<!-- Please insert all topics below this line and always add a new topic at the bottom of the page -->
<!-- Please insert all topics below this line and always add a new topic at the bottom of the page -->
== Deleted players, including ODI and WODI players. ==
Can see @[[User:Batagur baska|Batagur baska]] the last week has removed dozens of player pages (at lest from May 3 - 6), redirecting to lists. Is there a discussion of these removals? I did look at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Cricket/archive]], but can't see them name there. Examples [[Pernille Jønsson]], [[Malene Iversen]], [[Zain Abbas (Hong Kong cricketer)]], [[Jordan Martel]] [[User:Moedk|Moedk]] ([[User talk:Moedk|talk]]) 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
:Hi, {{u|Moedk}}. The articles have been redirected to appropriate lists such as [[List of Denmark women ODI cricketers]] because they seem to be permanent stubs without scope for expansion. In addition, although I personally do not like [[WP:GNG]], they all fail that too, and it would only be a matter of time before they are taken to [[WP:AFD]] and probably deleted. The better option is [[WP:ATD-R]] because, although the article has been redirected to a list, its history remains intact and, should anyone find sufficient reliable sources about the subject, it can be expanded and reinstated. So, if you read ATD-R, it explains the process. If there any redirects you believe you can expand, please go ahead.
:It is interesting that the first example you have chosen is [[Pernille Jønsson]] because that was a very short stub indeed — it had a readable prose size of 166 bytes (25 words).
:I should add that I'm working on [[:Category:Cricket stubs]] and its subcats to identify non-stubs, which I'm promoting to start, and also permanent short stubs like Pernille Jønsson which can be stored via ATD-R. Happy to discuss further. Thanks. [[User:Batagur baska|Batagur baska]] ([[User talk:Batagur baska|talk]]) 13:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
::Surely these should have been discussed? Difficult for one editor to tell if these articles are "permanent stubs without scope for expansion", and even if they are sent to AfD and accepted, they can then be redirected anyway. [[User:Mpk662|Mpk662]] ([[User talk:Mpk662|talk]]) 18:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
:::{{u|Mpk662}}, the wording of [[WP:ATD-R]] is: "{{tq|A page can be [[WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT|blanked and redirected]] if there is a suitable page to redirect to, and if the resulting redirect is not [[WP:R#DELETE|inappropriate]]. If the change is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a [[WP:consensus|consensus]] before blank-and-redirecting again. Suitable venues for doing so include the article's talk page and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]].}}
:::There is no need for any editor using ATD-R to discuss the matter beforehand. [[WP:BOLD]] applies and any competent editor should be able to judge an article's potential. You have misquoted me by omitting the words "seem to be". Please do not try to twist my meaning. I made it clear in my response to Moedk that they should restore any redirects they can expand, as per ATD-R. Okay? [[User:Batagur baska|Batagur baska]] ([[User talk:Batagur baska|talk]]) 20:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
:There have been endless discussions on the subject of sports biography stubs, including a massive RFC that resulted in changes to [[WP:NSPORT]]. Ultimately such articles need to meet [[WP:GNG]]. Stubs sourced only to databases, match reports, team announcements, etc. fail to even meet [[WP:SPORTCRIT]] so redirecting is a good [[WP:ATD]] and saves wasting everyone's time at [[WP:AFD]]. If anyone wants to revive and expand the articles to something encyclopedic, they are welcome to find some substantial sources and do so. <sub>[[User:Wjemather|<span style="color:#0D5218">wjemather</span>]]</sub><sup>[[User talk:Wjemather|<span style="color:#520D0D">please leave a message...</span>]]</sup> 10:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you, {{u|Wjemather}}. You have taken the words out of my mouth. If articles like these were taken to AFD, they would face the risk of being deleted. Actually, I'm finding that non-stubs are the main problem in the [[:Category:Cricket stubs]] family. Thanks again and all the best. [[User:Batagur baska|Batagur baska]] ([[User talk:Batagur baska|talk]]) 10:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
== Requested move at [[Talk:2024 Indian Premier League#Requested move 10 May 2024]] ==
== Requested move at [[Talk:2024 Indian Premier League#Requested move 10 May 2024]] ==
Hi! A separate Wikiproject for Women's Premier League (cricket) has been proposed. For it to be established a minimum number editors are needed to show their support to the Wikiproject. Interested editors please add your name here to show your support. Thanks!
See the Wikiproject draft here. You can also invite others by placing {{subst:User:Vestrian24Bio/Wikiproject Women's Premier League (cricket)/Invitation}} in their talk page. Regards! Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 05:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does a single competition really merit its own Wikiproject? By that logic, there would be one one for the men's IPL, one for Test cricket, and dozens of others. I can't see that the resulting fragmentation would be a good thing. JH (talk page) 08:50, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not needed as this and all the other competition projects are just forks of this project that often just make up their own rules and violate cricket and general Wikipedia article guidelines. We should be closing down the IPL, PSL etc WikiProjects and merging them into WP:CRIC, not creating another unnecessary project. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need for these competition WikiProject's in my opinion. They are often only small in size which isn't good for participation and deciding things within the project and often over time die away. All can be done from this WikiProject anyway
Comment. Agree with Joseph2302. These should be bought under the control of this project and made into taskforces. AA (talk) 22:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The new wikiproject will likely be inactive within a matter of weeks, and then just sit there doing nothing in perpetuity. Desertarun (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, and this is the state of the PSL, LPL, BPL projects too- either completely inactive or active for a few weeks a year only. I'm sure I suggested a few years ago making them all taskforces of this project, but we didn't get much engagement on the subject. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the required limit 7 was reached yesterday when, only the first two comments by JH and Joseph were posted, Everything else were posted later; So, I didn't exactly ignore anyone. Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 15:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dick Pilling's article got deleted, apparently because it was created by Blackjack who is banned. Can anyone here with admin access recreate it using the contents of the deleted article. Tintin12:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's been recreated but could use some work. There's a bit more context at this archive link where concerns about copyvio were raised by an account that turned out to be a sock. When did the newer article get deleted? (btw, dick pilling is an interesting google search term - probably not one to do at work...) Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Batagur baska has made some good edits in Indian cricket articles. Had never suspected that it was him. Don't know what is being achieved by deleting his good edits. Tintin01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The same has happened with the Lahore Tournament article. I have messaged the deleting admin to say that I don't think it was appropriate to delete under G5, due to the nature of the article and its value going forward. Silly they delete articles created by banned users, like it's harming the banned user *shrugs shoulders*. AA (talk) 19:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did a little work on the Dick Pilling article. I suppose BlackJack is already back here somewhere. I move around different areas of WP to avoid becoming too familiar with the "characters". He failed two of my attempts to get Shane Warne to GA status. Assuming good faith I just thought the article wasn't quite ready. Oh well. Desertarun (talk) 19:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warne is on my to-do list as part of my Hampshire expansion project. He requires some work, so is toward the tailend of my list while I knock off the 'lesser' known players. AA (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He died 2 years ago now ..seems like only yesterday! I've lost interest in taking it to GA but would possibly review it. BJ would no doubt be interested in failing it again. Desertarun (talk) 03:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a big loss. Hampshire members hoped he would one day coach the club. Keep on working on it, and have a look at similar cricket GA structures. There's plenty of Somerset cricketers who are GA, where you can get some ideas. Happy to muck in and go for a joint-GA. Also, given he is now sadly deceased, articles tend to be more stable once the subject is deceased, especially when they are very well known. AA (talk) 11:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do a co-nomination when you're ready, no real rush, you will have to remind me if its 6 or 12 months hence. The article is in good condition and ready to go. I did all of the heavy lifting with deletions and spin outs, and got it a copy edit from GOCE. The only real problem I had was with his domestic career, its lacking in content because I don't have any sources. But as you're a Hampshire man that would be neatly taken care of! Desertarun (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello all. I have expanded Robert Poore, and wondered if anyone has any sources which could expand the article further? I think he has FA potential going forward. AA (talk) 12:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers JP. I had read the CotY article, but overlooked a useful snippet about how his height affected his fielding. Hadn't considered The Cricketer, but found a couple of extra bits from that. Cheers. AA (talk) 13:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's that time of year again! Cricket is in full swing in the northern hemisphere and it's time to dust off your cameras. A number of grounds need beautiful photos, a list can be found here. Snap away!!! AA (talk) 23:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Create a page on 2024 World Championship of Legends
The league has been approved by the ECB and is set to take place in Edgbaston, starting on July 3. It’s been created by Zabawa Entertainment, a distinguished Bollywood film and music production company, with roots in India and Dubai.
Several notable figures from international cricket over the past three decades have already been signed for the league, including Yuvraj Singh and Kevin Pietersen.Shahid Afridi has also been signed to take part in the league.
The tournament comprises six teams that will compete in the 18-match event and it will be played in a single round-robin format. The top four teams will make it to the semifinals followed by a Final on 13th July, 2024
I really wish they would focus on better content. These hit and giggle leagues devalue our content and aren't remotely encyclopedic. AA (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Naming of ICC events - especially the T20 World Cup
The 50 Over ODI World Cup is named the Cricket World Cup, without ICCorMen's even though the recent official name for the ICC given in 2023 was the ICC Men'sCricket World Cup. After discussion, the page was not moved due to following the common name. Same rule is followed for all of its related pages, categories and templates.
In contrast, the 20 Over T20I World Cup is named as ICC Men's T20 World Cup and discussions reaching the conclusion that we have to follow the official name. Same rule is followed for all of its related pages, categories and templates.
In the past however, (before 2021), all of the T20 World Cup pages had a previous name - The ICC World Twenty20: and did not have the word men's in it. Even on wiki where you're supposed to have a common continued name for all events - different ones are being followed - and contrasting reasons are being given in discussions to close them.
A possible solution from my side:
We can follow the Cricket World Cup style - remove ICC and Men's from all the titles of the t20 world cup pages - for eg. 2024 T20 World Cup, 2016 World Twenty20, List of squads for the 2022 T20 World Cup. For the women's t20 world cup articles - we follow the same rule - 2024 Women's T20 World Cup, 2016 Women's World Twenty20, etc. Same style.
Next year when the Champions Trophy is held - we see what name the ICC brings out and then follow the same style of naming.
Thanks for reading this far editors - I hope we can deliberate! I shall be pinging some editors who have historically commented here (having both opinions), just to have conversation. Not trying to brigade. Pharaoh496 (talk) 08:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First, Thanks for inviting me to contribute to this, hope to come to an agreed solution.
I still believe Wikipedia should not be able to override or otherwise "edit" the name of an event when the official branding from the owning organisations change their naming schemes (in this case the ICC).This is ultimately why I still believe that we need to begin including gender specification as how the ICC now refers to the world up. This is why I believe that for a longer term fix, this might need a further discussion on whether or not Wikipedia:Official names requires changes in how it handles naming changes. in addition we may need to consider whether Wikipedia:Article titles is relevant (specifically the Name Changes section may require more consideration). I however have not had the time to properly flesh out and open a discussion on that page, if anyone else is willing to (and sees merit in seeking further clarification from the guidelines), please feel free to do so.
With respect to the solutions, I don't see much difference between the current naming scheme and the one proposed in the first point, and I am generally not one to "kick the can down the road" so to speak, and therefore not willing to wait till the Champions trophy to make a decision. It is for those reasons I am happy to leave the pages as is, until the guidelines are clarified on these types of situations. TheDataStudent (talk) 09:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That might be true, but shouldnt they have a similar categorization of naming? Either remove icc or keep it for all, and remove men's or keep it for all? Pharaoh496 (talk) 10:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That might be true, but shouldnt they have a similar categorization of naming? Either remove icc or keep it for all, and remove men's or keep it for all? Pharaoh496 (talk) 10:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the odi world cup, it does have men's in ever article except wikipedia. while that in itself is totally fine - atleast we should follow that style for all icc events. Pharaoh496 (talk) 10:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discussions related to this moves have been made before too, one was just a month or two before I guess. I think it would be fine with removing ICC, but having gender differentiation I feel is still necessary considering women's and men's tournaments are held in the same year. Cric editor (talk) 12:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you put women's in those pages, they are differentiated.
Add mens and its no different either, removing icc would require just the same amount of effort as adding mens.
Fundamentally this naming scheme mis-represents the status of womens events as somehow lower in the status quo as compared to the mens competition - it implies that the Mens World T20 is the penultimate competition in all of international cricket, and the womens game is just some seperate sideshow, I understand historical context may lend itself to that perspective, but it is no longer the case, and wikipedia should acknowledge and represent that. TheDataStudent (talk) 22:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is very very far from the case - All men's teams and competitions of all sports accross the world dont have the name "men's" in their wiki page - no one is saying that the women's team or event is lower in status. Its the common name followed. Pharaoh496 (talk) 07:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You take any national team, any world cup; any ipl team and it does not have men's. This is the convention being followed, and the t20iwc should stick to it. Please do read again what I said in my earlier first message.Pharaoh496 (talk) 07:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, what other sporting bodies name their competitions is not relevant to this case, The ICC is not FIFA and FIFA is not ICC.
Secondly, there are many examples within cricket pages of Men's being in the title, 
If we are being so strict about WP common name for articles cricproject's remit, then there is more than ample evidence for Men's to be added as anything else related to the ICC contains a gender modifier. How individual nations decide to name their teams and competitions is not relevant because that's up to the national governing body. Anything directly ICC related/administered, like the World Cups, or Champions Trophy, should be named as per ICC naming schemes. TheDataStudent (talk) 02:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rankings is different to what competitions are.
FIFA and ICC can be looked with the same eye as far as wikipedia names are concerned.
1. Both are ICC administered, therefore equivalent
2. No they aren't and should not be. Thats like saying Nepalese Cuisene and Indian Cuisine are the same because they happen to share geography and a similar spice pallete.
Hello all. Just began an expansion of this article. I think he has GA/FA potential, being a Test cricketer and England captain, with a lengthy career with Hampshire. If anyone has any sources they can add, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm happy to collab for GA/FA down the line. AA (talk) 20:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Squad templates for T20 World Cups
Why don't we have squad templates for every team playing at the World Cup for every season?, while we have the same for women's tournaments. These templates can not only be transcluded in players' pages, but also can be used in the articles of teams' performance at the World Cup.
For the past week, I've been creating articles for performance of teams at the T20 World Cup, for eg. Australia at the T20 World Cup. Instead of having squads listed for every season just like in the Cricket World Cup pages, we can replace them with these templates hence reducing the size of the page too.tead of
Please read the guidelines and help pages for templates, specifically navigation templates. Also, data-dumps are not suitable for an encyclopedia (especially when they are just duplicating information already contained in other articles); the "at the T20 WC" articles you are creating need well-sourced prose throughout. wjematherplease leave a message...10:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This list was created following the same format of the similar articles that already exist, we have lists of players that have represented at International cricket for even teams that have played only one T20I, and if 2024 Scotland Tri-Nation Series (round 3) fails to have a standalone article, that makes all of these series' articles from previous cycle not notable too. Please let me know the issues so that I can correct them :) Cric editor (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are 24 rounds giving a total of 144 matches; that many of them in one article won't be constructive. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 08:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
24 rounds sounds a lot. Sooner or later someone's going to try to merge, redirect or delete them. There has to be a better way than this? Desertarun (talk) 08:27, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The round info should just be mentioned in the body of the article, it is completely confusing to have them in the titles. How does anyone reading the title know which competition it is Round N of? It fails at least 3 of the 5 WP:CRITERIA. Spike 'em (talk) 09:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
