Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2007 Cricket World Cup warm-up matches


 * 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 17:28, 28 March 2008.

2007 Cricket World Cup warm-up matches
Originally nominated this for WP:GA status, and was originally promoted after I convinced the reviewer it was an article and not a list, it was later removed on the basis of, er, it's a list. :p Not my finest hour. But in due course I've come back to the article list, improved it, and fixed various problems, and am now nominating it here. All comments are welcome! One thing I'd like to ask is: are archive.com links okay? I originally linked to a story for one of my references but the website has since moved and removed all news articles from before the move, but it's still available on archive.org. It's been linked and noted that it's an archive.com link in the tag. Hope that's cool. Anyway, critique away, & thanks a lot for any suppots, opposes, comments or suggestions. :) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 14:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

A few things from me. Hope that's helpful. --Dweller (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - I made a small modification to one of the tables but otherwise my major concerns have been addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Numbers 1-10 (except scores) are usually written as words (I refer to the Lead)
 * Is that Irish flag something there's consensus over? (I'm ignorant on it - just surprised me)
 * "Performance" in Statistics charts is a bit of an oddity, as for most it will be an aggregate of two performances. How about "Aggregate"?
 * Done the first and last two, thanks! Re: the Ireland issue, yes it is, really: the Ireland cricket team represents both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland so using one or the other would be both incorrect and potentially insulting given the tensions between the two. Cheers! AllynJ (talk | contribs) 17:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support-however, I would source the lead a little bit more. But in spite of that, it is FL worthy. T r U C o  - X  14:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! But I'm going to respectfully disagree with that suggestion, I think, per WP:LEAD:
 * Because the lead will usually repeat information also in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. - I don't see anything as particularly challengeable, especially when the information in the lead is all listed and sourced in the article. It simply looks neater, I believe. :) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 23:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments -- Matthew 20:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "a series of matches to prepare, experiment with different tactics and to help them acclimatise to conditions in the West Indies." I think needs another comma after "tactics"
 * I'm not sure on this: I've never used the serial comma, and I don't believe it is particularly common in the dialects of English spoken by cricket-playing countries (ie, per the manual of style, If an article has been stable in a given style, it should not be converted without a reason that goes beyond mere choice of style).
 * "despite sharing some of main features of the form of cricket" is "the form of" necessary?
 * I would say so: it is meant to clarify meaning One-Day Internationals as opposed to Test matches. I've changed a word that should make this clearer, but I think it would look awkward if I rephrased it to say One-Day Internationals again when they've already been mentioned in that sentence.
 * "For example, the main change allowed for thirteen different players to play in a match: nine players being allowed to both bat and bowl, with two only being able to bowl and two only being able to bat." What is this a change from?
 * Done.
 * I think "voiced concerns" is better than "aired concerns"
 * Done.
 * Why are the matches against a blue background?
 * This is because it uses a template (see Template:Limited overs international). This has become a WikiProject Cricket standard and I would be reluctant to change it.
 * Perhaps wikilink to overs and runs
 * This is an issue with the template, really... I don't how it should be addressed, personally.
 * What are the names there for? (Marlon Samuels and Thomas Odoyo, for example, and what do the numbers beside them represent?
 * They are the names of a the top scorer/highest wicket taker alongside their runs scored/wickets taken; but again, this is more of an issue with the template.
 * Why is small font being used? It's a hinderance to those with poor eyesight
 * Done mostly - I agree it's a readability issue in some places and have removed them there, but I think for the (50 overs) it would look rather odd to have it the same size as the score - the overs aren't part of the score, but are a necessary part of reading the score. (I can't think of a better way to phrase that, sorry! I really don't know how to put it, but I do think it works better in the remaining places.)
 * What does aggregate mean in the Statistics section?
 * This is something TRM suggested further up the page as there were only two matches played by each team results seemed poorly chosen, and aggregate - an aggregate of two, in this case - seemed more fitting.
 * Thanks! AllynJ (talk | contribs) 23:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Re commas, I've lived in a number of English-speaking countries and as a result speak and write with a bastardised version of the language that changes from day to day!
 * If the templates render these things in a certain established way then that's fine to leave it as is.
 * Support All other concerns have been satisfied with either edits or explainations. -- ṃ• α• Ł• ṭ• ʰ• Ə• Щ•  @ 05:05, 27 March, 2008
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.