User talk:Stephen Turner/archive3

Donald Bradman

Donald Bradman's is this fortnight's cricket collaboration. Thank you for voting for it. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:30, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Conrad Hunte

Sorry. That was my only addition and won't be making any more changes now. Tintin 11:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Bacher

Just when you think we've got all the big names covered! The gaps we have in this project never cease to amaze me. -- Ian ≡ talk 13:05, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtual Scoring

Hmmm. Actually, Jack has added some text to the article since my original vote, and now I do think a Keep is appropriate. However, I still have concerns about the lack of an independently verifiable and specific source. I've rewritten my vote based on this; hopefully it's somewhat clearer now. Loganberry (Talk) 22:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket image sources

Hi Stephen the photos are from a website I run at www.upminstercc.co.uk that were taken by one of the members. I have added the relevant copyright notice to the images. Hopefully they are all ok now, if there are any problems can you let me know? Kevin (kroome111)

CSD I4 tagging

While you are of course free to do as you wish, I would ask you not to tag images just for falling under CSD I4; we are working through this category as fast as we can, so there's no need to put them into the Speedy list as well. What would be very helpful is for you to go through and warn uploaders, and properly tag the incorrectly tagged ones. Here's a short list, but there are lots more: Image:Iacar.gif, Image:JUSTICE PAPERBOY.jpg, Image:Jerryoverbeck.jpg, Image:Joemoorekhon.jpg, Image:John alexander martin.jpeg, Image:John23tiara.jpg. Thanks! JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:14, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

My main concern here is to clear up Category:Unverified cricket images, which I've been working on for some time. Stephen Turner 10:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ODI reords

Yeah my calendar was wrong !! I was updating per cricinfo which must have gotten updated after my edit -- Ian ≡ talk 09:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cricketer biographies

Stephen Turner said: Hi Bobo192,

It's really great to see you creating so many new cricketer articles. I had no idea how much you were doing until I made this list of recent updates to cricketers.

Can I encourage you to put your new articles in (for example) Category:West Indian test cricketers and Category:West Indian ODI cricketers not just Category:West Indian cricketers? That's because this little box is calculated by counting the number in each category.

Thanks!

Yeah, I'm pretty heavy into my cricketing statistics in general, having stolen.. I mean, borrowed.. all of my brother's old Wisdens from years gone by.

The categorization I was planning to do next. In terms of, going through the whole category of cricket bio stubs, rather than doing them as I go along. My work is much more methodical that way. This task will certainly get done.

Hey, if you feel you could help me on some of the more obscure names, particularly of the Pakistani cricketers or those from the non-test playing nations, that would be awesome. I'm going to start on the categorization as soon as I actually work out which of the cricketers did or did not take part in tests, so this is something which I'm planning to do very soon.

Thank you for your interest - I wonder now whether I could be of any assistance down at the cricket WikiProject or whether there were any other tasks need doing? I've got some stats that may be necessary if we want infoboxes completed? Thank you. Bobo192|Edits 17:45, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Turner said: Thanks for your reply, Bobo192. I think the lists of Test cricketers for each country, e.g., List of English Test cricketers, are accurate as to who's played Test cricket and what the usual spelling of their name is. As well as being a good supply of redlinks! :-) For stats, I think most of us tend to use Cricinfo.

Of course, we always welcome more help over at WikiProject Cricket. Feel free to add your name to the list of participants. One of our main aims is making a biography of every Test cricketer, so we're really grateful for your contribution already. On the project talk page there's a list of particularly notable cricketers without an article.

I was hoping cricinfo would be useful to us. I'll have a gander through the redlinks and see which ones I can add and which ones I'm going to be able to add, and which ones I may have a problem doing. There's no problem, after all, in just adding contexted figures, as long as they are indeed put into context on the page. Looks like a pretty sweet list we've got going on there, so I'll go and take my pick.

Come to think of it.. your list is much better. I'll sort through.

The next question of course, shall we do things about cricketers who have never played in an international match? Let's apply the same standards, after all, that we do to our soccer players. Let me know what you think and I'll see if I can get any squad lists up. Bobo192|Edits 18:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Turner said:On the subject of cricketers who haven't played any international matches, we do have some stats infoboxes that are suitable for them. They're listed on WP:Cricket. I'm not sure if there's anything else you want to know about such cricketers, but if they're is, maybe Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Cricket is the best place to get people's opinions.

Cool. I'll see what I can get done this evening, I'm definitely going to put my name down to join the group, and I'll attempt to collect some statistics. Bobo192|Edits 18:55, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket box -er you know what I mean

Yes, most of the cricket articles are so good I usually cancel the edit. I also made a change to search and replace some time ago, to ignore dates immediately preceded by an "=" sign, I can then override by inserting a space between the = and the date. However I've had a better idea...
In the round, I'm making a few uncorrected mistakes, but out of many thousand edits, and improving all the time. Quotes are hard, and can only be checked by inspection, (and sometimes the "quote" is a translated, in which case the wikifining is the right thing to do), but I can certainly exclude lines starting with ":".
Incidentally, beause of wikilag, I do a bunch of pages, check them, then the next bunch, arguably the checking is the weakest point of the process, and the better the rest, the weaker the checking gets. Also worth noting, the main part of wikifying dates is almost done.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough 14:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quiz

Q8 is all yours - Ian ≡ talk 01:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So is Q10 - Da Gizza ^{Chat (c)} 08:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your turn again. Tintin 21:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of cricketers

Hmmm. I didn't realise that. I updated both lists yesterday, but shall do it for only the right one. Thanks. Tintin 14:31, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket merge bot broken

Hello, AllyUnion. Your cricket merge bot failed to merge the individual articles into the various tournaments and various team pages, so the pages for each tournament and team are now broken. (See for example Cheltenham & Gloucester Trophy in 2005). Please mend them. Thank you. Stephen Turner 15:06, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

%#!!!#^%#^$^@^#@%@$%%#!% ... *sigh*. --AllyUnion (talk) 21:52, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it fixed now? --AllyUnion (talk) 00:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Boonie

Hi - I think the boonie photo was my first effort here taken from a misc webpage somewhere, and as such probably is copyrighted. I'm a rush, so free to change the tag and remove it. Thanks Jgritz 22:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Test

Can you change your bot or script or self so that it/you alters test to [[Test Cricket|Test]], not [[Test]]? Might as well disambiguate at the same time. Morwen - [[User_talk:Morwen|Talk]] 11:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bots

There is some bureaucratic stuff to get through before running bots - Wikipedia:Bots. Please make sure that you don't run into trouble later. Tintin 11:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Proper format for initials in the article title, and redirections. Tintin 14:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Names removed from Selected alumni of the University of Cambridge

Of the most recent removals from University of Cambridge, the only one I would argue about would be Thomas Young, of Young's slits fame, as his experiment is taught to almost every school child. Perhaps Babbage could be removed instead -- he does not form a significant part of school curriculae and there are no major physical laws or experiments named after him. However, I understand that you have to draw the line somewhere, so I will leave the list for the moment! Rnt20 11:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For considerable legwork...

For working tirelessly on copyright problems, bot programming and other tiresome tasks, I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. Thanks for your work! Sam Vimes 16:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Sam. I'm honoured. Stephen Turner 17:37, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kiran More

Dear Mr Turner:

Thank you for your advice on my article on Kiran More. I had in fact attached a link to the article from the source.

Similarly, the article on Vishwamitri River. You have put a copyright notice on it. If you have noticed, here too I have displayed clearly the source of the article and acknowledged it. Is acknowledgement not sufficient ? I belive that nowhere on the web is such detailed information about Vishwamitri available. And coming from the City of Vadodara through which the river flows, I did feel that the information on the website the source of which I have acknoledged as CROCODILE SPECIALIST GROUP NEWSLETTER vol. 21, no. 3, July-Sept 2002, pp. 9-10— WWW Edition http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/natsci/HERPETOLOGY/NEWSLETTER/news213p9-10.htm is such that the people who refer to Wikipedia should know about. There are not many rivers which pass through a heavily inhabited place have as many as 70 crocodiles. And mind you, in the last 40 years I have lived in this city, there is not a single instance of a crocodile harming a human being.

I am not a researcher on herpetology and I would not be in a position to write about the facts which I thought Wikipedia ought to have and I thought acknowledgement of the source of the article is sufficient compliance with copyright laws. If not ....... my apologies go to the CROCODILE SPECIALIST GROUP who had published this article.

I again thank you for the advice.

Subhash Bhagwat, Vadodara, India

linking years

Stephen, re [1]. I'm guilty as charged and promise to do it no more. -- Ian ≡ talk 17:05, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me too. I was always under the impression that it was the convention to link the years. Tintin 17:51, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries guys! I realise most people do it. It's just something that bugs me. Stephen Turner 20:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suffice to say that WP:Cricket editors have plenty of time on their hands and therefore read everything they can come across. ;) I still don't see any problems with season links the way Loganberry started to do, though - hope the MoS doesn't mind that? Sam Vimes 10:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think season links are fine in principle because they do point to something useful — although I'm also not sure anyone would click on them, because they won't realise they're not just the normal useless year links. Stephen Turner 10:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to stop doing year links and I'll go back to some of my more recent edits to remove them. Should we also scrap the year links on birth and death dates in bios, do you think? Johnlp 00:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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 12:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I am sorry for doing this, I just thought people might want the date linked so they just would not want to have to type it in. My bad, I will just start doing years on the full dates now. Sorry. - Super Mario

Hey, I been looking around Wikipedia and noticed that a lot of articles have this so-called problem. Not being mean, but what is so bad about having the years medialinked? I know you don't like it but the years need it because it provides a good link. I won't continue if you don't want me too, but I would perfer to keep doing this for myself. Thank you. - Super Mario

Thanks for your reply. You're right that it's common, but it's still wrong according to the Manual of Style. Links should only be included if they're useful to the user: too many links are distracting. It's not useful to link every possible word when there's no doubt about its meaning. So, to take a cricket example, if you write "He played his first Test match in 1928", it's useful to link "Test match" because people might not know what a Test match is and might want to follow the link to look it up. But it's not useful to link 1928 because everyone knows when 1928 was, so the link doesn't help anyone.

But you don't have to take my word for it. This is explained in detail in Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links).

Thanks, Stephen Turner 09:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vikram2784's pictures

Oh, and while I'm here - User:Vikram2784 have uploaded a couple of pics you might like to take a look at (Image:Sourav.JPG, and Image:31yuvraj.jpg). The latter is a definite copyvio, I'm suspecting the former is as well. Sam Vimes 10:17, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Make that three...Image:Dravid.jpg Sam Vimes 10:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After ignoring several messages on his user page, he's now replied to me by email saying that he will stop uploading pictures. Stephen Turner 12:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of cricket topics

Stephen,

Would cricketbot be able to generate a list of cricket related articles which aren't recorded in List of cricket topics? I suppose the hard bit is defining what is a "cricket article". It would exclude cricket bio's, but (could) include anything else with a category with the word "cricket" in it. I'm open to other suggestions though. -- Ian ≡ talk 12:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion, Ian. The problem, as you imply, is how to define what is included. Going through the cricket categories might be a good start though. That would be very easy, and I'd be happy to do it, if we have a list of those categories somewhere. But I don't know how to generate the list of categories automatically. Stephen Turner 13:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is Category:Cricket which has sub-categories and articles. Would it help if I did up a list of categories? -- Ian ≡ talk 01:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rush! It was just one of those things on my list of things to do. :) -- Ian ≡ talk 13:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]