Talk:New Zealand cricket team in Australia in 2011–12

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cricket Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Cricket To-do list:

Article assessment

Check Category:Unassessed cricket articles for class and Category:Unknown-importance cricket articles for importance: see Assessment Department for details

Verifiability

Update fair and unfair play, fast bowling, first-class cricket, googly, innings, leg break, limited overs cricket, not out, Pakistan Cricket Board, spin bowling, underarm bowling, wicket, and other fundamental articles classified by the WikiProject as high-importance so that they meet WP:Verifiability policy standards

Cleanup

There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format)

Infoboxes

Add infoboxes to the player articles found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/requested infoboxes

Cricket people

Create articles about 19th century players who are listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/19th century players
Create biographies about Bangladeshi players from the task force redlink list
Check the listing of key bios at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Key biographies and improve these to at least B-class.
Create batting/bowling graphs for cricketers who have excelled in international cricket.
Create articles for redlinks present here and here

Cricket teams & countries

Domestic cricket coverage is needed for Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe;
Create articles from redlinks and improve existing articles in List of current first-class cricket teams; National cricket teams; Under-19 national cricket teams
Create articles about cricket in these missing countries
Create or expand articles on international tours from items in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/summary of international tour articles
Create a link as such on Template:Cr-Aus/doc for Cricket Australia XI

Images

Add pictures (and remove template from address requests) in these Category:Wikipedia requested images of cricket people
Add pictures for grounds missing photos from here

On this day in cricket

Expand the anniversary coverage for Portal:Cricket at Portal:Cricket/Anniversaries

Umpires

Expand ICC International umpire panel; ICC Elite referee panel; ICC Associates and Affiliates umpire panel

Women

Expand Women's cricket, Women's Test cricket and articles about women's cricket generally especially biographies and tours

Update

A number of lists need to be updated, can be found in Template:International cricketers and Template:National cricket captains
Regularly updating cricketers' career stats.

Other

Export all cricket terms present in List of cricket terms to Wiktionary

How is the Player of the Match chosen[edit]

Rumours I've heard tell me that it's now a popular vote of Channel Nine viewers.

That would explain a batsman in the losing Australian team getting it ahead of a very successful bowler from the winning team.

What IS the story? HiLo48 (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was being voted for by viewers. Feel sorry for Bracewell. Lugnuts (talk) 07:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just Ch 9 viewers in Australia? That would be stupid. If it's the case, it has lost all merit and no longer deserves mention here. HiLo48 (talk) 07:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to this report, it was voted by people who purchased an app. BUT Warner was the official man of the match - it was Cricket Australia who decided to do it this way. St Anselm (talk) 10:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, the Player of the Match award in Australia right now has almost no equivalence to the Player of the Match award in previous series and elsewhere currently. The article presents the information as if it means the same thing as in previous series. We either need to clarify this change in meaning in the article, or just remove it completely because it's rubbish (as that reliable source says). HiLo48 (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should report who was the man of the match, regardless of how that person was picked. Cricinfo offers up Warner's name. I think we could become bogged down in a potential edit-war to a problem that doesn't exist in the first place. If someone doesn't like Ch 9 viewers picking the MotM, why not the next editor disagreeing with a former cricketer in the commentary box who they dislike who picks a MotM. Report the facts not hide the facts you don't particually agree with, otherwise it becomes a bit PONTINGY, er WP:POINTY ;-) Lugnuts (talk) 19:36, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely DO NOT want to hide the facts. Right now, the fact that the method of selecting this award's recipient has dramatically changed is hidden. I will work on a suitable annotation to make sure that we DO report the facts. HiLo48 (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am unsure that it changes much at all to be honest. Player of the match/series have been decided in a variety of ways in the past and I don't see that the method of choosing is relevant and I am puzzled that it is given much weight at all. If there was to be discussion on the topic in an article, this article is NOT the place - it should be at Man of the Match. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. I looked there. It's a very shallow generic article about similar awards in many sports across the globe. There's an article in today's Age about this issue now - "Warner award a 'slap in the face' for Kiwis". So how the recipient is selected has in itself become a story. HiLo48 (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket Australia has apparently decided to abandon the public vote system. This may be worth mentioning in the article. —Raven42 (talk) 02:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it certainly became an issue. Probably the most controversial aspect of the whole series in the end. I will think about some words for the article. HiLo48 (talk) 03:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The best NPOV way forward is to mention the award and to mention the notable criticism it attracted. --Dweller (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added a subsection to this effect. HiLo48 (talk) 08:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]