Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Steve Waugh/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 15:08, 28 August 2012 [1].

List of international cricket centuries by Steve Waugh[edit]

List of international cricket centuries by Steve Waugh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets all the criteria. It is based on similar new FLs such as List of international cricket centuries by Mohammad Yousuf and List of international cricket centuries by Kumar Sangakkara. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 15:23, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  • "Steve Waugh is a former Australian cricketer and captain." should expand to say former captain of Australian cricket team, just saying he was a former makes no sense
    • Changed it to "Steve Waugh is a former cricketer and captain of the Australia cricket team" —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • refs should come after punctuation, ref 3 currently does not
  • "away his wicket easily and is someone who valued his wicket", comma should be a full stop
  • "He was named as a Indian Cricket Cricketer..."
  • we have ten and 10 in close succession, be consistent, should really be in digits above 9
  • Srilanka -> Sri Lanka
  • "2003-04 series against India" hyphen should be an en dash
  • Table is formatted strangely we have all figures aligned centrally except the score column which is not, be consistent.
  • Country, venue and date column should be aligned to the left, looks untidy aligned centrally
  • I don't see the point in the I/N column, can't see how it can be referenced either
    • As I already said the list was modeled based on Mohammad Yousuf's list where M/N was included in a separate column. I feel Innings played by a cricketer is a proper representation rather than Matches played. The reference for that column would be the Innings by innings list from ESPNcricinfo —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You also say the Sangakkara list is a model and that list does not have that column. Remember Wikipedia is not a statistics website, as far as I can see this is information that does not add anything to the table, and is irrelevant information. NapHit (talk) 13:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I never said this was solely based upon the Sangakkara list. Both the lists are different in some aspects. If wikipedia is not a statistics website then why do we have articles on List of records that too some of them being FLs. Anyway I've removed that since it bothered you. —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand its solely based on one list, but regardless the information was not needed. Records are notable, such as centuries, what is not notable are some of the stats that accompany the notable record, in this case the number of innings. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should have a separate column for refs
    • Why should refs have a separate column. Is there a reason for it.—Vensatry (Ping me) 06:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It makes the table look neat for a start. As they all at the end of the table anyway, they should be in a separate column. NapHit (talk) 13:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The column should be unsortable. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot that! Fixed. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do you have B/F and S/R in ODI table but not test column? I would remove these columns
    • In Test cricket balls faced really doesn't matter, where as in limited–overs cricket it's a prominent figure. Other similar lists doesn't have balls faced in the Test centuries table. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They also don't have it in the ODI table either, most have S/R but not B/F, I'm not convinced its needed.

NapHit (talk) 13:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What if someone wants to know the "balls faced". The Mohammad Yousuf list has the column and as I said earlier this article was modeled based on that. I don't have problems removing the S/R, but I don't think it makes sense if we remove the "Balls faced" column altogether. —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just because one list has the column doesn't mean its needed, not convinced by your argument that its more important in ODI than test, why is that? Surely its relevant to both? Anyway you've not adequately explained why the column should remain, people wanting to know is not a reason. Still think it should be removed, just stats overload as far as I'm concerned. NapHit (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In Test cricket balls faced doesn't really matter. You could see many Test matches where Balls faced was not recorded before some 30-40 years. That's not the case with ODIs. I see S/R in almost every century list in the ODI table. So what's harm in having S/R in ODI table. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Read the strike rate article, it seems more relevant to ODI, so happy for that to remain. NapHit (talk) 15:23, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Key should be arranged in order of columns in the table, so test should come after Inn. instead of before Pos.
  • A number of refs have hyphens when they should be en dashes, nearly every ref from 26 onwards
ref 57 still has a hyphen. NapHit (talk) 13:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NapHit (talk) 17:16, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Quick (mild oppose) comments
  • " Middle–order batsman" no need for M and hyphen, not en-dash here.
  • You link middle order batsman, but not right-arm medium bowler in the lead.
  • "Waugh took Australia " led rather than took.
  • "honored" I know in BritEng that should be honoured. What about AusEng?
  • "Test–playing" hyphen, not en-dash.
  • " a Guinness record" just say a world record.
  • "Waugh's position is seventh in the list" -> "Waugh is seventh..."
  • "for Australia over a period of nineteen years" -> "for Australia for nineteen years".
  • Ref 24, for instance, en-dash needed.
  • Ref 25, for instance, publisher needed.

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all. —Vensatry (Ping me) 20:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • In the tables, debold the headers per WP:MOSBOLD
  • Align references to the center in the tables
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order

TBrandley 19:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 20:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • "He was named as Indian Cricket Cricketer of the year in 1988". Capitalize "year"?
  • "Waugh made his Test debut against India on December 1985". Unless a more precise date is given, "on" should be "in".
  • Should "International" be capitalized in "Waugh retired from International cricket"?
  • Could remove List of from the two section headers, since it's obvious they're lists.
    • Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 10:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not done. I still see them. All you did was remove the table captions, which were helpful and should be restored. I meant the section titles themselves. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is intended to be sourcing the first note? Giants2008 (Talk) 01:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think sourcing the note would help. That's why I brought it up. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. TBrandley 02:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No concerns. Meets the standards. Zia Khan 23:19, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from --Kürbis (✔) 10:19, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
*Comments
    • "cricket cricketing captains" - jawbreaker; could be just cricket captains
    • "He was named as Indian Cricket Cricketer of the Year in 1988, and Wisden Cricketer of the Year the next year.[10][11]" - to avoid repetition, perhaps: "He was named Cricketer of the Year in 1988 by Indian Cricket, and a year later by Wisden."
    • "In January 2010, the ICC honoured him by inducting him into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame.[12]" - perhaps just write: "the ICC inducted him into the..."
    • "In Test matches, Waugh has scored centuries against all Test cricket playing nations, and is the second player to do so.[15][N 1]" - no need for "and is"
    • Man of the Match is a proper noun, therefore should be capitalized
    • That is all. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 17:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_international_cricket_centuries_by_Steve_Waugh/archive1&oldid=1138486626"