User talk:GRMule/Archive 2

Unterseeboot 402

Thank you for the kind words about my new article. Thewellman (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

deleted artilce

Hello, the article that you have put up for deletion is notable under the cricket criteria of having to have played at least one first class or list A game. This player fulfills the criteria so could you please remove the tag. Thanks. ps. I do not think that it will be able to get any bigger due to length of career. 02blythed (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are stubs, at best, and are more appropriate to a list, if at all. Have you ever been to an AfD over these article fragments? -- Forridean^(T/C) 03:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please remove the tag from the second article you have put up for deletion for same reasons as above. 02blythed (talk) 03:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you answer my question? I disagree that they are notable, do you have a link to the place where you got this: "notable under the cricket criteria of having to have played at least one first class or list A game". I am not familiar with that notability criteria. -- Forridean^(T/C) 03:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CRIN#Notability_criteria_guideline_for_article_inclusion follow this link to the criteria.02blythed (talk) 03:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)\[reply]

I understand that it will take you time to read through the criteria but there are a number of artcles on wikipedia that are of similar length. The article confers notablity i.e. has played at least one first class game which both of them have. They both are referenced to reliable sources. Both have a few sentances that may be important to readers for reference. I am starting to create players that would not be created otherwise to try and bulid up the numbers of cricket biographies of non international cricketers. One of my articles has already been put up for deletion but it was demmed notable. The wikiproject cricket members advised me to expand the articles I have created with date of birth/death, who they played for etc. If you look on the cricket talk page you can see it. I hope you do not delete the articles once you have read the criteria. Thanks. 02blythed (talk) 04:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that caught my eye was this:

"Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion."

What do you think of creating articles for the teams by year, rather than a whole article to list the stats of guys whose careers consist of one or two matches? Is this something you'd be willing to discuss over on the cricket talk page? If so, I can pull those SD templates and we can head over there and hash it out. I see that these two articles do indeed meet the guidelines established by the cricket project. That said, my contention no longer lies with your articles specifically, but the guideline itself. -- Forridean^(T/C) 04:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, looks like we were too long in discussion, an administrator appears to have deleted the page. I'm still willing to have this discussion on the cricket boards, maybe if we can get some better guidelines in place, or a plan to handle these players better, we can create a better medium to include these players in Wikipedia. Game? -- Forridean^(T/C) 04:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have saved on my computer all the code or whatever it is called so if they were both deemed ok then it would take two mins to create again. I am game to discuss at wikiproject cricket. I will start the discussion once finish this message and will state my opinion. I do not know where in the world you are but it is 5.30am here so once done that i will not talk to you again untill tomorrow evening. Thanks.02blythed (talk) 04:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the states on the East coast, but there's no hurry. I started a discussion about it, if I see yours come in after mine, I'll merge them together. -- Forridean^(T/C) 04:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]