Dear Andrew nixon: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

• Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Community Portal
• Frequently Asked Questions
• How to edit a page
• How to revert to a previous version of a page
• Tutorial
• Copyrights
• Shortcuts

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD!

Feel Free to Directly contact me!!! I Love helping you guys out!! After all I was new here about 3 months ago!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 22:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket is the second most popular sport on earth. I even sourced it - heres some more http://www.sportingo.com/All-Sports/a9188_Revealed-ten-most-popular-sports-world-no-prizes-guessing-whats-No http://www.sportingo.com/cricket/a9200_basis-loaded-can-cricket-become-new-baseball-usa http://www.sportingo.com/Cricket/a8919_Could-cricket-overtake-football-as-worlds-leading-sport

there you go- i dont see all the fuss, + i sourced it? so why do you keep cutting out my edit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashwinosoft (talk • contribs) 23:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, Great work on the national cricket teams. A very minor tip: we generally don't use single ='s in sections names. Use doubles or more. See Wikipedia:Section#Creation_of_sections. Regards -- Ian ≡ talk 14:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant! Absolutely Brilliant! You deserve this!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For contributing valuable articles about the lesser known national teams in cricket, I, hereby award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 15:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew! As you have noticed your work here is much appreciated. Why dont you create your own User Page? It will let us know you better. You already seem to be quite comfortable with Wikipedia, so I guess making the page wouldnt be much of a problem. Also why dont you become a WikiProject Cricket participant?

Keep up the good work!

Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 15:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, welcome, and thanks for the new pages. I take it you are working through the redlinks on International Cricket Council? When you have done all of the national teams, there are lots of governing bodies to do too ;) -- ALoan (Talk) 17:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing the national team pages first, then I'm going to work on pages for the various non-test tournaments I mention in the tournament histories plus one on the Austral-Asia Cup, then some work on the qualification for the 2011 World Cup (which is mainly covered by the non-test tournaments anyway). Then I'll have a look at the governing bodies :)

Very ambitious - well, good luck. (You can sign posts on talk pages with four tildes, by the way - thus ~~~~) -- ALoan (Talk) 11:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may consider joining. You are doing a great job of creating cricket team pages for the weaker nations. Thanks Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for someone to make that page :) But, you have made a slight oversight: Japan has qualified for the Cricket World Cup, and played a number of full One Day Internationals, although suffering some stinging defeats in the process. In a similar vein, the USA and China are probably the world's top "soccer" sides... and the world's highest individual ODI score isn't Saeed Anwar's 194, but the 229* of Belinda Clark. For reasons that I can not begin to imagine, in Japan, cricket is something of a women's game! The men's team is a long way behind in comparison. (I think the BBC covered this some time ago, but the vast majority of coverage is for men's cricket so it is hard to track it down). IIRC, the Japanese women's team is about on a par with Bangladesh; while this is hardly a signal of top class quality, the gulf between the men's team and even a lowly side like Oman or Gibraltar is pretty wide. TheGrappler 12:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please excercise due regard for references in your editing of this article, c.f. WP:LIVING. Speculative content is inappropriate here, especially so in biographies. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 23:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just a question; how did you come to know the Division Three event is supposed to be held in the United States? Sam Vimes | Address me 14:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A WP:CRIC barnstar for your sterling efforts on filling the redlinks on List of International Cricket Council members and working towards a completed {{National cricket teams}}. Keep up the good work! -- ALoan (Talk) 21:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd argue that we don't need articles for each individual division - everything that can be said about those divisions could, I think be merged into the main article (which is rather short if you take out the teams, which one should do when treating the tournament). So I'd like to move the current articles ICC World Cricket League Division One and Division Two to 2007 ICC World Cricket League Division One, as each individual tournament should be treated separately. Sam Vimes | Address me 13:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was just wondering, would it be a good idea to move the current world cricket league article to something like 2007-2011 World Cricket League? I say this because the information there right now is pretty specific about the current one and not in general. So would it be a good idea to move it and then make a general article about the world cricket league?--THUGCHILDz 02:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Slovenian cricket team, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Magnificent work! Thanks! --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 18:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, but your thanks are mis-directed, I am afraid - it wasn't me who nominated it, but rather Johnlp (see this diff). -- ALoan (Talk) 09:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I'm getting myself confused! Andrew nixon 10:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The thanks are all due to you: I think the work you've been doing on these unsung bits of the cricket project is first rate. And I just thought the Slovenian story was too good not to be shared. Well done. Johnlp 09:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article Argentine cricket team, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page. You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Thank you for reviewing the situation as per Dougie Brown. I knew I was being a tad bold in adding the category, but since it was removed, I suppose there's no harm done. Bobo. 23:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Andrew. Further to your entry on the Project Cricket talk page, I'm not sure if I can commit to an concerted joint effort towards the expansion of Irish first-class cricketers, but I'll do my level best. I plan to expand (and where necessary, create) articles relating to major figures in the history of the Irish game, some historical, some contemporary. I shall certainly ensure that all recent Irish internationals are included. I just completed an expansion of your excellent Lucius Gwynn article, maybe we can work out a more concrete basis for co-operation in the near future.

Keep up the good work on associate and affiliate nations! DublinDilettante 03:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for creating a page about Ham Lambert, a man I knew well and admired greatly. I have added to and somewhat altered it to include information about his life outside of sport, plus a little more about his sporting activities outside of cricket. Abbeyvet 00:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You Wrote: Just congratulating you on your work on Bart King. I'm a fan of King's and it is good to see him get such a comprehensive write up. I plan on getting articles up on all first-class cricketers from Philadelphia's cricketing golden age by the end of the year and any help you can provide would be much appreciated! I created the Philadelphian cricket team and Christie Morris articles, so any help you can give on them would also be appreciated. Keep up the good work! Andrew nixon 15:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll start with King and try to get that at least to GA or A and then try moving onto the others. I'm still new to Cricket, so I may move a bit slow. Thanks for the encouragement.--Eva ^bd 19:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the new infobox, as well. Great work!--Eva ^bd 19:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You Wrote: I've just made a slight edit on the US cricket sandbox. Whilst the games in 1913 were the last in the USA until 2004, games were played on US soil in the interim, in the US Virgin Islands which are part of the West Indies for cricket purposes. Don't get me started on which national side players born there are eligible for! Andrew nixon 08:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I did not realize that the USVI were considered part of the West Indies for cricket purposes. Are there any current players from the USVI on the Windies team. I can understand that they'd rather play for the West Indies if they have a choice between them and our block-headed administration. Thanks again.--Eva ^bd 14:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. Do feel free to put your hat in to the ring at T:DYKT. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Neil Doak, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 22:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Douglas Goodwin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On April 23, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert Gregory, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks again Andrew, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I'm having trouble tracking down any future fixtures for the Bermudians, and noticed you added this paragraph - wondering where you found this out at? Thanks. AllynJ 13:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks. On a follow up note: did you update the stats in the infobox? I couldn't find any stats for First Class/List A cricket anywhere, only for ODIs. Thanks again. :) AllynJ 16:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're a star. AllynJ 17:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello To refer to your message I acedentially rated it as a stub it was meant to be start instead sorry. If you believe it to be higher then by all means. I am about to change but if you believe it be higher then by all means change it as I am still learning the ropes with assessing articles 02blythed 18:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Jim Harrison (cricketer), for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created on May 7 where you can improve it if you see fit. Regards, howcheng {chat} 21:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, just got slightly cheesed off when that and about a dozen similar edits were all reverted within hours. The only real way to stop banned editors editing is to revert their edits, as they realise that every time their accounts are identified their edits are reverted. Dealing with this particular editor I've even seen over a dozen articles he created deleted, for the exact same reason. It's got nothing to do with the merits of their edits, they are reverted or deleted without prejudice. I've no real objection if you wanted to re-do the edit, bearing in mind that if you see similar edits in future that the reversions have been done for a reason. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 11:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jim Harrison, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Wizardman 15:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. The other articles I've seen of the same type had a box on the right-hand that looked much like that of Simon_Curley's article. I was under the impression this fell under the "section layout" catagory of wikification. Streetsabre 21:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be against wikipedia guidelines for me to remove the wikify box then? I'm sorry I didn't understand the context of that particular box. Streetsabre 22:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William Hone (cricketer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 04:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I noticed you created articles like Sierra Leone national cricket team. Could you please use the national stub (i.e. SierraLeone-stub) as well as a category, i.e. Category:Sport in Sierra Leone? Thanks--Thomas.macmillan 15:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scott Huey, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 15:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eddie Ingram, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Women's European Cricket Championship, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 00:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On May 29, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sajjida Shah, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks again Andrew. An interesting article on a remarkable young lady. Blnguyen (cranky admin anniversary) 06:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On May 30, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Isobel Joyce, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hi Andrew. Maybe we can have multiple cricket articles per day without people complaining....Our transatlantic friends haven't complained yet. Do you take a camera with you to work and take cricket pictures? :) Blnguyen (cranky admin anniversary) 02:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On June 4, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leslie Kidd, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks again Andrew. Keep it up. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew, due to the restrictions on DYK, I don't think you should release all your DYKs in a group on one day, otherwise, we would not be able to fit them all, due to having to have a mix of things on the main page. I had to do the same thing...User:Blnguyen/Cricket organising I am keeping them on my hard drive and releasing them gradually. Unless ALoan and other people will guard T:DYK/N all day long. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh :) Even I would baulk at more than a couple in one update. But one in each update ought to be fine :) -- ALoan (Talk) 13:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I did not realise I will be more careful from now one 02blythed 11:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please view and vote on the Deletion review here. Thank you for covering for me with the source information. Bobo. 16:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. You are off to such a great start on the article Dickie Lloyd that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dickie Lloyd, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ian Pont, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 22:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Jackson (Somerset cricketer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--JayHenry 15:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article there on a Belgian cricketer. I don't know if you have ever visited, but my sandbox contains a list of Belgian cricketers going back at least to 2001 and possibly earlier, I can't recall. If you wanna stop by and have a look, that'd be cool. Bobo. 19:03, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With your work on Irish cricketers, you might be interested to know that I've just done an article on Fred Stedman. I came to it from the Surrey "end", and hadn't realised that there was an Irish connection till I wrote the article. If you'd like to expand the bit on his time in Ireland, then please feel free. JH (talk page) 19:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pakistani women's ODI cricketers and Category:Pakistani women's Test cricketers, which you created, have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to participate in the discussion here. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the page needs a records table (something like Kenya cricket team#Records would be sufficient). A would a proper squad table would also be nice, look at England cricket team to see what I mean (I don't expect you to find the domestic teams tho!). The table is not needed to become B-class but would be very helpful. Taking myself as an example I don't know any Cayman players so I wouldn't know who the bowlers/batsman are. Added later: They haven't played a game?! If that's true no need for a record section just add the table then. Monsta666 20:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was fast! Good job, have given it a B-ranking as I don't have the authority to rate it any higher. Monsta666 21:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew,

I'm going to take a look at these columns again - would it be possible for you to give me a couple of examples of players in which you'd find other columns/headers useful? Just so I know what I'm aiming towards.

Thanks, –MDCollins (talk) 10:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at the Trent Johnson example here that sort of thing what you'd like? (Yes I'm aware that the Irish don't use the flag of Ireland, but that's a limitation I can't think about right now!}.–MDCollins (talk) 14:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry: here. Unfortunately the flag is generated by a [[Flag of {{{country}}}.svg]] function. Give me a moment and I'll work that out too. Are there other countries with a similar set up? West Indies maybe? –MDCollins (talk) 14:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Wasn't too bad, very easy to add others if they come up. As for {{{country}}} cricket team - I think I've got ahead of you there. Certainly all of the main Test/ODI/ and a few others now have redirects in place, because I've done them (!). Its far easier to create a simple redirect than to try and code all of those varieties as and when they come up. I'm not going through all of the affiliates! –MDCollins (talk) 14:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		WikiProject Rugby league
		Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed you have made some edits relating to rugby league. May I interest you in joining the Rugby league WikiProject, which aims to greatly improve the rugby league articles on Wikipedia. To join simply add your name to the participants list. You may wish to seek some help about the WikiProject, if so please ask your question here. If you need help on general Wikipedia place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question. SpecialWindler talk 03:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		WikiProject Rugby league (State of Origin task force)
		A new task force has begun to improve the scope, quality and coverage of Rugby League State of Origin on Wikipedia. This task force is part of the WikiProject Rugby league. Please add your name at the participants page. The current to do part, is completing the "requested articles" which can be found on the main page. If you wish to join you can add one of the following (as a userbox): {{User WikiProject Rugby league State of Origin|nsw}} {{User WikiProject Rugby league State of Origin|qld}} SpecialWindler talk 03:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pls see this. --- koyn 08:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was interested to note your comment on WT:CRIC about the early tours being fully professional. Our Len Hutton article currently says:

He was appointed as England's first professional captain in 1952.

Should that therefore be changed? I don't know enough about those early tours to be confident in doing it myself. Loganberry (Talk) 14:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought it might be a case of semantics. I'll leave it as it is for now, but if you or someone else rewords it then I'll have no objections. Loganberry (Talk) 22:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Caledonia cricket team, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Steve Atkinson (cricketer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Mgm|^(talk) 09:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Malaya cricket team, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Northern Ireland national cricket team, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 22:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew.

I just wanted to let you know that I have updated the page for the 2007 ICC EAP Trophy tournament which starts in Auckland tomorrow.

I thought I'd let you know, just in case you wanted to mention this tournament on your Beyond the Boundary website.

Cheers! Dave of Darwin 09:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw Cricket Europe - looks like you were on to it already :-) Dave of Darwin 12:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On December 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward Barrett (cricketer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hello there. Thanks for your message. I don't believe they are substantial changes.

I have simply clarified things because the existing criteria were woolly. Why go to all the trouble of saying this is notable and that is notable and Uncle Tom Cobley and all are notable when all that is needed is a simple statement that all major cricket matches are notable (and then make clear what a major cricket match is). The only exception is the ICC Trophy which does need an explanation (as in fact does anything concerned with associate members).

The scope section was very poorly expressed and completely missed the essential points that the project must create and maintain articles about all people and subjects that are notable in cricketing terms; and the project must maintain an efficient and navigable category system. These are the basics. We have got to put an article about every notable subject onto the site and we have got to make all articles accessible for the readers. Having a scope that goes straight into featured articles or whatever is not only cart before the horse but cart with no horse at all and completely unrealistic.

I am not saying anything different. I am simply expressing it in a more understandable way for the benefit of readers and new starters. As for any quibbles, be bold and give them a tweak.

Best wishes. --The Ghost | ^séance 19:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The definition (description, really) of major cricket takes into account the views expressed by numerous historians who recognise the importance of single wicket, while it is clear that ListA limited overs cricket is generally considered major. This is as close to a consensus as there can ever be and I have not found any historian whose views are radically different.

I don't believe single wicket poses any problems because everyone who took part in its great contests achieved notability in the 11-a-side version too. WP already has a full set of articles about those players (e.g., Colchin, Dingate, Waymark), although we could still add much about single wicket to articles about 19th century players like Mynn and Felix.

CricketArchive's matchlist is the definitive one for verification purposes. Note that it includes much that the ACS list does not. For 18th century matches, CA uses a major and minor classification. The major matches are just that.

The whole point of this notability exercise is that "first-class" is a completely unreliable vehicle for use as a notability guideline. If you doubted that someone like Robert Colchin was a notable player, there are plenty of respected historical sources that provide the necessary verification, per the article. The ACS matchlist is their opinion only and the matchlists produced by Ashley-Cooper, Frindall, Webber, etc. are equally valid. So, if I chose to write an article about a player who was first-class according to Roy Webber only, I could rightly use Webber for verification. It is like boxing: no one knows who the real champion is because each title has so many different versions. --The Ghost | ^séance 07:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cyril Reed, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 13:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I missed your previous query. There are a number of reasons. (And of course there are a number of reasons that the singular is good too.) Wikipedia:External links is the guideline, and the main reason is style. We use plural for both "External Links" and "References" (and I guess "Notes") in the same way that books have a "Contents" page even if there's only one chapter. Subsidiary reasons include that people often add links without updating the headings, and consistency. If you trawl through the talk page you'll see the various arguments come up on either side. Rich Farmbrough, 21:34 30 December 2007 (GMT).

On January 1, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ernest Dynes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 02:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Andrew. Much appreciated. Very best wishes for 2008. --The Ghost | ^séance 09:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased to confirm I have fullfilled your request for rollback. Best Wishes. Pedro :  Chat  09:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the 1878 match. I must admit I thought myself that the Aussies played only minor matches on that tour (like the earlier English teams had done). I altered the match link and I decided to remove the bit about discontinuing in 1913 (in any case, the point of the paragraph is when it started). Best wishes. --The Ghost | ^séance 07:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why on Earth have my edits been deleted. There are no lies involved at all!!! Reply back from Dwayno99

Hi,

I've implemented your suggestion regarding one-test-wonders, or one-List A-wonders etc. You can now use the added field 'onetest = true' (or oneodi and onetype1, onetype2 for the domestic players.

Hope it works to your liking! –MDCollins (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tuanku Ja'afar Cup, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 05:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On January 16, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mohammad Shukri (cricketer), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your query on the Wikiproject talk page. Bobo. 14:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What am i going to discuss about, I just provided with references to the fact/citation needed marks. And after the ref's a provided you just revert it back? I don't get it.--THUGCHILDz 00:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do me a favor and add what Image:Clark.jpg is supposed to be? I am trying to figure out whether it would be better to keep that one or the newer image from User:Token1. Thanks! -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Egypt national cricket team, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cirt (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The 25 DYK Medal
		Congratulations! Here's a medal for you in appreciation of your hardwork in creating, expanding and nominating 25+ articles for DYK. Keep up the good work, Andrew, there are more notable cricket articles! --Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have a ton of DYK's. I just wanted to say that I nominated Ronald Joy for DYK. I hope you don't mind, but I felt that it met DYK's criteria. But even if I nominated it, it's still your DYK.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 15:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ronald Joy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 18:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The London Gazette is the place to look. All commissions and promotions in the British Armed Forces are routinely published there, as are awards of honours and decorations. Search page is here The indexing can be a bit dodgy due to the OCR process used for the old issues, and there's no particular consistency on how names are entered, so to find as much as possible you need to search on fullnames, first name, middle initial and surname, all initials + surname from the late 30s entries for Army and RAF officers also include their service number, so if you can find that from one fo the initial searches, it's worth searching on that too. Depending on when they served, and in which service, there may be info in the documents online section of The National Archives website too, that usually requires a fee to view, unless you happen to be on the Kew site for some reason. I've also brought him to attention at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Eric Cole because the folks there may also be able to find some more sources. David Underdown (talk) 17:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help out a fellow Red Rose supporter in exile. When I did a search in the Times digital archive, one of the things it turned up was a scorecard for a Sandhurst v Staff College, which predates any of the current info on his cricket career, don't know if it's worth adding? I should be able to find the article again. I'd imagine he played at school as well, but there's no verifiable source for that. David Underdown (talk) 15:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of dyk, the hook you originally proposed has the most readily verifiable cites, and is quite fun anyway. Other than the London Gazette stuff, which is freely accessible (OK you need Acrobat, but most people should have that), but is mostly fairly dry factual stuff. The more interesting stuff needs subscription/fee etc., so I think we're better off sticking with your original one, though I have suggested at least sticking major-General in front of his name if that doesn't take us over the character limit. David Underdown (talk) 09:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

haven't had time to look at Wilkinson yet, but I have just discovered that Melsome was a POW in WWII and was subsequently awarded the MBE for his work on escape committees in the camps where he was held, and managing to contact the War Office from the camps and provide secret info! David Underdown (talk) 08:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a bit of a look at Wilkinson now, though I haven't really got started on the article proeprly yet. It's not surprising he got shot in the hand, he seems to have had no regard at all for his own personal safety, this is the citation for the bar to his MC "No. 30466". The London Gazette (invalid |supp= (help)). 8 January 1918. {{cite magazine}}: Check date values in: |date= (help), I haven't found the full details of his original MC, but the GM (going into a minefield to rescue one of his men) and DSO (wandering across a bridge at Monte Cassino under mortar and artillery fire to set up a smokescreen after the subordinates who were supposed to be doing it were killed) show similar traits!

Wilkinson done now. David Underdown (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eric Cole, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 04:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First thing that I've found out about Cassels is that he seems to have been generally known as Jim, and didn't really use his first name at all, this [1] is a very good general biography, and assuming you are a member of your local library, you should have online access (and if not, it's worth joining jsut for the online sources it gives you these days). Neither Musson has an ODNB entry though, so I'd hav eto fall back on newspaper searches etc for that anyway. I don't know how much time I'll have in teh immediate future, so it might be better if you do start them off, as at least I'll have all the dates and so on, which helps narrow searches down. David Underdown (talk) 20:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Wilkinson , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--well done Victuallers (talk) 22:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at my page in order to keep the conversation intact. --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The national side in a country such as Argentina is surely a function of the domestic situation. Please refrain from taking such arbritary decisions. You seem to have reverted a fair number of other people's edits. It would surely be better to edit the edit. After all I responded to a suggestion in the discussion.Fieldgoalunit (talk) 18:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This player was not Chilean. He was born in Chile and played for a team called Chile but one composed entirely of ex-patriots involved in the business community. it had no jurisdiction to be called Chile I suppose, there was no real cricket Association. He was a British Ciitzen all his life - refer to ACS which has the late Phillip Thorn's notes. Only after WWII did Arg/Chilean cricketers, whether Anglo-Argentine or other, take nationality. I believe under Peron they had too. I would change this but I'm Afraid I don't know how to remove the image. By the same token FR Brown was not Peruvian. CH Gibson, I think I'm correct, never relinquished UK nationality. RM Poore played for South Africa but he was not South African. He was based there in the army. A decision was taken in about 1927 that ex-pats would not play for India. Some lived there 30 years and played for all-India teams(of a sort). Dipak Patel however took NZ nationality( a requirement). If the Jackson principle is applied to Rugby(either code) chaos will reign - Tuingamala, Viakona, MK Elgie, HG Vivian, Henry Paul and all those Samoans. Stuart Law? An Australian Test Cricketer who took UK Nationality in later life I think. See what I mean. very few ex-pats up to WWII would ever have refered to themselves as anything other than British. This subject is well covered in this current rash of books on the end of empire and Britain in the 50's such as Kynaston and Hennessy. 19:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you know anything about this subject?Fieldgoalunit (talk) 23:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from the article you wrote I would dispute that. Have you read Bridger's book or just taken the scores from ca. the latter. have you read the cricketer from between the wars to get a handle on this - no. Do not revert the article without seeking arbitration. It seems from your history you do this a lot and cause annoyance. I would describe your remark as ill-informed. I refer back to the national team. Incidentally do you understand the point I was making about JAS Jackson. the Argentine team of the 20's -30's was a team rather than a national team. Whgen Hong Kong entered the ICC trophy there was a lot of huffing about there team which was essentially a multi-national team of ex-pats. Please try to address isues.Fieldgoalunit (talk) 23:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your reply reveals the staggering ignorance of people like yourself who think they can look at cricketarchive and write encyclopaedic articles that other people might like to use as a reference. The article you wrote was frankly feeble and was cited by the great WP as such. It is people like you Andrew who render the WP project risible and why the students who attend my University(Keele) are forbidden to use it as a reference. Your responses simply outline why this is the case. Have a Barnstar and read a proper book instead of cricketarchive. Oh and put in one of your user boxes one for ignorance of academic standards.Fieldgoalunit (talk) 23:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a lie down and some one will pick your toys up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieldgoalunit (talk • contribs) 00:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ApologiesFieldgoalunit (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew - I've reversed your removal of my comments about the teams finishing towards the bottom of Div 5 forming part of the new Divisions 6 to 8. It is not mere "speculation" - and I have provided a citation in support of these comments from the CricketEurope site... written by you, no less! To quote that article: "WCL Division Seven: Six teams to be determined according to results in 2008 Division Five and recent regional tournaments. WCL Division Six: Four teams to be determined according to results in 2008 Division Five and recent regional tournaments, 1st and 2nd from 2009 Division Seven". If that doesn't indicate that several of the teams in this year's Division Five are not expected to form part of Divisions 6 and 7, your original article needed better wording. Grutness...wha? 10:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to misunderstand what I wrote on that page. If I had written that those teams would make up divisions 6-8, it would have been speculation. I did not - I wrote that it is likely they will - something you admitted yourself was a fact in your comment on my talkpage when you wrote: "it is likely that all eight teams will be in Divisions Six through Eight". You even mention that that was confirmed by someone from the ICC. As such, I made no speculation on the article, but rather gave the stone cold incontrovertible facts as they stand - i.e., that these teams are considered likely to be among those in the new divisions. There is nothing speculative about that comment at all, and it belongs in the article. Grutness...wha? 10:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S'alright - glad someone's keeping a watch on the ICC articles! :) Grutness...wha? 10:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Halsey (cricketer) = Sir Thomas Edgar Halsey, 3rd Baronet... agree? Talk:Thomas Halsey (cricketer). Cheers. Bazj (talk) 21:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward Cawston, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have access to information that could help, we need to update Malaysia national women's cricket team which is more than a year out of date. Kaiwhakahaere (talk) 02:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work, Andrew. Definitely a B as far as I'm concerned. All the best. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 16:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another good article, Andrew. I've given this a B-class rating. Best wishes. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 19:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Andrew. Must admit I've learned something there. I actually thought it was a separate administration. I'll make suitable changes. All the best. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 06:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Am afraid I accidentally over-wrote your infobox with my own. I then realised yours was better and integrated it in. Sorry about that! SGGH ^speak! 11:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew, and thanks for the document that I hadn't seen previously. I've saved a copy and I'll check the f/c article sometime.

I think the wf and wa classifications do imply WP:N for anyone taking part, though we should update our WP:CRIN to clarify things for the deletion brigade. Suggest you raise this at WT:CRIC as I think a few others will be interested.

Big sigh of relief today. Barring a miracle, Yorkshire will not be relegated!  :-) BlackJack | ^{talk page} 18:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on 2010 ICC World Cricket League Division Five requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 21:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent article, Andrew, which I've rated B-class. What a tragedy: it shows how easily a life can be snuffed out. I suppose he must have lost his footing or his balance just as he was going to jump down. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 05:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 3 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maurits van Nierop, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 17:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. Dunno whether you spotted my response on the Wikiproject talk page. A summarised response here. Personally I think that a year is appropriate, although having the heading "current squad" perhaps isn't. Of course I am open to any other standardised criteria, and the discussion should probably be revived by the project.

With regard to your revert, I'll leave it until you respond, but I'd suggest it's switched back for now until criteria is set out by the project. It leaves the England list out of sync with the other international lists, as well as the criteria set out at the top. It leaves players who also aren't in the most recent squad (Bresnan, Tremlett, Vaughan), whilst removes Luke Wright (who is). Also, it removes Panesar's ODI "status" which is due to expire in a day or two. Regards HornetMike (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well yeah, I'd suggest renaming the heading, personally. But anyway, we should probably try and move this dicussion over to the project and get a wider consensus. HornetMike (talk) 21:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew, . If you want a category exclusively for cricketers that played just for the Northern Ireland cricket team, you will need to think of different title. This title should be open to any cricketer born in NI regardless of whether they played for NI or not. The title suggests it is about a cricketers nationality and not which team he played for. I would suggest Northern Ireland international cricketers as a possible title. Djln --Djln (talk) 21:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, although I could do with reinforcements. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 07:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, could you have a look at this question, please, and let us know your views? I think we may be well advised to apply English naming conventions to Australia. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 10:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very good work, Andrew, and I've rated it a B-class with mid importance. All the best. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 15:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew,

I've finally finished the dual country thing. It's all in the international section. Have a look at my sandbox for my example - I've posted on the infobox talk page as well. Any thoughts?—MDCollins 12:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the infobox. JH (talk page) 18:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. Do you have any idea whether or not these matches are going to have List A status or not? Normally I wouldn't expect them to but the 2007 ICC World Cricket League Division Two matches did so I'm wondering if this extends to Division 3? Cheers. Jevansen (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your prompt response. I'm hoping to see the Afghans qualify for the next stage. Jevansen (talk) 06:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the infobox. A couple of minor poiints: Do you have a source for the nickname "Mossy"? I don't recall having heard it before. Also, in the "bowling style", would it be better to put leg-spin first, as being the style with which he took the great majority of his wickets? (Or failing that, to say in the body of the article that that was his msin style.) JH (talk page) 22:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd be happier if we could find a second source, as I haven't found Cricinfo altogether reliable. I just had a look for my copy of Richard Streeton's biography, but I couldn't lay my hands on it. JH (talk page) 10:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with your revert. Please weigh in at Talk:Cricket#.22Old_Flemish.22 to help support consensus. --Dweller (talk) 11:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Derick Etwaroo, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derick Etwaroo. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. §hawnpoo 17:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew I notice you have twice reverted my contributions with regard to John Crawfurd which I am sure you have good reason to do. John Crawfurd was my grandfather's brother and I have much information about how he came to study at Oxford including how he started to play cricket. He was, in fact the grandson of John Crawfurd who was the First Resident of Singapore, an important colonial figure from the nineteenth century. All this is publicly available.

Please could you explain your reason for reversion; I hope that it is not to just keep the biography about cricket, but I am sure you could help in this matter.

Best regards Justin Lavender --Jjdlavender (talk) 23:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew, As a regular contributor to the cricket page, I was wondering whether you had any comments / concerns about the New Lead [[2]] I'm proposing. I'd be grateful for your input. Many thanks. David T Tokyo (talk) 07:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since you're involved with cricketeurope4.net (IIRC), I thought you'd be the right person to ask what NCU means in the context of this article. Nev1 (talk) 21:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Women's Cricketer has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.

Apologies for the bog standard boilerplate notice, just figured it'd be simpler that way! — AMBerry (talk) 01:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. I reverted the last one in error when in fact I meant to go right back to the last definitive edit by Jevansen. That's the trouble sometimes when you get a succession of these vandals. Anyway, I think it's okay now. All the best in 2010. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 07:11, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew nixon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 8 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Trevin Bastiampillai - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Rupert Gomes - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Asim Khan - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Andrew, when is Raees making his next blog post on Cricket Europe? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 11:19, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting us know and for exhibiting your proper knowledge and your professional behaviour. No worries, cheers! Thanks!-- Uqahr (talk) 03:56, 3 June, 2010 (UTC)

Reply:I don't want to argue, but will i tell you straight forward. You have no right to accussed other people without providing evidence. And also Test match cricket in Australia tradionally begins at 11:00 am, ask any professional cricketer. I don't care what you say and other people say. You are intitled to your opinion and i have the right to my own opinion. There just jealous and your just jealous, please leave me alone and do not bother me with your childish issues. I will not revert if you provide proper explanations only. Thank you. --Uqahr (talk) 06:40, 3 June (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the IRISH flag from the 2011 Cricket World Cup? Its quite clear that Irish Cricket team is union of the 2 countries, hence this flag is being used.--Karyasuman (talk) 10:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why arent you replying?--Karyasuman (talk) 10:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. then the flags of the national countries are not used by many teams. This does notmean that we cannot use the flag of the national country to represent that team.--Karyasuman (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the guy in the know about most things relating to Associate and Affiliate cricket, do some of the T20 matches at the Asian games have T20 International status or are they purely exhibition matches? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 22:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The first play-off game at Knowsley Road could be the last game to be played there. It's looking likely that not that many more games will be played at Knowsley Road, Belle Vue, the Willows or Wheldon Road and we have very few free-to-use images of them (although the ones we have, particularly of Wheldon Road are very good). I wouldn't like to see our material on these historic grounds go the same way as the very limited material we have for the historic Boulevard Ground, Thrum Hall or the Parkside Ground. If you will be at the next play-off game at Knowsely Road or if you are able to get any pictures of these grounds I would be very gratefull if you could upload them to commons. I can sort out the categories and such if you don't have any time. Alternatively if you know of anyone who could it would be much appreciated. I am unlikely to go to any away games next season because of my current circumstances so will not be able to contribute towards this, although I shall endevour to get some great images at home games (I've a load of the CC final to upload but there sat it a very long backlog).

Kind Regards, Mtaylor848 (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So where is it to be held.KestevenBullet (talk) 15:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Cricket for an article for The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Thanks and I take this opportunity to wish you a very Happy New Year! – SMasters (talk) 07:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a issue in WT:CRIC that needs your vote. Thanks --ashwinikalantri ^talk 06:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew nixon. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.
Message added 20:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mtking (talk) 20:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Mtking (talk) 21:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm user from Latvian Wikipedia. I really want to write some articles about the most known Cricket players in Latvian, but I don't know about whom should I write about. So could you tell me please who could be considered the most famous and greatest players (current and all-time) — some 5-10.--Edgars2007 (Talk/Contributions) 14:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew, hopefully you can help with me with the article I've created on Sportpark Duivesteijn. I'm trying to find where it is in Voorburg. I've been on Voorburg Cricket Club's website and been on their map page.[3] I noticed the ground on the map points to Sportpark Westvliet, another ground which has held ODI's. I've searched around Voorburg on google maps but can't find another ground. Could it be possible that Sportpark Duivesteijn and Sportpark Westvliet have been confused by CA and CI as being different grounds, when they could be the same? :s AssociateAffiliate (talk) 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah knew you'd be able to sort it! Seems CA has got confused along the way! Thanks Andrew. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 18:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Andrew, much appreciated. Pass my thanks on to the Dutch editor! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 18:41, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) AssociateAffiliate (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. I'm fine, thanks, but have had a really busy year. I hope you're okay too. I've added a section called ICC lists which I think is very useful. All the best. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 17:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re- your post on WPC. My belief is that it is becoming a despotism. Reports tell me some other areas are the same. Perhaps we should just leave Jack to edit 1750 etc. I would point out that it contains many errors even allowing for other issues. TMA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.100.75 (talk) 14:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked the news before removing my addition. I post a link for you here. Please check it. http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=211550&cid=26

One more, for people like you whose job is deleting other's information, you are culprit of wikipedia. Because of people like you, no one get interest to spend time to add information on wikipedia. I sincerely request you, do multiple check before removing someone's adding information. We do not get paid here to add info, so when someone add info by spending valuable time, that means a lot.

The Turks and Caicos Islands are a small place, so I wonder if this Oliver Williams, who played for them from 2003/04-2007/08, is also this Oliver Williams? Perhaps your excellent knowledge of beyond the Test world might be able to answer that question! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 22:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How did you land that? I've always fancied writing a blog or something similar on cricket. I'd love to write for a magazine one day - I love cricket and am rather opinionated (though not pushy!) always enjoy a chat about the game with a fellow enthusiast, just never known where to start. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 19:07, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts? *chews nails* S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, he is getting more deluded by the day! I guess soon the whole of WP will be a sock of BlackJack's! Love how he rabbles on about the unemployed. Considering the amount of effort he seems to be putting into trolling, you have to assume that with so much time on his hands, unemployed would describe him accurately! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:48, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know whenever and wherever he strikes. I'll restrict his movements...! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More than happy to seek further action if this continues Andrew, the harassment is now clearly unacceptable on a number of levels, so I'd ask you to keep me in touch with all the times this user attempts to abuse you (or anyone else should you become aware of it) and I will pursue actions to prevent this user from harassing and abusing you (and others) in the future. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching, too. Btw, I'm Jack, and so is my wife. --Dweller (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See my proposal to rename Category:Cricket at the South Pacific Games to Category:Cricket at the Pacific Games Hugo999 (talk) 11:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true that from next season Irish domestic cricket will be restructed and hold first-class status? Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 18:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From this article: "Ireland, whose performance has stood out among the non-Test playing countries, cannot just be a "breeding ground" for England, Holdsworth said. "We were very grateful for ICC's recent boost to our funding to permit us to implement a domestic first class structure in 2013 and play more international fixtures against the Full Members."

I have seen some good results for the Dutch youngsters, but it's where they kick on from there. Ireland has the structure in place for those kids to progress in the game, the Dutch less so. Kinda like Afghan u-16s losing to Iran u-16s the other year, play that match two years later with the same players, the result would be hugely different. I did wonder if by first-class he meant a first-class setup as opposed to literally first-class, though I see no harm in rating a multi-day three-day tournament as first-class. PS: Besides RTD, I think he'll possibly be the first Dutch player we have a picture of! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew nixon. You have new messages at AssociateAffiliate's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

"United States of America Cricket Association: Andrew you would have to be a complete idiot to believe that one person is running this page. You see the thing about a machine is that it takes many parts to keep it going."

"United States of America Cricket Association: sorry Andrew Nixon I meant atheists not *idiot*"... can't help laugh, at them of course!!!! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On changing the subject to who will people vote for, with the USACA clown saying the first President to hold a cricket bat, got to say your response has made my day! "You're voting for the first US president to pose with a cricket bat? Is George Washington allowed to run for another term? He was a cricket player after all." Like Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 19:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew, you are correct in that there wasn't an official Final in the 1973 Women's World Cup. However the England-Australia match was a de facto final both in terms of scheduling and impact much in the same way that the 1950 FIFA World Cup final match between Uruguay and Brazil was. Wikipedia designates this match as the Final. Clicking FINAL redirects the page to : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguay_v_Brazil_(1950_FIFA_World_Cup) ). Bigbenboa (talk) 18:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand your frustration at a discussion going in a way you don't agree with, really I can, but your comments were ungracious and, as such, really not like you. I'm surprised and worried about you. --Dweller (talk) 11:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm far, far less bothered about the outcome of the discussion (either way) than I am by your response to it. You're a respected and valued Wikipedian who isn't known for blowing his top at others. Even on a big issue - and is this "big"?

Forgive my hypothesising and amateur shrinkery on someone I've never met, but I don't think your reaction is about this discussion at all. I've compiled some hopefully not too patronising suggestions you might find interesting at User:Dweller/Suggestions for wikistressed editors. Well, less patronising than WP:TEA, anyway. Hope I can be of help in some way. --Dweller (talk) 12:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew nixon. You have new messages at BlackJack's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

----Jack | ^{talk page} 12:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Thank you for your hard work in cricket. I am very curious about European cricket . I want that every nation will play and watch cricket religiously. Would you please inform me - 1. Why cricket is not popular in Europe? 2. Is cricket gaining popularity in Europe? If yes, then how much? 3. which format is ideal to popularize cricket in Europe ? Imrankabirhossain (talk) 15:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andrew nixon, The pages Twenty20 cricket and Twenty20 International cricket have been moved to Twenty20 and Twenty20 International. So I'm assuming that just "Twenty20" and "Twenty20 International" are the standard terms used. Also the page List of Twenty20 International records does not have the word cricket in it. I created a page named List of Twenty20 International matches played by Nepal and another author also created a page for the same purpose later on with the word 'cricket' added to it (List of Twenty20 International cricket matches played by Nepal). Earlier, I moved a page named List of Twenty20 cricket matches played by Nepal‎ to List of Twenty20 matches played by Nepal‎. But the author who created the page moved back the page saying "Non cricket watching viewers wouldn't understand what the page is about by just looking at the previous title." I thought that didn't make sense as non-cricket viewers wouldn't be interested in looking at the list of matches a cricket team has played. And at the moment both pages exist. I don't think it's a good idea to have two similar pages for the same purpose. I'm wondering which is generally accepted that's why I'm asking for your help. I also asked an expert, who have been editing cricket related articles since very long time, regarding the matter. The author also believes that the consensus would be that the pages without the word cricket is correct. Please have a look at them, and delete one of those pages or do what you think would be suitable. Cricshady (talk) 05:31, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew. If you're still looking in, I think you'll be interested in this AfD. The player recently played for Singapore in WCL3; the WP:CRIN criterion being WCL6 as you will recall. Hope all is well with you. Regards, Jack | ^{talk page} 14:30, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bikash Dali is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bikash Dali until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SeytX (talk) 22:48, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know. Red Jay (talk) 08:48, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew nixon. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andrew nixon. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. Totally agree with your article, esp. the bit titled "ICC barely acknowledging records set in associate matches". Have a great 2020. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:52, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Richard Wodehouse has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage in RS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. buidhe 00:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richard Wodehouse is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Wodehouse until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. buidhe 09:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Users with indefinitely protected user talk pages". Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Allen (Irish cricketer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Allen (Irish cricketer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Störm (talk) 22:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Former first-class cricket club has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 23:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew - hope you are well. I know you're not active on WP, but incase you do check your talkpage from time-to-time, I just wanted to thank you for your column on Cricket Europe. I always enjoy reading it and your latest one containing a piece on the Commonwealth Games qualifying, and the lack of a mention about this on the ICC, is something that really bugs me about the ICC. Still nothing about the CWC League 2 in Namibia taking place, adding extra matches, and then been cancelled... Anyway, hope you have a great Christmas and a happy new year. Ho, ho, ho. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only just seen this which shows how often I check it! Thanks for your kind words. Andrew nixon (talk) 09:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Solomon Islands national cricket team has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable national cricket team. It appears to have been defunct since at least 1999. Prior to that it played few matches and was not well organised. Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Cricket in the Solomon Islands indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Henry Terry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Terry until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Arthur Birkett has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Frederick Cuming has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Montagu Toller has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alfred Bowerman has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alfred Powlesland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. Also fails WP:NOLYMPICS, as only two teams participated. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Harry Corner has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. Also fails WP:NOLYMPICS, as only two teams participated. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Francis Burchell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. Also fails WP:NOLYMPICS, as only two teams participated. An attempt to find additional sources failed, and WikiProject Cricket was also unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article William Anderson (cricketer, born 1859) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates the general criteria of WP:NOTDATABASE, and fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. Also fails WP:NOYLMPICS, as only two teams participated. A search for additional sources did not find any WP:SIGCOV, no additional sources were available at the French wikipedia, and WikiProject Cricket was unable to help.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 07:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Montagu Toller is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montagu Toller until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 10:43, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alfred Bowerman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfred Bowerman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 10:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arthur Birkett is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Birkett until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 07:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frederick Cuming is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick Cuming until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 08:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harry Corner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Corner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 08:04, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francis Burchell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Burchell until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BilledMammal (talk) 08:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article T. K. Sukumaran is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T. K. Sukumaran (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 14:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Easan Sinnathamby has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Grahame Cruickshanks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Seems to fail WP:SIGCOV. The main source is a statistical database which can be very unreliable. The piece about his death in Berlin during WWII looks very dubious and has been challenged.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BoJó | talk UTC 06:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article W. Browning is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. Browning until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

BoJó | talk UTC 15:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article C. B. K. Beachcroft has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails GNG and SIGCOV. BoJó | talk UTC 15:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BoJó | talk UTC 15:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Robert Anderson (American cricketer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Exclusively reliant on stats on database as sources. Could not find significant coverage of the subject to suggest that it passes WP:NATH or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 04:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Egyptian cricketers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. AA (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew nixon! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Members/Active, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Members/Active.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:03, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]