Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of centuries in Twenty20 International cricket/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was archived by Crisco 1492 00:50, 16 February 2015 [1].

List of centuries in Twenty20 International cricket

Featured list candidates/List of centuries in Twenty20 International cricket/archive1
Featured list candidates/List of centuries in Twenty20 International cricket/archive2

Featured list removal candidates/List of centuries in Twenty20 International cricket/archive1

Nominator(s): Ianblair23 (talk) 10:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the newest form of the centuries old game, this feat has only been achieved 12 times by 11 cricketers. Based on the existing FL List of centuries in women's Test cricket, I present this list for nomination. Ianblair23 (talk) 10:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment

Factual error: although Levi's entire innings was 51 balls, his century came off 45 balls. This fact (along with the fact it was the fastest by time) should be referenced in the lead. Harrias ^talk 11:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Good pick up. Thanks Harrias -- Ianblair23 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments

The lead reads like a collection of bullet points, it would benefit from a rewrite to make it more flow better. It could also do with a bit more depth, perhaps mentioning that because it is such a short format, centuries are rare in Twenty20 cricket.
- @Harrias: Rearranged and expanded the lead -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the language used in the lead isn't very encyclopaedic: "Levi's knock" is a prime example of this.
- Reworded -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"..and is arranged chronologically." As this is a sortable list, change this to "..and is initially arranged chronologically."
- Reworded and moved to it just above the table as per List of ICC Champions Trophy centuries -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to the discussion below, I'm happy with the columns used: I'm not particularly in favour of the addition of either H/A/N or Innings, although I similarly wouldn't oppose the latter.
- I have restored the innings column after the strike rate column. As I stated below, to be consistent this will need to be added to List of Cricket World Cup centuries, List of Asia Cup centuries and List of ICC Champions Trophy centuries. Also List of centuries in women's Test cricket and List of centuries in women's ODI cricket will need to be updated to reflect this agreed change. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would favour the "No." column being sortable.
- Made sortable -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The format for ESPNcricinfo references is inconsistent, Refs 3–11 use "ESPNcricinfo. ESPN.", while 12 onwards simply has "ESPNcricinfo." I prefer the latter personally, but either way, remain consistent.
- Made refs consistent -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You should remove the publisher's name (ESPNcricinfo) from the title of references 12 onwards. Harrias ^talk 22:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from —Vensatry _(ping)

Comments from —Vensatry _(ping) (Mild oppose)

~~First two sentences of the opening para are unsourced.~~
- Added refs -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Ref #1 doesn't actually support the claim. It only lists the matches played during that season. So are the next two refs. (of succeeding sentences).~~
- Changed refs -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Richard Levi stayed unbeaten in the innings. This makes it statistically better than Gayle's 117.~~
- Reworded -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~The current world record -> As of December 2014 ...~~
- Reworded -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~"Levi's knock is also the fastest ton, achieving the milestone off just 45 balls.[8]" is just a jump. There is no sequential flow here.~~
- Reworded and expanded. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~There is absolutely no need of "Statistic was not recorded" in the key.~~
- Removed -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~I don't think mins. are really needed in lists like this. Some might argue that it's an essential parameter in T20s though.~~
- Removed -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~A column should be there for "Result" and H/A/N in the table.~~
- Added -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - ~~H/A/N is still not added —Vensatry _(ping) 19:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]
~~Rose Bowl, Hampshire-> Rose Bowl, Southampton~~
- Corrected -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Runs column doesn't sort right.
- Fixed -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done —Vensatry _(ping) 19:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The list does't follow the format of similar lists that we have. Please have a look at those to get an idea. There is a serious problem with sourcing. You only use scorecards for facts in lead, which doesn't fully support the claim. —Vensatry _(ping) 19:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review Vensatry. I have used the format used other lists which has meant the minutes and innings columns have been removed and the results and ref column added. I have resolved the issues which the references and the addressed the other items which you have raised above. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - I never said you to remove the innings column. It's a vital parameter in these lists. —Vensatry _(ping) 06:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Vensatry: I used the format used in List of Cricket World Cup centuries, List of Asia Cup centuries and List of ICC Champions Trophy centuries, all featured lists and none of which includes the innings column. I am happy to include it if you like, but then it should be added to those lists as well. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 06:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - Interestingly, all the three lists were created and promoted by me. I don't how I missed that in all these lists. I would like to have the opinion of others too. —Vensatry _(ping) 17:01, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        @Vensatry: Any feedback yet? How did you want to proceed? As I said above, I am happy to include it. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you to initiate a discussion here if you want. —Vensatry _(ping) 19:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: I have started the thread as you suggested to get so more eyes on this. Yesterday Faf du Plessis scored 119 against the West Indies in Johannesburg so I have added this to the list. It was also the second fastest century off just 46, so this has been updated as well. As for the outstanding issues, the runs column now sorts correctly but I have still haven't added the H/A/N column. As a said above, I used the format used on the other three FLs. It would be great to get some consistency across these lists. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 01:32, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with the H/A/N thing. In the runs column, the scores 100 and 116 doesn't sort correctly. —Vensatry _(ping) 19:15, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: The 100 and 116 scores should sort correctly now. If you could have a look at the above comments from Harrias and my responses that would be appreciated. If there is anything else before you are willing to give your support, please let me know. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments

Ref #1 needs author
Lead image needs an alt text
Why is ESPNcricinfo is linked in ref #4 and not in ref #1?
New Zealand, Australia and South Africa are linked twice in the lede
"Due to shorten format, it is rare that centuries are scored" is probably WP:OR unless sourced.

—Vensatry _(ping) 08:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: I've sorted the above points on behalf of the nominator. Cowlibob (talk) 14:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Looks much better now. —Vensatry _(ping) 17:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.