Talk:Wally Hammond

List of centuries

Is the list of centuries necessary at the end of the article? I don't feel that it adds much and it looks out of place to me.--Sarastro1 (talk) 23:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

No, not really. Such stats have previously been made into their own articles. Such as: List of international cricket centuries by Ricky Ponting. Maybe worry about that in the future; however, you're better off worrying about writing the main article. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 00:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The list looks like a one-off and doesn't really add value. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 01:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the list from the page but I have kept it at User:Sarastro1/List of centuries by Wally Hammond with a view to creating a separate article at some point in the near future.--Sarastro1 (talk) 00:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries by Wally Hammond was recently closed as a merge decision. I've redirected it to here rather than merge, based primarily on this discussion and the FA status of the article. Any comments would, of course, be welcomed. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Per my revert, this 11 year old discussion with almost no input does not override the recent AFD consensus. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 16:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, up to you. For information @Sarastro1:, as the person who took this article to FA status, might have an interest when they're next around. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

It is clear you have concerns on how the merge should be best approached, but arbitrarily overruling the AFD close without discussion is not acceptable. It would be better if you shared your thoughts here rather than abandoning it to a potential copy-paste job that requires substantial cleanup afterwards. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Clearly I did open discussion above, but there you go. You actioned on it, grand. I considered it was better to do something rather than let the merge tag stand, as I did at Colin Cowdrey. If you want to copy and paste a table into a featured article that was removed, after discussion, by editors who brought the article up to featured article status more than 10 years ago, then go ahead, do so. You may want to review every other cricket featured biography and note exactly how many of them have tables anything like this one. I'll save you the trouble: the number is less than 1. One of them does link to a list of international centuries article; it's a featured list.

I was wrong at the AfD. I should have argued keep and worked on bringing the list up to FL standard. If the list is added here then it will be unecessary. I don't feel that it would add much and it will look out of place to me. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

No, you actioned without prior discussion in order to try and commute merge to redirect. Consensus changes, and the AFD supercedes the discussion above. If you have ideas on how the merge should be done, please share them. Note: it does not have to be merged as a table if prose can adequately summarise everything. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

It already does. I don't think there's anything very much that could be added to Sarastro1's prose that would improve the article really. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Wally Hammond: The reasons why

I don't know if anyone else has read this, but I was wondering how reliable some of the details are. While a good book, it does not have any references or any indication in some places which parts are conjecture by the author or facts from other places. I have left out some of the details which seem difficult to prove, such as Hammond's thoughts or motivations. What do other people think?--Sarastro1 (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wally Hammond/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC) As an American I am very uninformed on the details of cricket, so let me apologize up front if I make any stupid errors or ask any silly questions. However, this could be of assisstance as it will ensure the prose can be read and understood reasonably well by an outsider.

• File:Wally Hammond.JPG has no source information.

I did not add this image so I don't know where it came from. Also, I'm not very good with images generally so advice would be appreciated.--Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• It's a great image, but I would tend to say remove it. Without source information we have absolutely no idea if the copyright claim is valid or not. I'm going to slap a source lacking tag on it. Staxringold _talk^contribs 15:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
• Yeah, looking at the uploader's talk page, seems like he's had several similar pics deleted for this reason. Staxringold _talk^contribs 15:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Removed image for now unless someone can source it. I'll see if someone more image-minded than me can suggest another image which is more reliable. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Promoted A lead image would be nice, but you have to go with what you have. Staxringold _talk^contribs 23:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

As I understand it any image taken in Australia before 1955 is out of copyright and that image was certainly in Australia and pre 1955. Why is the source important as it simply cannot be under copyright? --LiamE (talk) 23:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

• The lead sentence "In a Test career spanning 85 matches, Hammond captained England in 20, winning four, losing three and drawing 13" seems to (if I'm understanding) combine his general career with the subset of that when he was captain, but it comes off a little confusingly (particularly when followed by his overall batting statistics). Perhaps reorder, saying "In a Test career spanning 85 matches, he scored 7,249 runs and took 83 wickets. Hammond captained England in 20 of these Tests... [blah blah blah]."?

Done as suggested.--Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Maybe use {{See also}} for English cricket team in Australia in 1928–29 for "1928-29 tour of Australia" since it's about just the one tour.

Done --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Can you give a brief summary of what "Bodyline" bowling is under "Bodyline tour"? It sounds vaguely like a brushback pitch in baseball, but it seems to play a relatively large role in his career so would be useful for the average uninformed reader.

Added some more info to explain it.--Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Link tonsillitis under loss of form?

Done --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Link moving average when describing the blue line in the graph image?

Er.. Not actually sure what you mean here. Sorry! --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Next to retirement there is a graph of his career batting performance. The last sentence of the caption reads "The blue line is an average of his ten most recent innings." Could you change that to "The blue line is a moving average of his ten most recent innings."?

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Does his death belong under the "Business" section?

Added new section for final years. --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Great overall though! Amazing sourcing, I'd say this baby's up to FA snuff. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for comments so far! --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Football infobox

As he played football, we could do with adding a football infobox - but should it go under the cricket infobox or adjacent to the Football career section? --Jameboy (talk) 23:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

My own thought would be that if it fits within the football section, put it there. Failing that, put it under the cricket infobox. I'm not sure if there is a standard way to do it. I checked a few other football-cricketers but both ways have been done and I'm not aware of any FAs which would be a model to use. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

"Winchester Agricultural College"

Is this a former or alternative name for Sparsholt College?[1]

Researching Eric Hill recently, I came across the sad anecdote on p.265 of "The reasons why" - Hammond drinking on his own in bar in South Africa in 1956 or 1957 while Peter Loader and Brian Statham are celebrated nearby.[2] -- Testing times (talk) 20:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Possibly a former name, but I'm not sure. Everything I've seen says Winchester Agricultural College, but I think it is the same place. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:45, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

1929-30 tours

Wondering if for the sake of comprehensiveness, whether we should note that Hammond did not participate in either of the split Test tours of West Indies and New Zealand in 1929-30. I realize this was not extraordinary—Sutcliffe and Hobbs, for instance, didn't tour that winter either—but it might make sense to settle the question for readers who come across the fact that there were two M.C.C. touring parties that season.—DCGeist (talk) 14:32, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

ESPNcricinfo

This website was originally published by the Wisden Group until it was sold to ESPN. ESPN Inc. is a publisher of numerous products. As a website, it should be italicized per the MoS. The publisher field does not italicize, but work does. Dawnseeker2000 10:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't that rather depend on which style of referencing you're using? Which, unless it's changed recently, I don't think Wikipedia specifies. APA.7, for example, specifies non-italicised website names or urls. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Indeed; and nothing has changed. See WP:CITESTYLE. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 17:19, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Did Wally Hammond stage a cricket match between USA and England during army leave in the 2nd world war?

Anecdotly. Yes 2A00:23C5:EC0C:D601:A5FC:1D0C:CF7:C974 (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

USA were stationed at barracks in Huntington hfd shire

And Wally Hammond’s cousins farmed just up the road so the story goes 86.132.14.196 (talk) 00:40, 13 July 2022 (UTC)