Talk:2018–19 ICC T20 World Cup Asia Qualifier

Need to separate

Is there a justification for having the final tournament as separate (for here or any regional section). The page is not going to be that big even if we include the final tournament 58.107.66.90 (talk) 12:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I'll make some redirects and finals sections on the articles concerned. Thanks IP 58.104! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Player red links

Hi - I was just wondering why the red links had been removed from all players in score summaries and debuts both here and in the other regional events (Africa, Europe, EAP... but as yet not Americas), while in bi-laterals and smaller tournaments these are included? This dates back to when I created and populated the 2019 ACC Western Region T20 article in January without red links - these were then added by User:A Simple Human, which at the time I disagreed with but have come to agree with. I just wondered if there was a reason/logic as to why they have been removed from the regional qualifier articles but included elsewhere. I know that the regional finals are considered to provide enough notabilty for any participating players to have their own articles created, and hence there wouldn't be any redlinks in that section after a short while once somebody (probably User:Lugnuts!) has created the player's article... I am referring instead to the subregional stages. I don't have an issue with it, it just seems inconsistent across series. And of course when players later meet notability criteria (like several Kuwaiti, Singaporean and Malaysian players today) if the redlinks had been left their 'actual' links would have been automatically there in most cases. Any thoughts? Bs1jac (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

For the sub-regional matches, the players don't automatically meet WP:NCRIC (point 4), and in a lot of cases, are never likely to (take Mohamed Azzam and Mohamed Saafee of the Maldives in the first match, for example). If they were turned red, it leads to some editors (acting in good-faith) thinking it's fine to create those pages, without knowing the notability requirements. I do go back and try to redlink/blue link players once they have reached the notability threshold, but maybe the odd one is missed. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:32, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, ah yes I can see that being a possibility. The same could be said for certain bi-laterals as well (particularly on the women's side, e.g. Chinese women's cricket team in South Korea in 2018–19) - I have recently prepared several women's series articles from 2018 to 2019 including redlinks as that is what appeared (appears) to be the pattern in all other men's series, and am happy to go back to them and remove red links if you think that would be wise? But what about on the men's side, for example 2019 ACC Western Region T20 which is the one where redlinks got added originally? Players from some of those teams have already gone on to play in regional finals and so meet WP:NCRIC, but others (i.e. Maldives, possibly Saudi) probably never will; would you therefore have no redlinks (as originally) all all redlinks (as current)? Cheers Bs1jac (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bs1jac and Lugnuts: What I thought when I redlinked them in 2019 ACC Western Region T20 was that since the bilateral or multi national series are not listed in International cricket in 2018–19 and International cricket in 2019 articles, they are not important enough are not searched frequently. So redlinking them will save much time if the articles are created in future. The regional finals are listed and which will lead to people noticing the sub regional matches too. So since Lugnuts usually contribute in these types of articles instead of the new bilateral ones, I thought I will follow the regular non linking method. I don't usually edit women's article so I can't give opinion on that. Human (talk) 15:08, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Fair comment, although you are usually one for absolute consistency! Note that while not detailed on those pages, all of these series are in the (for example) Template:International cricket in 2018–19 which appears on those pages and on all series articles within that season. You don't see these on the mobile app but they are pretty prominent for desktop and tablet users. Anyway I think we'll leave the links as they are and treat the regional qualifiers as anomalies in this regard. Bs1jac (talk) 15:17, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Nepal lost to Qatar...now that's an upset given Nepal has the experience of playing in T20 World Cup, whereas Qatar started playing official cricket only this January. Human (talk) 05:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I didn't register that at first, just that Qatar had won. And then I checked who they were playing! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yeah I was surprised when I saw that this morning. Opens things up nicely. Singapore are highly tipped according to Emerging Cricket... could well come down to the last game between Singapore and Nepal (unless rain has an impact). Bs1jac (talk) 09:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bs1jac: Yeah your prediction was right. It is actually going down to the last day. Human (talk) 04:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bs1jac and Lugnuts: Singapore's dream came true!! Human (talk) 05:08, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Amazing news! And Nepal finished below Qatar. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:57, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Reschedule

@Bs1jac: Can you please provide the link where it said the matches will be rescheduled? I couldn't find any. Human (talk) 09:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Ref #16 (the Emerging Cricket story) has the details. Thursday is the reserve day. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes that's the one... I added it on Sunday. They have messed up the dates there (says Wednesday is the 27th!), but yes states Thursday as a reserve day. I suspect they might reschedule the game for tomorrow evening first though given that there is only one game planned. Also it has been stated as competition rules in EAP, Africa and Europe (all of which have been rain affected!) that matches can be rescheduled into reserve slots. Weather not looking great for Wednesday at the moment, should be better after that. Bs1jac (talk) 09:57, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Not sure of reschedule is happening. Reference Ankurc.17 (talk) 12:24, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

It will be. Also note that the ICC's scorecard on their site for the game is now dead. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:11, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

But on the ICC site in the standings the NR is included: [1].--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

The same thing happened with the washed-out matches in the European qualifier final, and they were then rescheduled. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Still no sign of the rescheduled match. Human (talk) 13:57, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Some matches weren't rescheduled in the Africa qualifier final. Human (talk) 14:24, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Sounds like it's one rule for one... haha! I guess we'll see if the teams turn up at the ground tomorrow. :D Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Very, very surprised this wasn't played on the reserve day. Why have a reserve day and not use it? The matches in the Africa finals that were not rescheduled were after the planned reserve day, so there was nowhere to move them to, while in EAP, Europe and here the reserve day was still to come. Seems that they are not going to play it though which is harsh on the hosts. Bs1jac (talk) 10:34, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I bet it would have been rescheduled if the fixture had Nepal playing. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)