User talk:Stephen Turner/archive6

Thanks for the edit

Hi stephen! Sorry about the Gopal Bose article. My data was totally fried. Anyway I wanted to ask if we can use statistics from cricinfo, why cant we use their articles & cite them like we do for the stats? I mean sure it will be great if someone writes a new article but till then cant we keep the cricinfo one? Srikeit 17:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately we can't use it. Copyright doesn't protect plain facts, and the statistics fall into that category, so we're fine to use them. We could have got the same data anywhere, and we only have to credit Cricinfo so that we have cited our sources and other Wikipedia readers can check that it's true.

Copyright does protect words and images, however, and we certainly can't copy their articles or pictures. However, we can read their articles, learn about the cricketer, and then describe his career in our own words. We would then give a credit to Cricinfo, but the important thing is that it is in our own words, not theirs.

I hope that helps to explain it.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

For patiently correcting goof-ups by newcomers like me & making major contributions & maintaining the cricket Project. I, Srikeit hereby award you this barnstar. Keep up the good work! Srikeit 06:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism & Dicey Info in the Chappell article

"This Greg Chappell article is under attack. First some IP address writes about how chappell playing politics helped kick ganguly off the team & now some other IP address writes about how much chappell earns without any citation. I seriously doubt the authenticity of that info. Can you please check it out."

Also can you please check out the Sourav Ganguly article. I have made a few deletions to it to try & get it to NPOV. I would like to know your opinion about it.

Thanks Srikeit 18:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, Srikeit. I must admit that I haven't really been keeping up with the Indian cricket articles. That's partly because I can't keep up with the politics in Indian cricket, so I don't know what's true and what's not. But it's also partly because it's so difficult to keep people from pushing their own POV in the articles. The Indian and Pakistani biographies both seem to be constantly edited by people who think that the player is the best ever, or else the worst ever, player in the history of the game. It seems impossible to find someone with a balanced view.

If you want to be bold with these articles, go ahead! They're really quite poor at the moment, and it needs someone to do it. But please realise that you will need to keep monitoring them afterwards, to stop them getting worse again.

PS Why not sign up as a WikiProject Cricket participant? And come and join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket. You can get other people to give opinions on specific articles there too.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Sorry about the Images. I did not know about the fair use clause. Anyway what kind of permission should I get to publish these images on Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srikeit (talk • contribs)

In principle, you would need to get permission from the newspaper, or perhaps from the photo agency that the newspaper had got the photo from. But you'd be unlikely to get permission. (If it was easier to get photos, we would have a lot more photos of cricketers. It's not that we don't want photos in the articles! It's that it's very difficult to get truly "free" ones). Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I happen to know some people at the newspaper, including the editor. Do we require a written permisson? Srikeit 10:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great! Written permission (even an email) would certainly be best, just so that we have a record of exactly what permission was granted. Make sure that the newspaper has the rights to the photo though — sometimes they use library pictures from photo agencies, and then we would have to get permission from the photo agency not the newspaper, because the newspaper only has permission to use it in their own publication. Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Trescothick

I note you reverted a mention of Marcus Trescothick's return home from India on the grounds that it wasn't really that significant in terms of his whole career. I'm mildly surprised, having visited the article specifically to see how this issue had been covered, but as it's still an ongoing thing I can understand it, and I have no intention of editing it back in.

My question to you, though, is at what point you think it would be sensible to include it. Clearly if Trescothick never gets back into the England team and his international career ends because of this, that would be notable enough for a mention - but let's say he's back playing Tests in the summer. Personally I'm inclined to feel that a vice-captain's absence from an entire major tour - for any reason - is quite notable in itself; where do you think the line should be drawn? Loganberry (Talk) 02:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Loganberry,

Thanks for your note. I may have erred by reverting that edit. In my defence, at the time I did, it was immediately after he had left the tour, and there was no indication how long he was going to be away. I also felt that it was out of proportion to the rest of the article (which doesn't have much recent stuff at all). And finally, I thought it was distasteful to put it in the sentence next to his wife, which seemed to prejudge what the unknown personal issue was.

I think one of the weakest things about Wikipedia is the way that news stories instantly get added to people's articles with no sense of perspective as to their true importance, mistaking immediacy for importance, and way out of proportion to the rest of the article. However, this one probably has proved important enough that something should be included.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed about the second point, and I know I've done that myself on occasion (on the Peter Chingoka article, for example). Also agreed that the juxtaposition of the "personal problems" bit with the bit about his wife was a bit off. And yes, had he been back in time for the first Test it would have been much less important.

Of course, we have no idea whether Trescothick will say anything about what's happened. If he does, then clearly we can quote him. If he doesn't, which at this point seems more likely, then it's a judgement call. Maybe put something in at the end of the series? Loganberry (Talk) 12:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship again

Stephen, Have you had a change of heart on this yet? I know that you'd make an excellent admin and would be happy to nominate you. -- Ian ≡ talk 01:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)he is very approacha[reply]

I too think having someone like stephen as admin our cricket project would benifit greatly. In addition to that he is very approachable & friendly. I too would like to request him to consider running for that position.

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 01:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking me again, Ian, and thanks for your kind comments too, Srikeit. I do appreciate being asked, but I'm afraid my view hasn't changed since last time. I just can't afford to spend any more time on Wikipedia at the moment. Sorry!

Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. I totally understand where your coming from. I'll leave you alone now! -- Ian ≡ talk 13:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date links proposal

Hi,

You contributed to a previous debate about date links. You may wish to see the proposal at: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#linking_of_dates. Thanks. bobblewik 08:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WCOTF

Hi Stephen, I was looking at India collaboration of the week when I found the tiny link to WCOTF. I did'nt even know it existed! Anyway now seems like a good time to revive that (heaven knows some of our cricket articles need to become FA). We now have many new users who look like good contributers. So what do you think about it?

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 07:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note, Srikeit. You can try and drum up support on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket. I just know that it died rather quickly last time, so I'm not sure whether there's enough enthusiasm for it.

Speaking for myself, I'm much more interested in writing two or three paragraphs about something that has only one sentence, rather than raising a good article to featured status. And in fact, I rarely have time even to do that: I tend to spend most of my time checking Recent Changes and making sure that bad edits get reverted quickly. That's not to say that COTF is not a worthwhile project, on the contrary I think it's a very good thing, but it's not my personal priority.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tendulkar

I have removed the contentious line from the achievement list and moved it into the description part, with added remarks. I presume that the NPOV issue is settled (for the golden arm point) More details in the Articles' talk page

Tell about the other issues in Cricket and we can sort one by one

And if you find me done something wrong, do correct me immediately Doctor Bruno 21:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

500!

Hi Stephen! I just completed 500 edits in Wikipedia. I owe it all to guys like you who have helped me & kept me motivated enough to reach this target. I would like to award you this Wikicookie.

Thanks

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 01:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

I hope you noticed 10KTT's user page too. Tintin (talk) 11:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I completely missed that, actually. Thanks for pointing it out. Not that it makes a difference to the AfD: I'm happy to nominate the article for deletion on its own merits — or rather, demerits. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A request for CricketBot

Hi Stephen, I'm not sure how difficult it would be but is it possible for the bot to update the current player infoboxes after they played a match. I am no techno expert and I have a feeling it may be too hard for a bot to collect data from Cricinfo and then update the statistics on the cricketers' articles. Please tell me it is possible or not. Thanks Gizza^Chat ^© 08:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, DaGizza. I wonder if *Paul* has a way to do it more easily. He updates all the pages like List of English Test cricketers and List of Test cricket records after each match. I assume he does it automatically, in which case maybe he could do the infoboxes at the same time? Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OMG

I have only just realised that you are sret1... -- ALoan (Talk) 13:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I should have realised ages ago, but never added up two and two. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SRT

Since you reverted my edit (actually a two-minute copy-paste job from an earlier version of the article), why don't you rephrase the first paragraph so it does the subject a little more justice? We are talking about the man with more Test hundreds and more ODI hundreds than anyone else ever, so I don't think statements of a negative tenor should appear in the opening paragraph. Lists are often made by people who have never played the game, and I don't see why Bradman's quote should be removed in favour of some Anglocentric ritual. 141.153.150.63 14:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it's too negative at the moment. Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is that better? Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest keeping the lead simple, without bringing in Wisden 2002 and all. It could be something like Sachin Tendulkar is an Indian cricketer who is regareded as one of the greatest batsmen in the history of the game. He holds the records for scoring most centuries in Test and one day international, or something as straightforward. Similarly, the second and third lines in the Don Bradman intro reads Among those who have a meaningful Test match batting average through batting in more than 20 innings, his figure of 99.94 is over 63% higher than that achieved by any other cricketer. Next among those who have batted in more than 20 innings is South African Graeme Pollock with an average of 60.97. The issues of the averages could have been handled somewhere inside the article. Tintin (talk) 14:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Benson

It's a bit long for a stub. Is there an awful lot more that needs to be said? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, Mel. I think it's still a stub. I realise people have different thresholds for stub-ness, but it has essentially nothing on his playing career, for a start. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so; I was only thinking about his international career (and I don't recall that he did an article's worth in those two natches), but there's his county career, too. Sorry. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lists

Thanks for updating List of ODI cricketers, List of Test cricketers, etc. I had added "see also" to List of women cricketers, which your update has unfortunately wiped out, although it was kept in the update of List of cricketers. Given that we don't have separate lists for the women yet, I've added the links back because I think they are helpful. ISTR that the updates were being done by a bot - does it need to be amended to keep the link? -- ALoan (Talk) 18:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I'll correct the bot, but I'm actually not sure the lists are worth keeping at all: see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket#List of Test cricketers and List of ODI cricketers. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your health

Hello Stephen. Get well soon. Regards,ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 01:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blnguyen, thanks for your get well message! Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will Jefferson

Hi Stephen, Thanks for rewriting the Will Jefferson article. It looks much better now. One note though, the link to Richard Jefferson, his father, went to a different Richard Jefferson; so I have changed this and set up an article on Richard Ingleby Jefferson. This may need someone to do a bit of tweaking as well! Regards, Rrsmac.

Thanks for your message, and thanks for writing the article on his father. Putting it at Richard Ingleby Jefferson is fine; another option which we more often use is to put it at Richard Jefferson (cricketer), but what you did is fine too. If you go to Richard Jefferson, you'll see I put a diambiguation link at the top, redirecting people to your article.

One last thing: the easiest way to sign your name on talk pages is just to put four tildes in a row, like this: ~~~~. That inserts your signature together with the date and time.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will Jefferson featured on Did You Know?

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Will Jefferson, which you recently created, 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.

I didn't actually create it originally, Rrsmac did. I'll copy the notice to his page. Stephen Turner (Talk) 19:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

St. Lawrence Ground

O.K., I won't contest that - but I've always understood that full stops are uniformly used for all abbreviations (I would, for instance, write "Dr."). I may well be wrong about this though Sikandarji 10:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Have a look at American and British English differences#Punctuation for a reference to this convention. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Thanks

Hi Stephen, Thank you for the barnstar! I must say that it is my best barnstar so far as it is from the person who helped me a lot when I was a newbie. Thanks again & see you around.

Cheers

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 19:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hashim Amla

Can you please comment on Talk:Hashim_Amla. IMO, it is better to replace the article with a one or two line stub. Tintin (talk) 17:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]