User talk:Stephen Turner/archive5

Cricket substubs

My threshold would be - if I was writing the article from scratch, is there anything I'd want to keep. For the Andre Nel one, I would want to keep the categories - although I admit this is at the limits of what I'd keep. Like you, I'm perplexed as to why someone would want to add all these substubs without creating an account and signing up for WP:Cricket. The guy's clearly interested in the game and, if he signed up and listened to the views of others on WP:Cricket, he could be an asset, jguk 13:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linking years

There is a poll happening at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) that you may be interested in. Tintin Talk 18:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Deletion

I understand the vanity page removal, that was acutally created in the wrong area by me, in a moment of confusion, but why was the band page deleted? There was nothing but factual information in the page that I spent some time putting together, and that band is mentioned in a few different articles. In an attempt to create a more detailed better relation between bands and new genres. There is nothing to gain here, especially since this band has been dead for a couple of years. I was just trying to help fill in some wholes in a couple of articles. Had I not put a list of members in there, the page would not have been deleted, correct? C'mon! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwyrick (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your reply. About the band: there are criteria for bands to be considered notable enough to be listed on Wikipedia at WP:MUSIC. Does your band meet them? If so, then I was wrong to list it for deletion and I apologise. (However, even though it's not a cause for deletion, it's still frowned upon to create articles about your own endeavours, as explained at WP:AUTO).

PS On talk pages, it's traditional to sign and date your contibutions. You can do that by typing just ~~~~. It comes out like this:

Stephen Turner (Talk) 20:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. The band I was editing meets two of the criteria for notability. The international tour and the Music Media one. I will re-create the page later.

Thanks again. I realize it is frowned upon to create pages regarding things you where involved in, but I thought I would get it started.

Thanks.

Brianwyrick 21:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hi Stephen! I'm thinking of nominating you as an admin. Would you be willing to take up this additional responsibility? Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nichalp,

Thank you for your message. First, I'm honoured that you would consider me worthy. However, I don't think I can accept at the moment, simply because I'm already spending more time on Wikipedia than I should. Much as I would welcome the extra tools, I also see adminship as carrying an obligation to help out with the necessary administrative chores. I don't think it would be right to become an admin and then leave the work to others, only using the extra power for my own purposes occasionally. I'm not ruling it out for ever, but I don't think I can devote time to being an active administrator at the moment.

Thank you again for asking me. I do appreciate it.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but I wish we had more people like you as admins. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

20 Wickets to win a Test?

Australia have now 'bettered' if you could call it that, the West Indies efforts. Today, the final Australia-South Africa Test was completed, Australia defeating South Africa, and taking just 15 wickets (SA:9 dec in 1st and 6 dec in 2nd). Jazzycab 11:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

15 is pretty impressive, but I wonder what the lowest ever is? I found a nine here, and an eight in Cronje's forfeit (although that shouldn't really count). Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same sort of thing, but thought it might be good for the quiz, but now it's out in the open... Jazzycab 11:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry if you wanted to keep it secret! Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't really matter, but if you find any Tests where less wickets have been taken to win the match than found so far, please notify me. Jazzycab 11:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

8 (or 9) is the winner. There's been an 11, 13 and 14 as well.--Paul 11:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I bothered Steven of 'Ask Steven' for nothing then... Jazzycab 11:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, what is the 11 ? We have talked about 8 (Cronje), 9 (Port of Spain), and 14 (Butcher). 13 happened in Port Elizabeth 1948=49. Tintin Talk 13:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bit of an odd one, Bedi "declared" at 5 for saying that no-one was left to bat --Paul 14:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is bizarre. Did the fast bowlers get them all, or what? Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gaekwad, Patel & Vishy were struck, Bedi and Chandra had hand injuries sustained whilst fielding. Apparently Bedi declared in the 1st innings as a protest of the bowling tactics Paul 14:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Venetia Burnley

You just beat me to adding the link to Venetia Burney. Gotta move fast in Wikiland to contribute, eh! Brusselsshrek 13:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cricketers

I've just removed all individuals from the category Cricketers and put them in a more appropriate sub-category. I noticed one person, Bill Allen, who seems not to be a recognised cricketer but is a dentist who happens to play cricket. For now, I have created a new sub-category, Club cricketers, but maybe there is an argument for removing from cricketers altogether. What do you think? --Portnadler 10:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, Portnadler. I'm not sure what the right answer is though. Can I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket? I'm sure some people there will have an opinion. Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image moved

Hi Stephen. Just to let you know, I moved Image:Cricketball.png to commons:Image:Cricketball.png. --Spundun 17:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

Can you please copyedit the recent changes to Vizzy. I am unfortunately not in a position to do that. Tintin (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

from User:Urshyam

Thanks Stephen, could you help me out that how can i upload an image and get a license. The language and conditions written on GNU Free Documentation is quite complex.

Thanks for your reply, Urshyam. Basically, you can only upload images where you have the permission of the photographer or the copyright holder (photo agencies etc.). For commercial images, there is no chance of getting permission, otherwise we'd have a lot more photos of cricketers than we do have! You can also use images if they are so old that copyright doesn't apply, or sometimes under fair use laws, but those laws are very complicated and much more restricted than most people think. So really it's only very old photos, or photos you took yourself. Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page name for temperature articles

To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 23:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irfan Pathan

I was reverting a change done by another user. Anyways good to know that the conversion happens based on preferences. I don't have to do that again. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 09:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Modern Cricketer

Hello, Stephen! I am stoping adding Infobox Modern Cricketer as you wish. Sorry for bothering you. But may I ask you that what would effect it on other cricketers' status by editing with new Infobox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urshyam (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your suggestions to raise an issue about this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket and we should discuss it there to make a common decision. But there are not so many cricketer yet as only 5 teams have played twenty20 matches and we can edit it gradually. Thanks, -- Shyam ^(T/C) 20:37, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image licences

Thanks Stephen. I have removed Public Domain component. Does that fix it? VirtualSteve 22:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No

Are you one of Panurge's sheep? Courier new 16:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date links

Since you have taken an interest in date links. Please be kind enough to vote for my new bot application. bobblewik 20:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]