User talk:Johnlp/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Johnlp/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!Dunc|☺ 15:05, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket

Hi, Johnlp. I noticed your contributions to a couple of cricket articles -- just wanted to draw your attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket, a project that some of us have formed to collaboratively improve Wikipedia's cricket content. If you have an ongoing interest in editing cricket-related articles we would welcome you as a member. Cheers! --Ngb^?!? 21:04, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quiz

Your go -- Ian ≡ talk 13:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And Q46 is yours. Stephen Turner 20:50, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Good work on the recent cricket stubs - they're good reads. However, you may make to take a look at Stephen Turner's user page (see his sig) re your linkage of years. I'd suggest you linked to seasons instead, like 1896. Sam Vimes 23:17, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like I'm unexpectedly making quite a stir — I had no idea anyone even read my user page! Stephen Turner 09:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, John. Years should always be linked when they're part of a complete date — for example, 28 November 2005 — because the users' date preferences can magically convert it to 2005-11-28 or 2005 November 28. They shouldn't be linked when they're on their own without a date. Stephen Turner 12:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Counting substubs done

Hello John,

Thanks very much for expanding some of the substubs. Just a note to say I notice that Sam Vimes has put a count on the top of the list, giving the number done. Maybe when you strike one out of the list, you could update the count too. Thanks. Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:16, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Charles Eady

Hello, good work on Charles Eady, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Charles Eady? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET if you wish to review some of the different citation methods. Thanks! BRIAN0918 23:55, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wisden 1966

John, if you have the Wisden of 1966 can you please check whether the obituary of Vizzy mentions the date or place of his birth. The obituaries seem to be present in all online Wisdens except for just this one year. Thanks, Tintin 04:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John. Interesting to see that Wisden praises Vizzy in his handling of the Amarnath affair and does not mention about his mismanagement of the 1936 tour. Tintin 20:47, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The cricinfo site seems to have the tour report. I noted these lines : but he could not alone be held responsible for the limited success of the side. Cricket is essentially a team game, and in a band of players divided amongst themselves the will to pull together was not often apparent. I wonder who else Wisden holds responsible. Maybe Nayudu. Nayudu had created many enemies but the modern view seems hold Vizzy as the main culprit. We should write an article - The Lala Amarnath Affair - on it sometime ! Tintin 21:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for bugging you again. I would like to know Vizzy's DOB according to the Births and deaths of cricketers. Does it mention his place of birth too ? I am out of town and don't have access to a Wisden. Thanks. Tintin 16:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I also put through a long distance call to check the yearbook of Association of Cricket Statisticians and Scorers of India (ACSSI). Now there is a third version - according to its 1989/90 edition, Vizzy was born on Dec 28 but in Vizianagram. That article is turning out to be a mass of confusion - there is no certainity about where he was born, his DOB, the spelling of his name, what his proper title is, or what post he held in independent India ! Tintin 18:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh. I completely missed it that it is his birth centenary ! Tintin 18:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you remember that I had asked about Wisden spelling his name as 'Sir Gajapat*a*iraj', the extra 'a' skews up the meaning of his name. I had posted a query in Wikipedia:Reference_desk_archive/Miscellaneous/February_2006#Knights. Somebody found the entry in London Gazette of July 21, 1936 which spell the name without the 'a'. So Wisden must have made a typo and everyone else copied it blindly. No big deal, but still gives some satisfaction. Tintin (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More sub-stubs

Thanks for the warning. I think. Maybe one of us could ask the Cricket Bot to do another scan of the list of cricketers over New Year. Sam Vimes 17:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try and get round to it later this week. Thanks for pointing it out. Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Nourse

John, I have added a couple of comments in the talk page of Nourse. Can you please take a look at it. Tintin Talk 19:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. I am away from home at the moment and have only a couple of books on Indian cricket with me at the moment. I have Dudley Nourse's autobiography Cricket in the blood and one or two such other books which I'll check when I get back in a few weeks. Tintin Talk 15:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had an opportunity to glance through Cricket in the blood and a book on SAF fcc but could not find anything useful. It was this search that led to Q.181 ! Tintin (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridgeshire CCC

Sorry, I should have left Wardle in so I've restored him. I can't agree with Jeeps being in as the article is about the cricket club. I've been looking at some of the top players from the old first-class club and I'll be starting stubs for them soon. I started a stub for Thomas Hayward because of the ambiguity with his nephew. All the best. --Jack 15:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now that's a good idea (i.e., famous people who also played cricket) and it could be enhanced by including cricket references in literature: for example, Raffles, Pickwick, Flashman, Master & Commander (although they got the period completely wrong!), Greyfriars School, Delderfield, Charters & Caldicott, etc. are just a few that spring to mind. --Jack 10:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Substubs

Yep. Though there's one good thing with it; Paul's aim to make infoboxes on all the Test cricketers means we'll not be slaves of our New Zealand friend's systemic bias. :) Sam Vimes 22:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Len Braund

Hey Johnlp. No problem. I was just doing some Recent Change Patrol and I saw the article with the extra line. I looks good! Gadig 00:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket Project

well pointed out, my apologies. Batman2005 22:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

Thanks, must have been close to 2000, wouldn't surprise me if one or two slipped through the net though. Anyway, have started on ODI only players, should only be a hundred or so of them --Paul 17:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Award

Johnlp, I hereby award you the oldest cricket bat in recognition of your contributions to WikiProject Cricket and in particular your invaluable work on substubs.

Regards -- Ian ≡ talk 00:46, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C. Ramaswami

John, I would like some help re. Cota Ramaswami in Wisden births and deaths. A 1993 book that I have says that Wisdens from 1988 to 1991 record him as being 'presumed dead' and that it was removed in 1992. I have Wisdens from 1991, 2004 and 2005. 1991 does mention his staus as 'presumed dead' and 2004 & 2005 as 'd. unknown'. Can you please let me how it was changed in 1992 and the edition in which 'd. unknown' first appeared.

Also, in which year did Ebrahim Maka acquire his 'd. unknown' status ? Thanks, Tintin (talk) 07:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have got enough material about Ramaswami for a long article. Tintin (talk) 10:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket stubs

Let me explain the reason for making the change: I wanted to make it easier to use the "related changes" link to see which ones had been updated recently, to see if they could be moved from the "substub" list to the "done" list. With them all on the same page, the related changes are all mixed together, and it is not much use seeing changes to the ones that are already "done". Having split them up, I noticed a few that had been expanded sufficiently to move to the "done" list (some people may expand the stubby biographies without updating the list). I hope it will make it easier to keep track in future, but I understand it makes updating the lists slightly more difficult (although it should just entail having two browser tabs or windows open at once, to cut and paste the line from one to the other, which is not all that different to cutting from one part of the file and pasting in another). Having said all that, if you are violently opposed, or it makes your life excessively difficult, please feel free to put things back where they started. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fratellis

That's what it said on the website :) Cs-wolves 22:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CRIC

Sorry - I just thought it was time to remove the templates ({{WP Cricket ODI bios}} and {{WP Cricket Test bios}}) as their raison d'être had passed, with all of the bios done. I have also added them back to the project page for the time being, but here are the links:

HTH. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hello Johnlp, and thanks for voting in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of (68/19/3). I appreciated your comments, which I hope to take on board in order to gain your respect in my work as an administrator. Best of luck in your continued editing of the encyclopedia! Sam Vimes 20:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Julien Cahn

Brookie here - as a cricket whizz can you add to/improve the above which I have started. Many thanks Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 06:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wrington vale light railway

Ok, if youre sure about the dates, ill take the note off. I dont know a lot about the line, just what ive heard. there is a comprehensive book which i will get sometime soon.

Date convention

Hello John. Actually I should apologise here as I've realised that 2005-06 does seem to be the Wiki convention, though I was previously sure it followed 2005-2006 as in Y2K convention. I agree it should be up for debate. I suppose if we have 1999-2000 no one would put 1999-00, or would they? --Jack 09:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leyland

John, do you have access to Bailey et. al's Who's who of First Class cricketers ? I think the Leyland entry in it has a mention about Chinaman. (My problem with books is always that is that most of my books are at my parents' house while the city where I work and live is some twelve hours away :-\ ). Tintin (talk) 05:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll put through a long distance call and trouble my father (who knows very little cricket) :-) Tintin (talk) 07:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/ARTICLES/PLAYERS/THE_ORIGINAL_CHINAMAN_SEP95 has an extract from The Complete Record of West Indian Cricketers. The description of the ball that got Robins is that of a left arm-unorthodox delivery (It pitched perfectly and turned nicely and Robins saw it coming back at him, he opened his legs and the ball went through) Tintin (talk) 06:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be the right thing to do. Chinaman already points to SLAU, so we may have to expand it there. It would also be better to replace RusTy's version ("What else you gunna call it"), which is hearsay, in the Leyland and SLAU articles and stick with the sources you mentioned in my takl page. IMO, it is digging up such stuff that what makes editing wikipedia real fun :-) Tintin (talk)

*Nudge* :) Tintin (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deville's RfA

File:Scarlettanager99.jpg

Hello, Johnlp, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA. The final tally was 72/1/0, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I'll be tentative with the new buttons for a while, and certainly welcome any and all feedback on how I might be able to use them to help the project. All the best, and thanks again! — Deville (Talk) 02:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

John, if you have Wisden 1916, can you please confirm that what I have said in Talk:Fuller Pilch is correct.

Re. Haygate, does any of the books mention how much time remained till the close of play when the match was abandoned ? Tintin (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More details would be better, but if we are expanding it, the section will probably need to be split into two. I checked Gerald Brodribb's Next Man In. It too attributes the appeal to Braund. While it is not mentioned in Law. 45, it seems that the fielders had to appeal to the umpire if the batsman is late and the two minutes are clocked from this point.

Brodbribb also mentions about the time left : "Here is a note made at the time taken from the Sussex scorebook : "With regard to umpire Street's decision that Heygate should not bat the time was 4 o' clock, so still 3 1/2 hours to play. Heygate was ready to play and was at the wicket when Street decided that he had exceeded two minutes he could not bat. He was ready to play and the umpire did not call "Play" " ".

It also mentions two earlier occasions when batsmen could have been timed out. In South Africans v Gloucestershire in 1894, EA Halliwell took a long time to come out (because too many wickets fell too quickly). "Grace protested at the delay and remarked that the South Africans had come here to learn the game". In Ox v Camb 1901, Oxford desperately tried to play out time. One batsman took six minutes to come out. Umpire Jim Phillips offered to give him out but the Cambridge captain refused to appeal.

The chapter on Timed out is quite long and covers many instances when batsmen or team could not turn up or missed a match. The best story is that of J.H. Parsons in Warwicks v Worcs 1931. He had forgot his spectacles at home. When the innings started well, he decided to go and fetch them. By the time he returned, Warwicks were allout and Parsons was entered in the scorebook as 'absent 0' (and in Cricketarchive as 'absent hurt'). Tintin (talk) 05:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar !

		The Running Man Barnstar
		For your excellent contributions towards cricket articles. Tintin (talk) 06:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kent photo

Hello John. I think you might be right though I don't know about Ridgway: can't recall what he looked like. But it does look like Laker's profile and, on closer examination, I think the interviewer is Bough. I assumed he was Peter West because of the cricket connection. Could it have been an International Cavaliers occasion, I wonder? I've copied this to Tintin too. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 13:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roy Ullyett

Wouldn't he be worth an article ? Was he predominantly a cricket cartoonist and did all sports ? Tintin (talk) 13:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 14 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Townsend, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Re: Captains and cricketers

Thanks for your note, John. According to WP:CG, "Articles should not usually be in both a category and its subcategory". See also this discussion. The reason is that it leads to someone being in far too many categories. However, there is some dispute about exactly when it is appropriate to be in both a category and a subcategory, and this may be one of the exceptions, because the number of Leics captains is small compared to the total number of Leics cricketers. If you think it's useful to put them back, I won't object. (But I think we've agreed that Category:English cricketers shouldn't be there if someone is also in Category:English Test cricketers).

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I'm happy for you to revert them. It makes sense for all Leics cricketers to be together in Category:Leicestershire cricketers, even if they are already also included in that category by virtue of being in its subcategories. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandham

(1) Sandham's obit says that these matches were classified as Tests only at a later date: at the time they were called Representative matches and in fact only one of the English team played in the Tests in England in the following summer. Do you know when the 1929-30 Tests were given Test status ?

(2) Is it okay to expand your sandbox to include other trivia ? I was wondering about adding a section on murdered cricketers. Tintin (talk) 10:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added five names. I hadn't known about Harvey-Walker. This was inspired by the Benny Green's introduction to Wisden Book of Cricketers Lives :-) Tintin (talk) 06:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do accidental deaths like that of David Hookes qualify ? Tintin (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Talk:Rashid Patel, do you have any reports from that time (excluding Wisden) which mention about the incident ? Tintin (talk) 05:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. The ICC's page too mentions this date but it contradicts the condition that there should be a governing body. There is no certainity about anything in early Indian cricket. BCCI was supposedly formed in Dec 1928 but no one knows the date *sigh*

Btw, I suppose you have seen this. Martin Williamson is known to visit wikipedia regularly and I wonder whether our attempts at murder inspired it ! Tintin (talk) 14:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is the best circumstantial evidence that we have yet supporting 1929. Tintin (talk) 06:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidated the discussions at User_talk:Tintin1107#India_in_ICC. I found four more references [1], two mention 1926, the others 1929 ! How are we going to solve this !? Tintin (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 20 September, 2006, a fact from the article Slovenian cricket team, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 19:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the nomination of the article, which I created! Andrew nixon 10:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worcestershire cricket bios

Just a little note to say that I'm most flattered to be described as "one splendid editor"! If you've been keeping an eye on my progress, you might have seen that it's stopped recently. There's nothing sinister behind that: it's just that in collaboration with another editor (Dar2020) I'm having a real go at getting Graeme Hick into a much better article. I certainly intend to return to writing more Worcestershire bios once the Hick article is done. As for the stub problem, I shall comment on the Stub sorting page, of course. Loganberry (Talk) 20:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind reply; I'm glad that the Tasker article's existence is to your satisfaction! My main source for these obscure cricketers is CricketArchive, as I find it much easier to navigate than Cricinfo for this sort of thing; I get a name from the Worcestershire subsite there, then type said name into the "Player Oracle" box and see what comes up. I then like to look around for little details which might be of interest to readers, in Tasker's case these being that he never got a chance to bat because Worcs declared twice, and that his only dismissal was of a future notable Test player.

Of course just using these sources I'm not going to find out much about their (perhaps more significant) lives outside cricket, since most of them won't have a Wisden obituary. The only exceptions are in cases such as Reginald Brinton where I have some local knowledge anyway and know where to look. Finally, as regards what I do next...! At the current rate I'll be finished with Worcs sometime in 2008, but as I don't have that attachment to any other county I don't know where I'll go. I might well end up running through my Who's Who in World Cricket (Roy Webber, 1952), which as one of those "potted biography" books is ideal as a reference for Wikipedia articles. Loganberry (Talk) 22:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May West (not the film star)

Gosh, do I feel stupid. Thanks for picking that up. --Dweller 11:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol That's hilarious. Almost worth a DYK! ;-) --Dweller 08:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somerset(shire) Coal Canal

Hi, Thanks for your message - you obviously have lots of info on the SCC. Please feel free to edit, particularly about Benjamin Outram. I've read about the inclined plane temporary solution & would like to add more on that. A lot of the info I'm using is from SCC Society & the lectures at the Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution. I visited Combe Hay this morning to take some pics. I noticed from your page that you are a biography expert - would you fancy doing something on Robert Weldon ?— Rod ^talk 21:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Gibson

Thanks for your improvements to the article. Its good to find someone who is evidently another Gibson admirer. :) JH 19:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I was never fortunate enough to meet Alan Gibson, but he is my all time favourite cricket commentator - even above Arlott - and one of my favourite writers. I haven't read "A Mingled Yarn", but greatly enjoyed his "Growing Up with Cricket" and "The Cricket Captains of England". JH 08:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wisden Book of Cricketers Lives

Wisden_Cricketers'_Almanack#Indexes_and_Anthologies talks about "Wisden Book of Obituaries" edited by Benny Green. There are also a few mentions online about this book.

The same book that I have is called Wisden Book of Cricketers' Lives. Did Wisden publish the book under two different titles - perhaps because WBO is too morbid (as Frith's "By his own hand" was changed to "Silence of the heart"), or is WBO a title used only for convenience as it is more descriptive of the contents. Tintin (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Are you back to editing normally now ? Tintin (talk) 11:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I read somewhere (probably Daily Telegraph's "Chronicle of cricket") that the Sandham's Test was intended to be a fixed-time match, but it was decided in the middle of the Test to make it timeless. Tintin (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Sandham's Test: was there something in the test match rules then about games being played to a finish when they were the deciding matches of a series? There's something in the back of my brain that says this, but maybe I'm fantasising. I'm not really back yet: 16-hour working days in real life don't leave much time for fun things at present. Johnlp 08:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

We once discussed it WP:CRIC. According to a Rowland Bowen article in Wisden, this rule was introduced in England in 1905 for the Ashes series, but was not needed that year. The Oval matches in 1912, 1926, 1930, 1934 and 1938 were all timeless. Kingston 1929-30 and Durban 1938-39 seem to be only ones in WI and SA. Tintin (talk) 16:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Championship table and leading players per season

Hello again John. I think your table is fine and it's just the sort of thing I wanted to do long term after I've created all the basic articles. I agree with you that five leading batsmen and bowlers is a good number. I'm only using one at present so that I can quickly create the article without too much lookup but I do intend to add more in due course. Keep up the good work. Best regards. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 19:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another question about a book

John, there is a book by Robert Brooke published in the late 1980s which is collection of his columns in The Cricketer (or is it Wisden Cricket Monthly ? ) Do you have that one ? Tintin (talk) 13:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:) JH 19:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is for updating the article on Rajinder Goel that someone created yesterday. According to the conventional figures (which appears in Indian cricket and the other Indian media), Goel took 640 wickets in Ranji trophy (a record by some margin). When this topic came up a few years back in the discussion forum that I once mailed you about, one person (who is no longer around) mentioned that according to the Brooke book (which is a compilation of the Cktr columns), Goel's tally is 636. I am trying to find out whether it said anything more - season by season break-up or something. It must have appeared between January & May 1985. As if this not enough, the wickets in Cricketarchive add up to 637 ( Delhi + Haryana + Patiala + Southern Punjab ). Tintin (talk) 18:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Human

Inhumanity undone. You're right and I've reinstated him. ;-) --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 21:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mushtaq Mohammad

The lead now says that he was "one of the first bat-twirlers in the middle." This line has come from the CI article. Was this a notable or noticeable characteristic of his batting style to be worth a mention in the intro ? Tintin (talk) 15:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, I have made some changes. When you are free, can you please add something about his time in Northamptonshire. CMJ hints at some controversy that led to his resignation but does not elaborate on it. Tintin (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Tintin (talk) 11:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]