Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket
Main page | Discussion | News & open tasks | Deletion alerts | The Nets | Assessment | The Library | Contests | Awards | Members |
|
|
Falling standards
[edit]Now we have Under-19 cricketers without senior debuts being added and deemed notable, largely due to WP:REFBOMB or WP:INHERITED. Given the above topic, do we actually have any proper, quality article creation/editing taking place anymore? AA (talk) 21:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- WP:GNG is the main criteria for inclusion. THis seems like WP:FORUMSHOPPING of the conversation at Rocky Flintoff AFD. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is zero consensus for the inclusion of under-19 cricketers. It has never been discussed here and their inclusion has always resulted in deletion. Now all of a sudden the Second XI Championship is the highest domestic level, and age-group cricket is now the top-level of international cricket. Of all the history of cricket and the thousands of pages needing expansion, we instead get "kids" whose matches fall well short of this important document. AA (talk) 22:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Now all of a sudden the Second XI Championship is the highest domestic level, and age-group cricket is now the top-level of international cricket.
Neither of these things are true. As I mentioned at that AFD, it is possible to pass WP:GNG without being at the top level, just like you can play top level matches and not be notable. All of these top level guidelines do not override WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- As noted, GNG is the benchmark test for notability of sportspeople, regardless of what level they have played at. If that guideline is met and there is enough information in reliable sources to write a proper article, then we should have one. wjematherplease leave a message... 18:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no doubt that the coverage he has received is because of his famous father. If he didn't have a famous father, nobody would bat an eyelid to any record in the Second XI Championship being broken, I can think of a few where no coverage whatsoever has been received. If we include any old cricketers, we become TriviaPedia, a concoction of random cricket trivia instead of a high quality database. Sad times. AA (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have you seen Rocky Flintoff bat? He's another Joe Root and a dead cert for England. Desertarun (talk) 15:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Desertarun:. And? Is the bar for notability now "he's another Joe Root and a dead cert for England"; if so, it's pretty low. We have articles popping up on Archie Vaughan and Farhan Ahmed. So what exactly makes these two notable? What have they done in cricket? There's a crazy argument on one AfD for these that signing a professional contract which is covered by loads of sources = notability. Rubbish! AA (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- For notability and suitability for an article, the question is not "what have they done?" but "what coverage is there?"; the answer to the former is often an indicator to the answer to the latter, but sometimes it is utterly irrelevant. If the appropriate coverage exists (which of course, has to go beyond the routine pro contract signing/press release blurb), then they are notable. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Signing a professional contract isn't notable, and neither is making a century the Second XI Championship. Essentially, any coverage of Rocky Flintoff or Archie Vaughan exists purely because they have famous father's. The WP:INHERITED is as clear as daylight! I mean, take Rocky Flintoff's page. 8 references to say he has signed a contract at Lancashire. Eight!!! That's terrible referencing and totally WP:REFBOMB. Apparently Lugnuts bar was too low, but here we have these... oh and just discovered Farhan Ahmed... what has he done to warrant inclusion? AA (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- So a great player of the sport's early days is not notable because there was minimal media coverage during his lifetime, but some nonentity who got his name into a tabloid last week is an absolute must for an article. Not so much falling standards as no standards. 92.17.1.49 (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Quite agree. AA (talk) 22:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why the coverage exists is not relevant, and you appear to be misunderstanding NOTINHERITED. When the coverage is of the individual, and meets the threshold for GNG (because there is far more depth than just reporting a contract signing), they are presumed notable.
We have countless articles on early "first class" cricketers for who we have no evidence of actual achievement (since playing first class cricket in this era was too often not based on ability or achievement at all), with references that are limited to routine announcements, directory listings (commonly school, university, armed services, etc.) and the odd mention in a match report/scorecard.
It's hard to say standards are falling when we have these older articles, let alone the thousands of formulaic db scrapes created by Lugnuts, Bobo and others – the articles on Flintoff and Vaughan's boys are far higher standard than all of these. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)- Isn't it a good thing then that one English county is currently at 63% complete coverage ;) AA (talk) 23:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Only if all those articles have multiple GNG qualifying sources. wjematherplease leave a message... 20:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't it a good thing then that one English county is currently at 63% complete coverage ;) AA (talk) 23:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- So a great player of the sport's early days is not notable because there was minimal media coverage during his lifetime, but some nonentity who got his name into a tabloid last week is an absolute must for an article. Not so much falling standards as no standards. 92.17.1.49 (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Signing a professional contract isn't notable, and neither is making a century the Second XI Championship. Essentially, any coverage of Rocky Flintoff or Archie Vaughan exists purely because they have famous father's. The WP:INHERITED is as clear as daylight! I mean, take Rocky Flintoff's page. 8 references to say he has signed a contract at Lancashire. Eight!!! That's terrible referencing and totally WP:REFBOMB. Apparently Lugnuts bar was too low, but here we have these... oh and just discovered Farhan Ahmed... what has he done to warrant inclusion? AA (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- This article is about Rocky Flintoff, not his dad. Your argument that Sigcov is trumped by inherited is very weak. Desertarun (talk) 21:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- ...which mentions in some detail all their familial details. Could have picked a better not WP:INHERITED example than that! AA (talk) 23:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's now made his first team debut for Lancashire. He gets lots of coverage because he's really good. Desertarun (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- And now qualifies for an article. Although his two appearances so far haven't impressed! AA (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's now made his first team debut for Lancashire. He gets lots of coverage because he's really good. Desertarun (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- ...which mentions in some detail all their familial details. Could have picked a better not WP:INHERITED example than that! AA (talk) 23:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- For notability and suitability for an article, the question is not "what have they done?" but "what coverage is there?"; the answer to the former is often an indicator to the answer to the latter, but sometimes it is utterly irrelevant. If the appropriate coverage exists (which of course, has to go beyond the routine pro contract signing/press release blurb), then they are notable. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Desertarun:. And? Is the bar for notability now "he's another Joe Root and a dead cert for England"; if so, it's pretty low. We have articles popping up on Archie Vaughan and Farhan Ahmed. So what exactly makes these two notable? What have they done in cricket? There's a crazy argument on one AfD for these that signing a professional contract which is covered by loads of sources = notability. Rubbish! AA (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Have you seen Rocky Flintoff bat? He's another Joe Root and a dead cert for England. Desertarun (talk) 15:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no doubt that the coverage he has received is because of his famous father. If he didn't have a famous father, nobody would bat an eyelid to any record in the Second XI Championship being broken, I can think of a few where no coverage whatsoever has been received. If we include any old cricketers, we become TriviaPedia, a concoction of random cricket trivia instead of a high quality database. Sad times. AA (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 August 10 § File:2027 CWC Fanmade Logo.png. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Future cricket events
[edit]There are articles for future cricket events (mostly stubs), some examples: 2025 BPL, 2026 WT20WC, 2027 U19 WT20WC. I am proposing that these articles be developed in the draftspace for now and be published to mainspace when it has enough coverage. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 05:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I created this navbox to keep track of the drafts, I also added the existing drafts to it. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 06:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Merge WikiProjects back into this project
[edit]There are a number of cricket-related WikiProjects that I believe would be best suited as taskforces of this project, which would enable collaboration whilst also understanding that articles on these tournaments need to follow guidelines of WP:CRIC. This was previously mentioned in 2021: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 90#Creation of task forces. Would be good to get a firm consensus on whether or not to implement this. These breakaway WikiProjects have caused numerous problems over the years including:
- Frequent MOS:COLOR violations on articles and templates
- Misunderstanding of how article ratings work, by rating categories as "high importance"
- Violation of the WP:CRIC standard to only add teams to a player's infobox once they make an appearance (Allah Mohammad Ghazanfar being an example who was in IPL and LPL squads but did not play)
- Creating clutter on article talkpages as if someone plays one match in one of these tournaments, they get added to the WikiProject
- IPL project created templates for every match (60 per season), which led to a massive template clean up project a few years ago
All of these WikiProjects are for franchise T20 tournaments that run for 1-3 months a year, and their WikiProjects are dormant for the rest of the year, or are permanently inactive. They are as follows:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh Premier League - looks permanently inactive
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Lanka Premier League - been inactive for around 2 years, despite only being created in 2021
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Premier League - looks to be inactive
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan Super League - looks to be inactive
In addition, I have separately nominated the recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's Premier League (cricket) for deletion, but would be okay with this becoming a task force here too (but no merge is required as there is no history to keep). This post aims to satisfy Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Merging WikiProjects#Establish consensus for a merger by getting a consensus for or against this. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- These seem sensible. I had hoped when I revamped the project page, that these would be started by new recruits from r/cricket and other cricket platforms, but I never really found the time. AA (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:ICC Men's Test Team Rankings#Requested move 19 August 2024
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Information.svg/30px-Information.svg.png)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:ICC Men's Test Team Rankings#Requested move 19 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 10:46, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:ICC men's player rankings#Requested move 19 August 2024
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Information.svg/30px-Information.svg.png)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:ICC men's player rankings#Requested move 19 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 10:52, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
RfC at WikiProject Sports
[edit]An RfC at WikiProject Sports is currently seeking a consensus on whether images of all venues in a tournament should be presented in a tournament article's § Venues section. Feel free to join in and share your thoughts! — AFC Vixen 🦊 15:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)