User talk:Spike 'em/Archive 1

Test cricket

I think this relates to this edit

Grammatically, the 'test' in 'test cricket' is an adjective and so should not be capitalised. That it is capitalised throughout the rermainder of the article does not necessarily make it correct. However: I did a search of the websites of various cricketing authorities, and nearly all incorectly capitalise the adjective. It therefore seems prudent to bow to those more authoratative about cricket and accept the capitalised adjctive (per WP:COMMONNAME). -Elektrik Fanne (talk) 17:41, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Test is always correct as per WP:CRIC#STYLE:

Teams & matches: Always use capital T when referring to Test cricket

Spike 'em (talk) 17:51, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

England and Wales Cricket Board

Hello. Just letting you know someone has been playing silly beggars in this article after you did a lot of work there. I think I've fixed it but you had best check as I'm groping in the dark. Cricket is my favourite sport too so hopefully see you around. All the best. Jason | talk | contribs 11:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Format of international tours

I think all tours where both teams are full members has to be under international tours and all other tours where maybe one is full member and one non full member or both are full members should be under minor tours... As per ICC as well only full member matches are the major bilateral series and all matches involving associates are minor tours so that's why this the best and simplest method of classification and makes the table more compact and leads to much less clutter... Cricket246 (talk) 14:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

England cricket team infobox

Just wondering if it would be possible to have the infobox include more information about ODIs and T20Is. Presently it has an overall Test record and information on the last Test played, but no information on the last ODI or T20I. Do you think this should be changed? Englandcricketteam (talk) 20:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at it earlier: I think it should have sections for Limited overs. It allows ratings for those forms, so results etc should be there too. I'll have a play and see what I can do. Spike 'em (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've added ODI and T20I to the infobox template, so check it out Template:Infobox Test team Spike 'em (talk) 14:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And have added the info to the England page.... Spike 'em (talk) 12:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, it looks a lot more informative now. Englandcricketteam (talk) 15:43, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Wynter & Luke Dreher

Hello, the WikiProject convention is that if a player from the devpt. squad makes the first team or bench then they are added to the first team squad on the Wiki page and of course to the squad template. Your edit here refers and see discussions here and here, where I sought the advice of one of the most experienced football editors. Michael Phillips should also be added to the squad as of today. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 17:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hoping this is still correct, as I've just added Jason Lokilo to the Palace squad. The links you've put above are not conclusive to me, but I'm willing to go with it! Spike 'em (talk) 10:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 ICC Champions Trophy squads

Great work in doing the "proper" tables. Lugnuts ^Fire Walk with Me 09:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 ICC Cricket World Cup Qualifier‎

Thanks for the extra set of eyes on this. I was convinced it wasn't a forgone conclusion about the West Indies. And all the press following the Champions Trophy said Pakistan are "almost" safe from going through the qualification route. Lugnuts ^Fire Walk with Me 11:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think Pak are safe, as I can't see any ODI fixtures for either them or Bang, so only SL or WI can overtake them, but given articles saying "almost safe" then I felt I should leave them in. Spike 'em (talk) 11:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How is Pakistan already qualified being so close to rating points with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka?

every team with less than 100 rating points is subject to missing out on automatic qualification — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.78.248.34 (talk) 03:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@103.78.248.34 There is already discussion on this on the article Talk:2018 Cricket World Cup Qualifier, please discuss further there. Sri Lanka and West Indies can overtake Pakistan, but Bangladesh can't. Hence Pakistan can finish no lower than 8th on qualification date (and Bangladesh can finish 9th) Spike 'em (talk) 05:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Cricket Uniform

About the table i understand, but about the data i got them from a poster of the New Zealand ODI kits on the NZC Museum at Basin Reserve. --KoreanDragon (talk) 17:48, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About England being sponsored by Adidas between late 1970s and 1990 it was in the World Series Cricket and in the Rebel tours played in South Africa. --KoreanDragon (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take you word on the NZ ones, but no England team took part in World Series Cricket and I'm surprised that I have to point out that the rebel tour to SA was not an official England team. Spike 'em (talk) 18:20, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About England, i mean the World Series Cup, not the World Series Cricket one between 1977 and 1979. I know that between the 1980s and 1991 the supplier was Adidas and that between 1992 and 1996 it was ISC because at that time, when the teams wore the coloured uniforms they had all the same supplier in any competition (Adidas for World Series Cup and World Series Cricket, ISC for 1992-1996 Cricket World Cup and 1992-1997 Tri-Series and Asics for 1999 Cricket World Cup for instance) --KoreanDragon (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But they were suppliers for the competition rather than being England's official supplier. Spike 'em (talk) 19:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. So it's plausible. In effect, the designs at the time were also the same for all the teams (side panels in 1981, yoke and side panels in 1983, Major League Baseball-styled team names in front in 1988-1991, Thunderbolts in 1993-94 and so on). --KoreanDragon 19:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please Help

Hi,

I was trying to add Cricket Australia XI to Template:cr-aus (thanks for your awesome help with that by the way!😀) and I've accidentally done something and I have no idea what so now all the teams have brackets next to them, like so:

Apologies, I meant to say Template:cr-Aus, have a look at it to see what I mean Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk) 22:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I've fixed it now Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk) 22:24, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you sorted your brackets. I've amended the doc page to make it clearer how to invoke the CAXI option. Spike 'em (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixtures

27 September 09:30 Scorecard

South Australia  9/254 (50 overs)	v	Cricket Australia XI 3/256 (46.5 overs)
Cameron Valente 100 (138) Jackson Coleman 4/46 (10 overs)		Beau Webster 121 (133) Daniel Worrall 1/40 (10 overs)

Cricket Australia XI won by 7 wickets Allan Border Field, Brisbane Umpires: Geoff Joshua and Michael Graham-Smith Player of the match: Beau Webster (Cricket Australia XI)

• Cricket Australia XI won the toss and elected to field.
• Max Bryant, Jonathan Merlo, Ben Pengelley, Harry Nielsen, Param Uppal and Mac Wright (Cricket Australia XI) all made their List A debuts.

Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk) 22:21, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!😀 Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk) 23:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aussiespinnersfanpage: I see you've added the Country Data, I think I've added in the necessary code to make it all work correctly now. I deleted ACT from the template documentation as there was no code to handle it. I don't know if they play many games and are needed in the template, if so you can use your new found skills to add it! I may not be this friendly in a month's time ;) Spike 'em (talk) 10:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! Yeah ACT don't play very much. Haha, hopefully the Ashes is a tough series! :) Thanks, Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk)

Run out

Hi, I saw you reverted my revert and said what I reverted was not vandalism. Please explain how removing hyperlinks from Run out is constructive.Spidersmilk (talk) 18:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which hyperlinks are you talking about?None were removed in the edit you reverted and it was a clear improvement in grammar. Spike 'em (talk) 19:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Results by matchday

To be honest, it's not the results by matchday that I'm opposed to but the league position by matchday. Since it can happen that matchdays are broken up due to matches being postponed, sometimes by weeks or months depending on a team's involvement in Europe, it begs the question of how you define a matchday for the purposes of that table. Is it when all the matches are played (not a problem for most weeks but potentially a problem when cups are taken into account)? Is it simply at the end of the scheduled weekend (but then how do you account for postponements)? The fact is, those tables are original research in that regard. – PeeJay 18:18, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? – PeeJay 21:01, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, been away. I can see some of your points, but as mentioned 16 of 19 other teams have these tables, and I think it provides a good summary of the season progress. If they truly are against WP:FOOTY then a discussion should be had there to remove all of them. Spike 'em (talk) 01:46, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed link reason

Hello Spike 'em I have read all the guidelines and the link which i put on the wikipedia page passing the information of Indian Premier League auction details which is not listed on that page at all. Please let me know what kind of policy i am violating here so i won't add that link again.

Niraj Bariya To me, it looks like cricketwizard.com is covered by WP:UGC (it describes itself as a blog and asks for content from readers), so is not a reliable source as far as wikipedia is concerned. Spike 'em (talk) 15:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spike 'em All the content is published under my authorship and content is reviewed by myself first. This is not auto generated content so all the content processed through one funnel. I have contributed other pages as well and all the content written by myself and completely authenticated. I am not violating any policy here and providing right source to encyclopedia. Thank you.

I never said it was auto-generated, it is User-generated (written / generated / edited by you). Unless you can show that you or your blog is seen as an authority on cricket, then you can't add links to it. Spike 'em (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spike 'em Please let me know what kind of content i should link to wikipedia page? The link which i added in IPL page clearly passing the valuable information which is missing on the page. Wikipedia is filled with UGC blog links and plenty of examples are there. In IPL 2018 page reference links are also filled with UGC blog. Let me know if that article is not passing right information to Indian Premier League blog and i will not add that link again. Thank you again.

If there are more UGC links in there, I will remove them (and have been doing so this afternoon.

To quote from the relevant pages here:

Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book and claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media are largely not acceptable.

Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is also generally unacceptable. Sites with user-generated content include personal websites, personal blogs, group blogs, internet forums, the Internet Movie Database (IMDb), the Comic Book Database (CBDB.com), content farms, most wikis including Wikipedia, and other collaboratively created websites.

Though as mentioned it may be acceptable if you can be shown to be an expert:

Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications. Spike 'em (talk) 15:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)#[reply]

The other user who was adding UGC links to 2018 IPL has now been blocked as the only thing they added was links to their own pages Spike 'em (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spike 'em Thank you for your valuable insights and information and in this case that was just mere information which i posted on that page so i still think i am not violating any Wikipedia guidelines here. I will spend or rather i would say waste few hours to review major pages and will remove all UGC links from wikipedia else i would stop contributing to Wikipedia no matter what information other people are seeking. Thank again. Spike 'em What is your problem mate? Do you even read the content? The link which i posted on Nal Sarovar page is a detailed tour guide of that place and not a single official reference site have detailed information about it. That was the detailed guide which i personally visited the place and helping other readers/visitors who want to visit that particular page. First read the content than remove it. Go by logic not by rules.

How about WP:NOTTRAVEL? You are using wikipedia as a link farm to your content. Read the policies I have posted, which forbid this. Spike 'em (talk) 16:09, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spike 'em Do you really think the link which i posted was to farm my content? Go through the content first and than make changes. Thanks for wasting my precious time.

You are not allowed to create links to self-published work. You have wasted your own time on this, not me. As per WP:ADV

But in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked. When in doubt, you may go to the talk page and let another editor decide. This suggestion is in line with Wikipedia's conflict-of-interest guidelines. Spike 'em (talk) 16:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Ball tampering controversy

I think there is a need to create a new article on this topic. We should follow the article Ball tampering controversy in August 2006--Donkey335 (talk) 12:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I think so too. There are various versions of vaguely similar text on at least 4 different articles. I'd suggest moving it all into one article and have a brief outline and link to that article on each related page via a {{Main article}} section note Spike 'em (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a draft Draft:2018 Ball tampering controversy, please add to the following.--Donkey335 (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello Spike Thanks for the correction to the Selhurst Park announcement, even though it was my first wiki post, i appreciated the fact some one noticed it and made it better within the space of an hour. Highcliffewikiuser 12:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Highcliffewikiuser (talk • contribs)

Linking of venues in Cricket World Cup 2019

Since you didn't believe a consensus was reached, can you tell me why all the venues in 2015 Cricket World Cup page are linked?? It's been a long standing convention to link all stadium names and venues in a match scorecard, so why is it being changed all of a sudden without any discussion/consensus? Going by previous World Cup pages I was absolutely correctly with my edits! Cricket246 (talk) 19:21, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have already posted same at the WC article, but please show me where this consensus was reached, without use of WP:OTHER. Spike 'em (talk) 19:57, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copied the below to the talk page on 2019 World Cup, I will make any further comments on that page, not here Spike 'em (talk) 08:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was in the Pakistan tour of England and Ireland 2016 talkpage, Talk:Pakistani cricket team in England and Ireland in 2016 where Lugnuts asked me to go with linking venues after a discussion citing logic, you can check there... Plus I was going by the past articles of 2015 World Cup and so on where every venue name is linked which there must have been some kind of a long standing convention or consensus as might have been the case so it is indeed important and relevant in this case to consider past precedents... Cricket246 (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vicente Guaita

Hello there, from Portugal,

you "disagree" because? In your opinion, how many times is it acceptable to repeat a word in the same paragraph?

Sorry to bother you, happy editing --Quite A Character (talk) 15:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the subjects are different. The first mention is of Roy Hodgson acting as manger of the club. The second mention is by the club as a whole and is needed otherwise the second sentence has no subject. Spike 'em (talk) 15:59, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Super League

Hi. I was trying to revert back changes made by some IP address (vandalism) but have some issues with the Pakistan Super League page. I have doubt on if the page was already vandalized and the version to which I reverted back itself was not a proper version. Can you check that once and correct that page whenever you get time.? Thanks. Sagavaj (talk) 22:15, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted further back, not sure quite how valid it was, but the intervening edits don't look constructive Spike 'em (talk) 08:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Root - Eng V Ind - Test Series

Well, I read the article that Lugnuts had cited for that statement and corrected based on what that article said. Is he the fastest ever also? ~¤Spacefarer¤~ (talk) 09:43, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He is the fastest in terms of absolute time between debut and reaching 6000 and 18th fastest in terms of innings. I've not checked the source on the article, will do so later. Spike 'em (talk) 10:24, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That article does state quickest England player, but this and this say fastest overall. They also mentioned the fact during TMS commentary yesterday. Here is the cricinfo list of fastest by innings, which isn't quite what is needed (as it is possible, though not very likely, that someone could do it in less time but significantly more innings) but it does add to the evidence. Spike 'em (talk) 11:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Good afternoon. Nothing for you to worry about but I've raised this case about vandalism I spotted on recent changes earlier today which looks like ongoing harassment. Please let me know if I can help in any way. Thanks. Izzat Kutebar (talk) 13:01, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Izzat Kutebar:. I've been the long-term target of an ip editor who seems to think I am a puppet of another banned long-time user (whose real-world name they keep mentioning). I used to get slightly vexed by it, but after a word of advice from a kindly mod, I've stopped worrying about it and just delete the comments when they occur. I think the same person is now targeting Blue Square Thing as they are tidying up some of articles on cricket history that were created / edited by the alleged puppet-master. Thanks for letting me know about the ANI, but I'm not sure what can be done to stop this as the ip addresses rarely stay the same for very long. Spike 'em (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Spike. The one he used yesterday has been blocked for now. Cast it aside and enjoy the footy season. Good luck. Izzat Kutebar (talk) 13:56, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

International Cricket in YYYY articles

Hi Spike. Following on from the discussion you started, I've updated the relevant pages, including adding this to the style guide. Feel free to change/improve it as needed. Thanks. Lugnuts ^Fire Walk with Me 17:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll have a look. Spike 'em (talk) 15:43, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking Spike'em from editing

I have asked Wikipedian administrations to block you from editing. Now, don't send messages to me anymore otherwise.... Dr Samkiv Kumar (talk) 11:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll let the WP:AIV / WP:ANEW process run its course, so if you stop edit warring and attacking other editors, I will leave you alone. I'd expect the same from you. Spike 'em (talk) 11:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018-19 Premier League Talk Page

Hello, Spike 'em. I know that updating the Talk:2018-19 Premier League isn't very much useful, but it's something that I'm used to doing and I like stiing things up in order. However, if it goes against Wikipedia policies, I'll immediately stop. TB Chigz (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a minor annoyance rather than something I'd argue about, but I would say I think it would be better done in a sandbox rather than on a talk page. Spike 'em (talk) 11:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Twenty20 cricket records

So what means what? Al Islam recorded first ever hat-trick in twenty20 cricket debut. So its a rare feat and this page is created for containing such records. You cant remove such record as a trivial. ImSonyR9 (talk · contribs)

This is a list of records, not notable performances. If we start adding things like this, the page will be quickly filled up with cruft from editors favourite players and become unmanageable. Spike 'em (talk) 14:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Gayle

Please follow the below link. The only change I have made is the increase in number of teams. The link is:- https://www.timesnownews.com/sports/cricket/article/mzansi-super-league-chris-gayle-creates-new-t20-record-after-playing-for-jozi-stars/317051 Dr Samkiv Kumar (talk) 07:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That says 10 t20 leagues, so that is all you can use that reference to support. Anything else is WP:OR. You have included a T10 league,a first class competition and a competition that did not take place. Spike 'em (talk) 07:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Discussion continued on article talk page.

Spike - thought you might find this interesting. Socked and blocked. Lugnuts ^Fire Walk with Me 18:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw that. He's been less abusive (to me, at least) than when first blocked, but still didn't listen! Spike 'em (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Virat Kohli

Why don't you answer me on talk page instead of reverting my edits. Dr Samkiv Kumar (talk) 17:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Samkiv Kumar: I did, but your edit was inappropriate so I reverted it as well. You should learn how to edit articles rather than inserting a load of unformatted junk everywhere. Spike 'em (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

According to this, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at the Sheikh Abu Naser Stadium, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at the Riverside Ground (FA), and MANY MORE should be deleted. ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sattari / Satari

Dear, Wikipedian/Sir I hope you are well.Sir you was moved an article page doesn't match with references or inline citation.I want to say you that the Sattari reverted/moved with another title because its Original name is 'Satari' that's match with this informations.Means you move on Sattari to 'Satari' and then the article has moved success.I have a request to moved the article page Sattari, Malda to 'Sattari' because its match with references/inline citations or informations.I hope you will do it. Yours Faithfully User:JMM000 JMM000 (talk) 14:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, Sir/Wikipedian

I will request you to see the Sattari page name title on the Google Maps on this link [1].Then you take decision and work it immediately to moved or reverted.

Yours Faithfully — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMM000 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC) What about ask the news articles that call it Sattari? Spike 'em (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, Sir

It has Newspapers typer folds.Its real info is on the notable site census of india 2011 and many other sites match with 'Satari' or 'Satari Goa' name title.You will saw the census of india 2011 site link that's exist on yhis page.I request you to search on Google to write the name 'Satari' or 'Satari Goa' and saw the result and then believe me better. Thanking You — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMM000 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you read WP:UCN and WP:RM and follow the suggestions there. I am not going to move the page or change the article without you showing that you have done this. Spike 'em (talk) 17:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sir

Are you don't saw notability of 'Satari' title ? Or Are you don't search 'Satari' title? Sir I am not so expert as you.Can you correctly search.you don't move but please search one time and then You take any decision. JMM000 (talk) 18:33, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I find both Sattari and Satari for the place in Goa on google, and most of the references on the article use Sattari. The article was stable with Sattari until you started editing it, so the onus is on you to show that this is wrong. Whilst the name used in the census is relevant, the article needs to be called what the majority of reliable sources use.Spike 'em (talk) 19:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But the notable and real name is 'Satari'.Ok thanks to talk with me.I hope you help me but you are find me wrong.Ok Thanks JMM000 (talk) 19:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read WP:COMMONNAME yet? Spike 'em (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No JMM000 (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, please do so, as I will not consider anything else you say until you make some sound, policy-based arguments, supported by evidence. Spike 'em (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am read it now.Yet an right decision.But I don't say this.The Goa media or news the name of Sattari usage.I hope they followed Wikipedia title name because the name previous called 'Satari'.I hope media or news basically follow the Wikipedia and told or write.JMM000 —Preceding undated comment added 19:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok bye

Thanks to talk with me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMM000 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ask For Proof reliable sources permission

Dear, Sir

I will proof you that the title or name Sattari page is related with 'Satari' title with page informations or reliable sources.And the title of Sattari, Malda page is related with 'Sattari' title, but I want your permission for add reliable sources on Sattari page for the title change?Are give me permission then I add reliable sources on the Sattari article page? I hope you give me permission.

Thanking you User:JMM000

I have to add notable reliable sources on Sattari page.Please saw and confirm the evidence about Sattari page. JMM000 (talk) 07:30, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Sir I will request you to show Sattari, Malda links on there reliable sources for 'Sattari'. JMM000 (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sullay Kaikai

Thanks for the edit conflict! What do you think the 'in use' template means? Eagleash (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I started editing before you put that template on there and got no message telling me that there may be a conflict when I went to save it. Spike 'em (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK; it did take a long time to get right the way through the page changing everything, tables, squads etc. I've gone through and finished updating it now. It should, I think, have shown up as an 'ec' when you tried to save. But my main edit wouldn't have conflicted until I'd finished it. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 17:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of current fast bowlers in international cricket for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of current fast bowlers in international cricket is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of current fast bowlers in international cricket until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Störm (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I support keeping the page as it contains verifiable information that is useful. 69.181.193.136 (talk) 20:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shuffle dance

Feel free to edit the page in a factual way. but if you keep breaking my links and deliberately undermining my content I'll keep reverting your changes. Your call. I'm happy to keep this up ad infinitum. I've tried to have a meaningful discussion about this on the Talk page for shuffle dance but instead we keep going back to completely unsupported claims with zero evidence of it being invented in Melbourne. Prove it!, i've provided video evidence of it in the UK during early 1989. If you can beat that do it. But do it properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 14:47, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiRaver: So you admit you are going to edit war? You tube videos of raves are not a reliable source. Spike 'em (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No you are. I've provided evidence you have none at all that it was invented in Australia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 15:20, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiRaver: I don't care where it was invented, I am removing links that are not reliable. Multiple editors have removed your content, so you are the one edit warring. Spike 'em (talk) 15:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But all the other links on that page either dont work or are unrelieble, those videos were the events I listed FACT

Why are you not deleting all the crap that's not proved in any way about Oz inventing it? Because you are biased! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 15:28, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Youtube videos from an official collection ARE a reliable source. Its video evidence. there is ZERO evidence at all it was in Australia during 1989-1991. I was raving in the UK in 1989 mate I know much better than you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaver (talk • contribs) 15:33, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiRaver: I'll have a look at the other refs, but the links to other wiki articles and youtube caught my eye as obviously being non-RS. It also doesn't change the fact that what you are writing is Original research. I've also called your bluff and started an Edit Warring case. Spike 'em (talk) 15:36, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not going to reply here any more, but will be adding further comments at the article talk page. Spike 'em (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cr-IPL

Dear user, I wanted to add the team colors to the IPL teams thru Template:Cr-IPL page. But I have made some blunders. Can you please fix it?

I see someone has reverted your changes, I don't think I would have done any more than that. Spike 'em (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Changes in India national cricket team

Hello Spike 'em First thing I am not a spammer and I know that Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, so I am not trying to take backlinks from it. I do changes in all pages and many page I don't add any references. Now on this topice "India hosted its first Test series in the year 1933. England was the visiting team that played 2 Tests in Bombay (now Mumbai) and Calcutta (now Kolkata). The visitors won the series 2-0" This information I found on Cricadium which is not available not Wikipedia so I added this information without reference but some of my this type of content removed because of reference, so I just gave the reference on it. So I don't think I am spaming anything. Thank you for your response but this is second time you'r removing my content, so first please check and them remove it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Salonikush12 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion on WP:CRIC, cricadium.com is not seen as a reliable source. Seeing as that is the only site you seem to use as a reference and you are the only editor I have seen use it as reference, I suspected it was WP:LINKSPAM. If not, then sorry, but I still think you should find better sources. Most of the links you used were to index pages, not specific articles that backed up what you added. Spike 'em (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Spike 'em

I am not owner at Cricadium neither working their but, I found their content interesting more then espn and Cricbuzz. and i don't want to add any link for anyone but, if I add content somewhere Wikipedia asking for reference or the remove my content, This is the only reason I have to add some reference and it's just a coincidence that I add cricadium link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salonikush12 (talk • contribs) 06:16, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. It is good to get a range of sources, but they do have to be of a decent standard, which I don't think cricadium is. I'm slightly doubtful on cricbuzz too so I may start a discussion about that. Spike 'em (talk) 10:53, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please suggest me how can I judge the standard, because I think "cricbuzz" is also better platfrom for cricket related updates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salonikush12 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd start with looking at WP:RS, in particular WP:UGC. cricadium doesn't credit its journalists and crickbuzz does so rarely, so it is difficult to tell who is actually writing the stories or providing overall editorial oversight : "Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight". Spike 'em (talk) 15:04, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm being harsh on cricbuzz, they have editorial / feature articles which are credited, but most of their news reporting just says "Cricbuzz staff". Spike 'em (talk) 15:14, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Thanks for the information, Spike. I will try to add some good resource on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salonikush12 (talk • contribs) 08:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

prem goals

:/ I just thought it be helpful to have that as an external link also. Govvy (talk) 12:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELDUP says that you should not normally duplicate pages already used as references as Ext Links, which is why I removed it. Spike 'em (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Archer

I'm afraid my clumsy mistake has caused you some inconvenience too. I knew full well his cup ties were for Southport but I must have my own team on the brain! I can only apologise. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, I'm learning new stuff out of this! Spike 'em (talk) 10:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Pakistan Super League

Hi! Thanks for your contributions. Saw your recent edits on the page. Did you notice, that a user, whom you just have undid, has added a link in the intro twice, which was already used below on the page? Means same link three times cited in a single page? There, I only put better source needed but I didn't remove that. You put "ref name" in one of it, and "cite web" in the other, while also tagged cn. Please check and tell what to do.

[2] [3] [4] All these are pointing to same link with multiple sections, better to use it just once in my opinion, which is already used in section #Final. The prose can be cited with some better news sources, which I don't want to add because that user thinks that I attack him personally while editing. Else, the wiki of 2018 PSL looks like mirror of ESPNcricinfo, isn't it? Thanks! M. Billoo 02:07, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any suitable refs I'll happily add them if you think the other editor will revert you on principle. I'm based in the UK, so the only coverage of PSL I see is cricinfo, but if there are other reliable sources to use I'd happily do so. Many articles rely heavily on it, so it is good to get a range of sources.

I did think about the fact that the same base page is being used 3 times, but the different refs all go to a different tab on the page, which show different information. It is probably better to only use once, so I'll change all uses on the page to use the same named ref throughout. Spike 'em (talk) 10:15, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki Links

Hi Spike. I had bookmarked the talk page of Bilal after I curated a page he worked on. I was wondering if the interwiki links they introduced on some pages may have been in good faith? They may not be using the right technique to connect English and Urdu articles, so maybe they just need to be explained who to do this using wikidata? Unless of course they were not the correct corresponding urdu articles? Thanks, _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 16:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Aaron Finch one looked correct, not sure about the rest, I didn't bother google translating. I don't actually see the links (just an extra blank line) in the displayed version of the page. I've never linked pages via wikidata myself, so it is possible that is what they are attempting. Spike 'em (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed the blank line as well. I think this actually used to be correct procedure before wikidata - editors were encouraged to add those interlanguage links at the bottom of articles to avoid the blank line. Interestingly, the ICC IOD article now had the Urdu version linked in Wikidata. It seems a bot on Urdu WP has scraped this off EN-WP. I'll explain Wikidata to the user and go back to the articles to link them as per current process in Wikidata. Don't think that's vandalism._pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 17:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had a try and added the wikidata to one of the ICC T20I Championship page by clicking on the languages section on the left hand menu. Spike 'em (talk) 17:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 96, Goals!

Matched to citation, why do you want to break format? Govvy (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I missed that, but that citation goes past what is now 11th place. All other seasons do up to 10th place and ties. Spike 'em (talk) 19:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019-20 Premier League Page

Why did you need to remove page links?

James JamesVilla44 (talk) 19:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because of WP:DUPLINK. Spike 'em (talk) 19:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Discussion

Hello, Can you participate here [[5]] & Say your views,thanks(Mr.Mani Raj Paul (talk) 01:41, 26 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

-- Amanda (aka DQ) 20:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar Reed

G'Day Mate Why are you not recognising that Oscar Reed has bowled 196kmh in which he has. Please stop undoing these edits as these are correct — Preceding unsigned comment added by L7826 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@L7826: Provide some proof and I will do so willingly. Spike 'em (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikibuff

Hi, I see you nominated Template:Wikibuff for deletion under WP:G5, but G5 does not apply to pages created by an editor before they were blocked or banned, only while blocked or banned (eg with a sock account). But it was just a spam link, so I've deleted it under WP:G11. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:20, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I wasn't sure if it was obvious enough for G11, and had a suspicion that G5 was only for editors previously banned. Spike 'em (talk) 10:23, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Cricket World Cup Points Table

Replied to your message here. (2019 Cricket World Cup points table talk page) Kvwiki1234 (talk) 06:40, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bedfordshire players

Hi. Did you get anywhere with that list of List A Lincs players at all? Even if you just have a list of names. I'm thinking I'd better create the darned list and if it can save me trawling through each scorecard it would help. Ta. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DONE! Spike 'em (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Not sure what you have in mind - years played as a possible column? Then just notes to include other teams - and a ref column perhaps? I guess I'm thinking along the lines of List of English cricketers (1772–1786) but with number of matches thrown in. I'll not add anything until you tell me where you feel this is going - don't want to step on your toes. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like what I had in mind (I was going to ask if there was an existing list that could be used as a starting point). I made a note of the other teams to help me keep track of which were the Beds only players and happy to ditch it. I should probably have made note of the years, as that is something I was thinking of doing. Spike 'em (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That looks fine to me - the other teams are worth sticking in the "notes" col - it's not as if there are hundreds of players to deal with here. I'll see if I can deal with some starting from the bottom later on perhaps. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Bedfordshire! I'm just trying to find 10 minutes to get the last 10 article names from the category and create the bare list. Spike 'em (talk) 14:45, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. I would have had it done already if I hadn't spent the last hour reading through various NSPORTS-related discussions! Spike 'em (talk) 14:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, I just changed Beds to Lincs on a Norfolk list so that'll explain that! Thanks - once you have the list that'd be workable. Good job I didn't start trawling Lincs scorecards...

Did you come to any conclusions re NSPORTS? Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mainly that there are entrenched editors on both sides who keep using the same arguments and put their fingers in their ears when someone makes another point! Spike 'em (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds about right I suppose - I'm as guilty as anyone else on that I suppose. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:England national football team

Please stop moving the reflist to the end - as the references appear in the nomination they should go underneath. GiantSnowman 17:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

the documentation of {{ref-talk}} says it should go at the end of the section it is used in, and having in the middle means there are a bunch of hanging refs including some that are re-using the refs in the nomination. Spike 'em (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

.. did you do this [6]. In chess, for example, first-round drawers can be paired against other first-round drawers (provided there was more than one draw). Philip Trueman (talk) 11:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point! My mind was clouded by playing in a backgammon Swiss yesterday, and no draws are possible there. I've reverted my change. Spike 'em (talk) 11:19, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 World Cup Bowling Average

Hi, the minimum balls needed to qualify for that list should be 1000 deliveries, as provided by Cricinfo, which is also the criteria in other sections e.g. Bowling Economy, 400 deliveries are not enough. Db135 (talk) 07:15, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Db135: I've made a full explanation at Talk:List of Cricket World Cup records#Discrepancy between Batting and Bowling average lists so please comment there rather than here. Spike 'em (talk) 09:02, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help me out

2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup and 2020 ICC Women's T20 World Cup and ICC Men's T20 World Cup, check the history, a editor named Lugnuts, who seems to have reverted all archiving of references, God knows why, some kind of personal issues may be as earlier we had a little battle, he seems to make his mind of reverting whatever I am doing there in the articles. I cannot revert now any more due to concern of edit war. I think your words will work as it was worked in the 2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup. Please help in this too. Thank you. Dey subrata (talk) 00:22, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Archer (forward, born 1993)

You AfDed this a while back, I note this has been draftified and created, but doesn't look that good to me. Do you think this should go back to AfD or is it ok now? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Based purely on what is in the article, it looks like he has now played at least 5 games between professional league teams so he passes WP:NFOOTY. This will be a major point made in any future AfD and I don't feel the need to raise it there. Spike 'em (talk) 08:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For info

Hi Spike. Thanks for your help earlier today at the international cricket article. Please see this at the edit warring notice board. Lugnuts ^Fire Walk with Me 18:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi Spike. I request you kindly to stop reverting my edits on IPL. Thank you.Selva15469 (talk)

No thanks. Spike 'em (talk) 15:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's used for quicker identification. IPL is most popular competition in India and other countries also. It'll be helpul for fans to identify their respective teams quickly without searching every names. Selva15469 (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will not discuss this anywhere other than WT:CRIC Spike 'em (talk) 15:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cripl/doc

you probably meant to nominate the template template:Cripl for deletion and not just the doc page for the template. Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

okay, I see you fixed it. Frietjes (talk) 16:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, was just doing so! Spike 'em (talk) 16:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year

Hi, compliments of the season... I was wondering (as you set up a page for Pierrick) whether you had anything on the go for Daly; just so we don't trip over each other should he ever make his debut – possibly Sunday in the Cup!? I have had an article in draftspace for over 2 years now, since his first inclusion, good run in U23s and junior England call-ups. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year! I have User:Spike 'em/sandbox/James Daly and User:Spike 'em/sandbox/Tyrick Mitchell on the go at the moment. I'll merge what I have on Daly into the draft and move Tyrick to there too. Spike 'em (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK good stuff; all the injuries might tempt Hodgson to chuck a few youngsters in... Eagleash (talk) 17:26, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket

Hi Spike'em. I have noticed a few errors in the article about Cricket. I would be happy if you could correct these errors. I cannot correct these mistakes myself, as I don't have the necessary credits.

Under the heading "Laws and Gameplay", and under the subheading "Match Structure and Closure", it is written that "The exception to this is if a batsman has any type of illness or injury restricting his or her ability to run, in this case the batsman is allowed 'A Runner' who can run between the wickets when the batsman hits a scoring run or runs." But the new rules state that the ICC has outlawed the use of a Runner. "Runners are outlawed from internationals by new ICC rules. Runners will no longer be allowed in international cricket after a number of changes to the playing conditions came into force on 1 October, 2011". Thus, it would be nice if you could correct that error in the article.

In addition to the above error, I spotted another error. Under the heading "Batting, Runs and Extras", the article states that "Substitute batsmen are not allowed." But according to the new set of rules, the ICC allows players who suffer concussions during a match to be replaced in their team's playing XI. Please correct these mistakes. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by U Navneeth (talk • contribs) 04:32, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @U Navneeth:, Runners are still allowed under Law 25, it is an ICC playing condition that disallows them in international cricket. Similarly, Concussion substitutes are also an ICC playing condition rather than being in the Laws of the Game (though I think other top-level competitions allow them too). I'll have a look and add a mention of the difference if appropriate. Spike 'em (talk) 10:47, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Spike'em! — Preceding unsigned comment added by U Navneeth (talk • contribs) 13:27, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Son red cards

According to prem league stats say he has two red cards per, [7] Govvy (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, that's where people might get tripped up. Govvy (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've often found the PL site to be internally inconsistent on things like this, which is why I've asked for an alternate source. Their list that shows most Reds for the season (which is the referenced source in the stats section) only gives him one. I'll add that link to the conversation on the article. Spike 'em (talk) 14:53, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, @Govvy: that page is for all seasons, for 2019/20 it says 1 Red. Spike 'em (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Root

How's Rooty not an allrounder? Might you need reminding of 4/81? Bowls in both test and oneday cricket so don't really see why not, 81.98.82.229 (talk) 17:46, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

if you can find a genuine,reliable source that describes him as an all-rounder then go for it. As an example cricinfo state his role as Playing role:Top-order batsman I'd describe him as an occasional bowler at best. Spike 'em (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fairdos. Do you play? 81.98.82.229 (talk) 08:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Premier League season articles

I have rated a fair few at Mid importance, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Assessment#Importance scale. Govvy (talk) 11:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that for the football clubs, not the premier league article itself, I would put those at High! Which I noticed you changed to Mid, because they are incredibly well known and ported throughout the world, hell, I was in a backwater area of Loas two years ago and they were watching a league game between Arsenal and Man U on a TV from 1980!! Govvy (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The scale means nothing if you put everything at high. I would put a seasonal article at 1 level below the team/competition it belongs to. Spike 'em (talk) 11:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And the guide suggests putting season articles at low, so that should be the starting point. Spike 'em (talk) 11:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This only got me when I was looking at the talk page on UEFA Euro 2020 and it was rated at Mid when I thought, surely that should be set to High importance!! Govvy (talk) 11:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

???

What ya keep reverting me edits for man? Classification doesn't need to be sourced when the info is already there. SamRathbone | give me messages in my talk keep me reading, keep me reading till the break of day | u wanna stalk me bruv? go for it you weirdo | 17 days after my birthday, 21:42 (UCT) 😊|

Wilf

Quick heads up... I have applied for page protection. Eagleash (talk) 11:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just tried to do the same myself and it failed, so I'm guessing this is why! Spike 'em (talk) 11:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Can you help me Satyam.sagar.sahu (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heyyy

heyy what are you doing??

Germany national football team records-----i seperate this article. and it look like this article's form of 1 month ago...

what do you want to do? there written that it is large and i seperated it... why you deleted some parts???? please undo it....(at least respect for labor-work) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.127.25.47 (talk) 10:05, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, it looks far better now (though still needs plenty of improvement). Spike 'em (talk) 10:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crystal Palace FC

	Crystal Palace FC
	Apologies for my edits. You are right we can only change dates or rewrite history when its completely official Stephen70 21:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries. The claims can be mentioned, but until other parties start to accept them, then it should be left clear that they are claims. Spike 'em (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell

Someone else has started an article for Tyrick Mitchell. Very light; can you merge your content please? Cheers. In case you are unaware that alleged Burnley player has a draft for Nikola tavares. Eagleash (talk) 15:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, done. Spike 'em (talk) 20:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10 wicket victories

Hey regarding your revert on the 10 wicket victory list on England test records.. I only kept iit that ways to make some sort of consistency across all the nations.

Ankurc.17 (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think a full list is needed on any of the other pages either. I don't monitor those pages so hadn't seen you had added there too. A list of 10-30 items when all the other lists are top-5s is excessive. Spike 'em (talk) 16:52, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought keeping country specific would cover the last issue. If the test teams dont increase then the max the list goes extended till is 11. ANyways since you are moderating the page I dont see any reason to reason with you. Ankurc.17 (talk) 18:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the need for an 11-line table just for the sake of it (and it may grow as the number of Test teams does), when the key info can be written in text. A 10-wicket victory is usually when a team isn't quite good enough to get an innings victory, so it seems incongruous devoting more space to them than the more impressive innings victories. If a table is really needed, then I'd suggest listing the 5 highest 4th-innings scores made in a 10-wicket victory. Spike 'em (talk) 09:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If we are aiming for consistency, I don't see this table in List of Test cricket records which I think should be the template, rather than cross-pollinating any records that happens to appear in one team list to all the others. Spike 'em (talk) 09:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check the sandbox?? Ankurc.17 (talk) 08:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So What?

Hi, I made one inclusion from a story that Steve Smith (cricketer) is ambassador to one company. You reverted it with a comment that SO WHAT? May I ask why? Isn't it a news that is reliable? Just trying to make it clear and learn that what is the violation here? Samantha Mont (talk) 11:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of players have sponsorship deals with a wide range of companies and I don't think they are at all relevant to an encyclopaedic article about them. We don't need to link to every single mention of a famous person in newspapers, as per WP:NOTDIARY. Spike 'em (talk) 12:09, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And it certainly has no place in the lead section of the article where you put it. Spike 'em (talk) 12:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Gayle

Hello. Everyday, a lot of people, including sports personalities, are tested for COVID-19. They usually disclose the results themselves, whether they tested positive or negative. Chris Gayle had to get tested because he was a close contact of Usain Bolt, who tested positive. The reports about what happened in that birthday party suggest that a cluster infection happened there. In edit, why did you say that Chris Gayle's negative tests were trivial? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 09:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be WP:UNDUE weight to have so much about it. A one line mention may be appropriate, but what you added was too much. Spike 'em (talk) 10:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll take a second look at it and leave out the unnecessary details. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 13:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

north american = national?

Hi, relating to Dave Lockwood, is a tournament that includes competitors from multiple countries (within the continent of North America) not international? Calling that national seems inappropriate, unless it truly only contained competitors from one country. Enwebb (talk) 18:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don;t think there are any tournaments that limit entries to a particular country, but in my experience (a while back) NATwA = US. I can't access the Chicago Tribune article you've linked to (it doesn't seem to like me being in Europe) so I can't see how they describe it. Spike 'em (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Barrie (who should be next on your list of winkers to create!) describes the ETWA and NATWA championships as "national" here. Spike 'em (talk) 19:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "At 12, Max was one of the youngest players ever to hold a world title. At 16, he currently is ranked 52nd in the world in tiddlywinks. But his brothers, Jon, 13, and Ben, 10, also have potential, their father said." Enwebb (talk) 20:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is true, he's only listed as losing one World Championship match on both IFTWA and ETWA websites. It may be worth trying to talk with RickTucker who I believe is still an active player. Spike 'em (talk) 22:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per [8], The North American Tiddlywinks Association (NATwA) was formed in 1966 with founders from both USA and Canada. I think saying that it counts as an international title is accurate (and conversely, saying it is a national title is not). Enwebb (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The main tiddlywinks article says There are two national associations, the English Tiddlywinks Association (ETwA) and the North American Tiddlywinks Association; anyone winning a national tournament (or being the highest-placed home player behind a foreign winner) is entitled to challenge the current champion and In America... National competitions are well attended Spike 'em (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP is not a reliable source, while the Chicago Tribune is. Enwebb (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The same Chicago Tribune that claims Max Lockwood is a world champion even though I've shown this is incorrect? Spike 'em (talk) 22:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

and above, you quote the ETWA site, which further along says To challenge at world level, a player must win one of the national titles and The standard of play at national competitions... Spike 'em (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it seems possible that they said world championship when they meant international championship. I'm not really interested in squibbling about this much more. I wrote what was in the source, which is what was verifiable. Enwebb (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And NATWA says : A winner of a national title (from NATwA, ETwA, and others over time recognized by IFTwA) earns the right to challenge the current World titleholders. You are now trying to guess what a source meant, which cannot be that reliable in this instance. Spike 'em (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

final response: I was conceding that it was possible you were right and the source was wrong. However, WP is based on what is verifiable. I added what was verifiable, which was what was written in the source. Enwebb (talk) 22:38, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And I have added some links to show how the various governing bodies classify / regard their tournaments. As mentioned above, I'd suggest discussing this with RickTucker who is the principal editor on the main article who could give an alternate view, though his edits are not that frequent. Spike 'em (talk) 22:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At one time the North American Tiddlywinks Association sponsored two pairs championships, one held in the United States and another held in Canada. Winners of each were eligible to challenge World Pairs title holders. The Canadian Pairs has not been held since 1974. Tournaments are sponsored by a particular tiddlywinks association such as NATwA and ETwA; winkers from any country can participate in them. ETwA sponsors their National Singles and Pairs. When the Scottish Tiddlywinks Association was in existence, they sponsored the Scottish Pairs. Winners of each of these association pairs championships were eligible to challenge the current World Pairs champions. World championships are conducted under the purview of the International Federal of Tiddlywinks Associations (IFTwA). I am the Secretary-General of IFTwA. Rick (talk) 21:30, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on batsman's ground diagram

See Talk:Cricket#Diagram of batsmen's ground. GreekApple123 (talk) 06:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

God of cricket

Can you please explain me why my edit on Sachin Tendulkar was reverted. That was not assumed on good faith. That is just a mere fact. Dont know why it got reverted Kashmorwiki (talk) 02:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium Capacity

Is there a course of action to stop all these editors changing the capacity back to 132k? It's extremely frustrating. The owners of the stadium say it's 110k..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narendra_Modi_Stadium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stadiums_by_capacity

Looks like the list page is also being edit warred. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 09:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reece Hannam

Just in case of duplication (again); I've started a draft for Hannam as on bench for CPFC today. Not all that likely to get on, but... Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 11:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I was just checking to see if it existed yet! Spike 'em (talk) 11:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagleash:, and I've just created Draft:Jesurun Rak-Sakyi, in case he should make an appearance this season... Spike 'em (talk) 10:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up; I did consider it on Saturday, but... FWIW, I think the Tavares draft ran out of time (G13). Eagleash (talk) 10:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to the Victor Trumper page

Hi Spike'em.

I made a more detailed pen portrait of Victor Trumper which provided a large amount of data to support the contentions I made (his scores in adversity were given, along with those made on sticky wickets). These are not wild claims but facts easily verified by the relevant scorecards.

I accept that more citations are required to complete my edit and will include these at my next attempt.

In 2019, I wrote the most comprehensive book on Victor Trumper's cricket career (The GENIUS, p424, ISBN: 9780646995014). My book was reviewed by David Frith (The Cricketer), Richard Lawrence (The Association of Statisticians and Historians) and Geoff Armstrong (Stoke Hill Press), among others. Armstrong called it the most intriguing cricket book of the year) - https://www.stokehillpress.com/blog

And my book appears in 60 libraries around Australia. I am not uneducated when it comes to the career of Victor Trumper.

The current pen portrait is woefully inadequate in describing a cricketer universally regarded by peers as one of the greatest players ever seen (I can give you two dozen citations, if you require).

I hope that my contributions will be welcomed, particularly given my understanding and proven expertise in the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ren185 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those figures are completely unsuited to the opening paragraph, and from what I can see he did not pass 67 20 times in 35 innings when opening for Australia: [9]. Spike 'em (talk) 10:08, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'd prefer this was discussed either at Talk:Victor Trumper or WT:CRIC#Victor Trumper. Spike 'em (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my mistake

Hi, I'm sorry for my misunderstanding. Now I learned that World level cricket championship competitions are different from championship rankings as in ICC ODI Championship and Cricket World Cup. I request you kindly to forgive my mistake. I think the information about mace only have to be changed. 11:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

No problems, very happy to make changes to the article, as they are confusing, but I'd like to discuss first. The ratings part could possibly be separated from the championship / mace stuff. Spike 'em (talk) 11:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, the discussion is necessary because I doubt whether the titles ICC Test Championship, ICC ODI Championship and ICC T20I Championship are valid because they are officially mentioned by ICC as "Rankings". Selva15469 (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hi @Spike 'em:, I request you to join and share your opinions on the discussion about the requested move of the pages ICC Test Championship, ICC ODI Championship and ICC T20I Championship. Thank you. Selva15469 (talk) 03:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Spike 'em:, I hope you're reading my messages. As per your advice, I got consensus on the discussion pages I mentioned above. The consensus is clear in support of the requested move as there's no formal opposition till now. Personally I asked sorry to you on the discussion page for my edit war and requested you to join the formal discussion but there's no reply from you since past 2 days. I tried my best to explain about the requested move with multiple sources. As you're the one who contested the move, I request you to share your opinion about whether you support or oppose the requested move. Also, I request you to follow Wikipedia:Civility. Thank you. Selva15469 (talk) 12:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'Woy'

Has Hodgson actually left? I've not seen an official announcement as yet and as Snowman will insist on reminding us every year (rightly) the season runs officially, and therefore contracts too, to 30 June. Someone has to show half the squad where the job centre is! Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Batter

Following the recent word adaptation from batsman/batswoman to batter, can we move the ICC Rankings template pages like this? E.g .Template:ICC Top 10 Test Batsmen to Template:ICC Top 10 Test Batters??? For woman Template:ICC Top 10 WODI Batters like this?? Let me know your thoughts. Thanks :-) Kirubar (talk) 15:15, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say COMMONNAME still applies, and am not convinced that the word Batsman is obsolete yet. Spike 'em (talk) 15:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Recently, If any consensus or background maintenance going on to change the terms in all Cricket articles or else suggested to leaving it as such? Batsman this word, not obsolete yet, I totally agree with you. Can we start from here to make a change or else propose for a consensus? Let me know. Thanks. Kirubar (talk) 02:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BCCI logo

Why you deleted Board of Control for Cricket In India logo. It is present on board's article under fair use policy then why not I can use it on India national cricket team's article ? If the logo is copyvio than remove it from BCCI article also. Newton Euro (talk) 16:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Newton Euro: As explained on the talk page of the India cricket team article, it is not acceptable fair use. Fair use depends on context. A file that is fair use on one article is not guaranteed or even likely to be fair use anywhere else. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then Newton Euro (talk) 17:19, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I explained this on the talk page of the article, please keep the discussion in one place. Spike 'em (talk) 17:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hannam

Why the change? It's man of the match (etc). not man for the match: The source says 'player of' and Wiki's arcing article is at Player of the Season and then there's this. It would be a major change across 1,000s of articles and Im not sure there would be consensus via the project! Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 11:26, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! I was looking for something to edit to keep the draft current and wasn't paying enough attention. I interpreted it as "he was voted player of the season of the 2020-21 season" where "for" could be more appropriate but re-reading the "of" makes more sense. I've self-reverted. Spike 'em (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That'll keep it 'live' as well though. Doesn't look as though he'll get his debut anytime soon. BTW were you aware that there is no 1989-90 CPFC season article? Quite important, 1st in top tier under Coppell and 1st cup final. Eagleash (talk) 11:45, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Links in Infobox cricketer

Hi. I recall that a few years ago you were successful in getting the term 'Batting average' in {{Infobox cricketer}} updated, so that rather than wiki-linking to the general article Batting average, it instead linked to Batting average (cricket), after this cricket-specific article was created. The {{Infobox cricketer}} template has a few other links that are missing or could be improved. With varying levels of importance:

• 'Runs scored' should link to Run (cricket)
• '100s' should link to Century (cricket)
• 'Wickets' would be much better linked to Dismissal (cricket) than its current link to Wicket
• '10 wickets in match' should link to Ten-wicket haul
• 'Catches' should link to Caught

A while ago I put a message on the template's talk page mentioning some of these links, but no one replied (either supporting or opposing) or made the updates to the template, so I'm just wondering how you went about successfully getting the change made to the 'Batting average' link? Thanks! Mmitchell10 (talk) 21:25, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to look at {{infobox cricketer/career}}. I've not checked if that needs template editor rights, let me know if it fits, or of anything else doesn't make sense. Spike 'em (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's really helpful, hadn't seen the career subpage before. And yes, it does need template editor rights. I don't have those. Do you?, or would I be better off submitting an edit request? Mmitchell10 (talk) 18:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do now (don't think I did at the time of previous change). I can have a look, but will need to do so when I'm editing on PC rather than on my phone. Spike 'em (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UDRS History Wikipedia

You have no right to remove a relevant weblink on the origin of the Player Referral' concept. You cannot arbitrarily exclude names of others who have a valid claim to due recognition. Any arbitrary decision must be subject to Appeal by a higher authority or panel. Rules of Natural Justice must be complied with. I wish to appeal against your decision. Remember this point. Like Black Lives Matter' so do Black Achievements. Do not abuse your powers to delist others who are not English. Please act fairly. Cricket is an euphemism for Justice and Fair Play. Act wisely. Act fairly. Restore the earlier text where Senaka Weeraratna is identified as the father of DRS. 112.134.211.198 (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is mostly nonsense and the comparison to BLM is fatuous. Open a discussion on the article talk page to gain consensus for your change.Spike 'em (talk) 16:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping cool

I know it can be hard, but please try to avoid doing this. It is not conducive to collaborative discussion. You were lucky this was raise at the Teahouse and not at the hornet's nest that is WP:ANI! Mjroots (talk) 19:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough: I allowed myself to become worked up by an edit summary asking me to discuss something, when I had already made an effort to do so. Spike 'em (talk) 21:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wilfried Zaha

The Palace loan spells should be separate out of the stats table, please can you do the honours? GiantSnowman 10:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think the table is good as it is (including an overall Palace total in line with other articles, such as Ian Rush, Diego Costa, Glenn Murray). Spike 'em (talk) 11:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I was snarky in my response to you at ANI, so let me partially amend by saying thanks for starting the RM discussion. Happy editing, JBL (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Also it has nothing to do with gender politics or with Ukraine, dwc lr is just for some reason interested in edgelord / offensive behavior.) --JBL (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No offence taken, and I also got too worked up over an argument I ultimately don't really care about, so apologies for trying to point score. I would say that this seems to me to be a COMMONNAME issue to me, particularly as the relevant naming commenting says to only use defunct titles if the person concerned is generally known by that title. Spike 'em (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Spike 'em This is bordering on harassment now, are you an administrator? If so can you please step in and close the ludicrous harassment thread at ANI, I reverted an undiscussed controversial page move politely asked the user to initiate a request move they refused *and* reported me on ANI and now I have been subjected to an attempt to be blocked there as well. In my efforts to maintain policy and standards on Wikipedia I have engaged in robust discussion yes, but nothing more, hence the block attempt is not going anywhere and has gained zero traction because I have done nothing wrong other than expose weakness in arguments. Thank you for any assistance - dwc lr (talk) 09:30, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin, sorry. I don't see a reason for you to be blocked, but I also find the whataboutism about gender recognition in Hungary completely irrelevant. Spike 'em (talk) 10:13, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]