achieve consistency. Also it will avoid the poossinility of confusion between two tours in the same year (eg "England in West Indies in 2009" and "West Indies in England in 2009"). JH (talk page) 18:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
As usual, I agreed with both Jhall and Johnlp. I should probably formulate an essay on Dweller's law, that in discussions on cricket, I always agree with Jhall and Johnlp. --Dweller (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- I was assuming that you meant that you had reverted the names of the relevant tour articles to what they used to be, but they don't appear to have changed. JH (talk page) 19:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Incidently, the current Australian tour of South Africa has also been moved from ".. in 2008-09" to ".. in 2009". I also noted the change to the current England tour of the West Indies, and was wondering if something had been agreed upon? Strictly speaking, we are still in the 2008-09 season, so the tours should be named accordingly. KDLarsen (talk) 22:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd move them back, and insert the guideline into the style guide...—MDCollins (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Is there a reason why one-day tournaments - 1998 ICC KnockOut Trophy, 2000 ICC KnockOut Trophy, 2002 ICC Champions Trophy (internet sources treat it as 2002-03 even though matches were in September?), 2006 ICC Champions Trophy 1987 Cricket World Cup, 1992 Cricket World Cup, 1996 Cricket World Cup, 2003 Cricket World Cup and 2007 Cricket World Cup - have different rules? --Jpeeling (talk) 16:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's a good question. But I suppose these events aren't linked into a domestic cricket season in the same way that a Test tour that involves first-class matches against other sides. Also, in effect, doesn't the ICC decide to hold a tournament in a particular year before it is decided where to hold it? Johnlp (talk) 19:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Kensington Oval Outfield
Under the 2005-2007 re-development section, I've added and outfield subsection. It talks about how the outfield and pitch was relaid. Does anyone oppose the subsection, before I add more to it? Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 02:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Obviously not :) Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 10:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Samaraweera
I recall years ago a piece in The Cricketer about bouts of Bradmanesque scoring by players other than Bradman (remember little except Neil Harvey was prominent).
So I raised my eyebrows when I dug into Statsguru this morning in the wake of Samaraweera's latest double ton, and I found this summary of his form over the past year or so: ([4]) --10:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Blimey! Flat Pakistani pitches have bumped that average, but it's still very impressive. And he hardly gets any attention whatsoever - I had no idea he was doing so well. HornetMike (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Younis's average is also very high from totally dead Pak pitches. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Mahela Jayawardene's average had also been bumped up by flat subcontinental pitches. Dilshan has been having a good time against weaker opposition lately. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 04:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Younis's average is also very high from totally dead Pak pitches. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Any idea why this redirects to Phillip Hughes (cricketer) when all the other Philip Hughes are spelt with one l. There's a link at the top of his page to the one l disam page. HornetMike (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Most likely because many people might not know that the people for whom they are searching and who spell it with one L don't know and look for LL SGGH ping! 17:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, most probably l and ll get mixed up as lot. But if you wanted to help those people, surely you'd link Phillip Hughes to the disam page. As it is, they'll still end up on the cricketer page and have to find the other people via the note at the top. So the cricketer article might as well not have the unnecessary disambiguation. HornetMike (talk) 16:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Most likely because many people might not know that the people for whom they are searching and who spell it with one L don't know and look for LL SGGH ping! 17:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
POV Dispute: Run Out
Can anyone explain the reason why the Run out article is listed under the POV dispute heading? Doesn't seem to be a problem to me. There only appears to be one outstanding question on the discussion page, and that relates to the identity of a batsman. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 03:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- That was me in September 2007! Embarrassingly, I was still too much of a newbie to know to post to the Talk page. I think I was bothered by the Mankad section. My other edits on that day were about the Cricket article, which I correctly predicted would lose its FA status, and I replaced a link to the Mankad section as being POV. --Dweller (talk) 13:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's okay. Just checking. I'll drop the POV tag now then. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 02:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Cricket invented in Belgium?
I'm not altogether convinced, but this is intriguing. Added later: Dammit, I've copied and pasted the link from my beowser and have no idea why it doesn't work. JH (talk page) 21:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps this link will work better: [5] JH (talk page) 21:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Very interesting, I earlier saw the headline on cricinfo. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 02:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Being the latest fad, 300 words were added about this which increased the length of the history section by one-fourth. It is now longer than the whole of the 19th century, or the 20th. Tintin 06:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- From what I can tell from the various articles, the guy has discovered that the word cricket has its roots in Belgium - something that was already suspected anyway - and has concluded that the sport itself was invented there. I suspect this is nothing more than an author/publisher sending out a press release and the press jumping on it without doing their own research. We need our old friend BlackJack! Andrew nixon (talk) 07:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi. I'm a member of WP:SPORTS and I saw this story over the weekend. I think the way it has been treated in Cricket is excessive and I would refer you to its treatment in 1301 to 1700 in sports where I have quoted a cricket history site that has acknowledged the theory but played a straight bat to it. To put things into perspective, I've no doubt that when someone unearthed the records of the Guildford court case it caused something of a stir too. --Orrelly Man (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
What is a doodlebug?
Is it a bouncer or a beamer. Roy Gilchrist deliberately ran pass the crease by a few meters and aimed one at AG Kripal Singh and knocked off his turban. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah when I read the Gilchrist article I was also confused. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 04:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- IIRC, Gilchrist deliberately bowled a beamer. JH (talk page) 11:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- What is the source of the Kripal Singh affair ? I thought it would be better documented if it did happen that way. The "taunted him in an attempt to have him lose his temper and be sent home" is somebody's guess, not a fact (unless Kripal himself said so in an interview). Tintin 09:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- A boodlebug is a V-1 flying bomb, hence using the term would descibe a beamer, meant with intent. -- Mattinbgn\talk 09:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Shootings in Pakistan
This is obviously developing but may require some work from this project, re: tour article etc. Lets hope for the sake of the Sri Lankan team and Pakistan cricket that this isn't worse than it already is. -- Mattinbgn\talk 04:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well if they are attacking the Sri Lankan's imagine what they would of done to the Aussies??... Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 04:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well with Farveez Maharoof withdrawn, they wouldn't have had second thoughts...I doubt they would have been pleased that Dilshan quit Islam to become a Buddhist. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well those terrorists are complete nutcases! I think the umpires were Australians, Steve Davis and Simon Taufel. Imran Khan and Geoff Lawson will have to eat their own words. The 2011 Cricket World Cup will almost definitely be moved from Pakistan, maybe more matches in Bangladesh? Although I wouldn't be too keen on traveling to the whole subcontinent. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 09:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well with Farveez Maharoof withdrawn, they wouldn't have had second thoughts...I doubt they would have been pleased that Dilshan quit Islam to become a Buddhist. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Anyone got a good idea about a pic to accompany the news snippet on Main Page? This is just awful - the day after I post here about Samaraweera's achievement, this happens. I hope Mark Davies has good security! --Dweller (talk) 10:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- As cricket is like a religion in Pakistan, hopefully the government tries to do something about terrorism in their country. Although I believe it is now too late, as terrorism has got too powerful. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 10:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- The picture in the article Attack on Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore (and shown here) would be suitable I think. -- 11:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Eyes needed. One ubiquitous user keeps on adding a conspiracy theory about India. He did the same on teh Mumbai attacks. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 07:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)