User talk:Stephen Turner/archive7

Bot

Can you please create a list of articles that use links to cricketarchive scorecards. The links start with http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/ thanks, Tintin (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that should be easy. I assume you just want the old-format URLs?

Did the URLs change in such a way that the bot could correct them, rather than just making a list of them? I'd be happy to do that if it can be done. Or is it not possible to deduce the new URL from the old one?

Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only the old format URLs but they have been fixed so far only in a couple of articles. The new ones don't seem to have any relation with the old ones, so looks like they will have to be fixed by hand.

I sent them a mail yesterday about this and requesting that they put automatic forwards for any future changes. Got the reply that they will look at the recent changes also, but it is better for us not to expect them to do it.

PS: Please look for cricketarchive.co.uk too. Thanks, Tintin (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got a message that if we can produce the list of links, they will provide us with the new links. Tintin (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry for butting in, but I've been annoyed by this also, and that last offer is at least something. :) I suppose it's easiest if a bot goes through all the articles in the cricket categories and searches for links with cricketarchive.com and cricketarchive.co.uk in them? Sam Vimes 15:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it as soon as I can, though I'm on a business trip at the moment, and very busy. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a recurring problem - Cricinfo changed their URLs a while ago... -- ALoan (Talk) 15:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List now at User:CricketBot/CricketArchive. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have mailed it. Tintin (talk) 17:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Received an excel file with the old and new links. I have copied them to User:CricketBot/CricketArchive/New Tintin (talk) 10:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the list. Unfortunately I won't have time to deal with them for about two or three weeks, but I'll do them after that if no-one else has. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Botham

I noticed an edit summary that expresses some exasperation. Could I offer a suggestion? When something looks like a typo or vandalism, if you add a comment into the edited text, it might tend to prevent the continual correcting (maybe – no guarantees).

To do this, open the comment (not visible in the article) with  . Somthing like  . Put it either before or after the sentence so it is relevant. This might not work with bots, but manual editors would see it when they open the edit window. Happy editing.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geneb1955 (talk • contribs).

Thanks for your advice, Geneb. I'll do that if it gets changed again. And I'll try not to get exasperated too! Stephen Turner (Talk) 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Flintoff / Geoff Boycott Captaincy Succession Consistency

I added the succession box for the England captaincy. This was subsequently removed by yourself with a note 'not appropriate when not appointed permanently'. This would be fair enough except that I was only adding Flintoff to be consistent with other successions on the chain. Most notably Geoffrey Boycott who was only appointed after injury to Mike Brearley who then returned later. For consistencies sake either Geoffrey Boycott needs removing from the captaincy succession or Andrew Flintoff needs adding. My personal opinion is that the succession should be for test captains and if you captain England in a test match then you should be included.

MarcusThornton 09:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marcus, thanks for your message. I personally think it should only be the official, permanent captain, otherwise people who'd only captained England for one match while the regular captain was injured would mess up the ordering. But I suggest we discuss it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NetTracker

It actually is a log analyzer. They do provide hosted solutions, but I've been using NetTracker for 3+ years now to process our own log files with no interaction with the company. It's not a fantastic product, in my estimation, but it definitely is a log analyzer (as in, I have a log-analyzing server, to which the Apache log files are uploaded nightly, and then NetTracker creates reports from those log files. I won't revert your edit until you have a chance to respond. Regard, Kickstart70-T-C 17:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kickstart,

Thanks for your message. It was obviously my mistake to think that they didn't do pure log analysis. Although on the other hand, their emphasis as a company seems to be on hybrid solutions, as far as I can see from their website. So I have mixed views. You decide whether they should be there or not; I won't interfere again.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cricketbot

Stephen, could cricketbot give us a count of cricket biographies WITH Wikipedia:Persondata data blocks completed? Regards I@n ≡ talk 15:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will Jefferson

Hi Stephen, I have put one of the photos that I have in my files on to the Will Jefferson article, let me know of any problems. The photo that you had on there is excellent for comparison on the List of famous tall men!

kroome111 21:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CA links

In the next run, we need to catch http://www.pcboard.com.pk/Archive/Scorecards and all http://cricketarchive/Archive/Scorecards/ because the current one doesn't include http://cricketarchive/Archive/Scorecards/u and http://cricketarchive/Archive/Scorecards/misc Tintin (talk) 03:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

Stephen, good to see you back on deck. I was starting to think we'd lost you. -- I@n ≡ talk 01:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I too was afraid you had gone for good. Please stay as we can't afford to lose an extremely valuable contributor like you :). Cheers --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 01:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words, guys. I'm just lurking at the moment. I'll return some time, but at the moment I need a bit of a break. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ODI record

Oh sorry for that revert, I was never aware that the 434 was surpassed. Who did it?Blnguyen | rant-line 07:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lanka vs Netherlands yesterday.^[1] Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS - An offer to RfA you still stands. I am willing to do the nomination. There is no obligation on you to do any extra work - as there are an infinite amount of RfA spaces, and hence any more at all is a bonus. It will simply make things more convenient for you when you get a persistent vandal and you don't have to report it to an admin like myself.Blnguyen | rant-line 07:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that, but although I'm semi-back, I'm really trying to cut down on my contributions at the moment. So I don't need any shiny new tools to distract me! Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Right of Images

If an image is named as This Photo is Public on the Flickr.com [2] website, can't it be used in Wikipedia ?

Cheers

Kurun

Thanks for the reply

Hi Stephen,

Thanks a lot for the reply. I just did it because, in one of the pages, there was an image with the same copy right tags obtained from Flickr. I will try to contact the authors and get their permission. Otherwise it is OK to delete them within 7 days or even immediately.

This wont happen again and I will not upload any images into wikipedia. I think it is a very compicated matter, unless I take pictures from my own camera I wont upload any images into Wikipedia. Anyway these pictures are just places of Sri Lanka (mainly)

Cheers Kurun

Hi Kurun, thanks for your reply. You're right, copyright is a very complicated and confusing subject. But I think that "public" on the Flickr website just means that we're allowed to view them there, not that we're allowed to copy them to Wikipedia. Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have obtained permission

Hi Stephen,

I have obtained permission from one of the authors [photos]. I have an email from him as a proof. Hence now how can I change what you have added to those images ?. But after this if it was not my images, I will never upload any images.

Cheers and Best Wishes Kurun.

Thanks for your message, Kurun. Well done for obtaining permission. You should go to the image page, edit the page, and put the email from the photographer instead of the {{no license|month=July|day=31|year=2006}} part. Stephen Turner (Talk) 00:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MOSNUM

Good job defending the WP:MOSNUM. I seen that you had reverted everything after I made some changes and left comments on the talk page. I was going back to take out the don't spell numbers part! For the record, I am good with status quo ante Wai Wai. --MJCdetroit 03:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, MJC, and for supporting me on the talk page. As no-one else had commented, I was beginning to wonder if I was completely out of line. Maybe it's just that no-one else was bold enough. It's hard to be both bold and sensitive, unfortunately. Stephen Turner (Talk) 03:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: There is a very active discussion over there that you would be interested in. --MJCdetroit 19:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the pics

I see, does that include AFP and Reuters pics? because although that is a picture used on www.cricinfo.com, the actual source is the AFP, and to my knowledge such things were public domain, please let me know so I can be sure next time I do something silly :-)Pubuman 13:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, Pubuman. No, press agency photos like AFP and Reuters and Getty Images are definitely not public domain. Their whole business is based around selling those photos and they don't allow anyone to copy them without paying! A photo doesn't become public domain just because you found it on a website somewhere: only if the photographer explicitly says that it's public domain.

I wish this weren't true. The articles look much better with photos in them, but unfortunately it's illegal for us to copy those photos.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and thank you very much for clarifying that, I will be more careful in the future, esp knowing this fact. And yes you are right about the articles looking a lot better with pics, so I guess next time I go to the cricket I will try to take a few myself. Thanks again Pubuman 16:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need help

Hey Stephen, do have the authority to block people, this editor 60.234.239.169 keeps on posting random nonsense on the main cricket page, someone has blocked him for 24hrs on an unrelated piece of vandalism, but I think this should be stopped somwhow, any ideas? A permanent ban perharps? Pubuman 15:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Pubuman. No, I can't block anyone because I'm not an administrator.

If you see some vandalism, the best thing is to put a warning on the vandal's page. If it continues, put a second warning, telling them that they will be blocked if they continue. That's usually enough to stop them, but if they still continue after that, put a note on WP:AIV, and an administrator will block them.

Normally the person will be blocked for 24 hours the first time, but if they come back and do some more vandalism it will be 48 hours, and then increasing amounts of time if necessary.

You can read more about the policy at WP:VANDAL.

Hope that helps,

Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will follow your advice in regards to this matter. Pubuman 16:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irvine Romaine

Sorry about changing those stats back on you... I must have messed up during the copying and pasting. --- Deville (Talk) 22:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no worries about Irvine Romaine. It was easy to correct.

However, isn't it the case that all the Bermudian player infoboxes now say "Updated: 22 August 2006" but the stats don't include the ODI of 21 August? Unfortunately I haven't got time to fix that now.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stephen, I believe you're correct and again the fault is mine. I updated the stats on 22 August implicitly assuming that I'd include the ODI of 21 August, but I think that cricinfo.com hadn't included the latest ODI in some of the players' stats...it was too soon. I should have double-checked this. Anyway, I've updated the list page to be current, and I'll go through and fix the player pages as well when I get a chance. --- Deville (Talk) 12:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gooch

Cricinfo's 100 & 200 list is hopelessly out of date. I looked for an instance from late 2002 ( AT Rayudu) and even that is not included there. Tintin (talk) 11:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Do you think we shouldn't link to that page? But we still need a source for the claim that no other batsman has scored 100 and 300 in the same match.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Cricketarchive doesn't have it. I'll check Wisden tonight. It may have the entries from recent years. Tintin (talk) 12:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wisden 2006, pp 275-276. There have been four since then (before the current season) - Rayudu, Matt Horne, Hrishikesh Kanitkar and Scott Newman. Tintin (talk) 12:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work finding the reference, thanks. I've changed it in the article. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

I am awarding you the RickK barnstar because it will make your day and you deserve it for living in wikipedia and monitoring us vandals day and night. PS is RickK anything like Rick James?

Thanks for the barnstar! I've never heard of receiving a barnstar from someone who was grateful to have their own vandalism reverted, which makes it all the more special. Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hi Stephen, thanks for & correcting my error. I have myself deleted the images in question. Frankly, I still don't understand the problem with the images but I explicitly trust your judgement & am sure you must be correct. Just to be on the safe side, I'll just upload GFDL stuff from now on ;-) BTW how have you been?Good to see you & Jguk back. Bodes well the cricket project! Cheers! Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 17:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, Srikeit. Basically, Wikipedia is not allowed to use images marked "for non-commercial use only", because we might want to be able to sell or licence our content later.

Many CC licences are OK, and there's no reason to stop using them. Just make sure it's one of the licences on the permitted list not the forbidden list. The bad ones are the ones containing nc (non-commercial) or nd (no derivatives). And of course make sure that it has the right licence tag.

To answer your other question, I'm fine, thank you. I took a month's wikibreak but I'm back now, although contributing a bit less than I did a few months ago.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New infobox

I just added an explanation of it at the bottom of the Wikiproject page. I'm not going to add it en mass but I updated the Michael Vaughan page to give people an idea of how it would work. josh (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]