Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Australia Test cricket records/archive1


 * 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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:30, 6 June 2017 (UTC).

List of Australia Test cricket records

 * Nominator(s): – Ianblair23 (talk) 09:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

My fellow Wikipedians, I present for review this list of Australian cricket records played in the oldest and greatest form of the game – Test cricket. Based on the Sri Lankan list which was promoted to featured status back in April 2010, this has just appeared on the Main Page in the DYK section. I look forward to your feedback on this nomination. Cheers  – Ianblair23 (talk) 09:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Nice work, Ian. I've started to take a look at it, making some minor fixes. One question - declared totals show as 758–8d (for example). I've only ever seen scorecards show it as 758/8d, and as it's an Australian list, should it be 8/758d?  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 09:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks very much for your comment. This format was a carry over from the Sri Lankan article. I have changed it as requested. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 03:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)


 * , significant work has gone into this list since you last commented. Would you mind please reviewing again. Thanks – Ianblair23 (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Ian. I took a look yesterday and nothing jumps out that needs fixing and it looks like all the major concerns have been addressed, below. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks very much for your support. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 08:03, 29 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Support - very nice work. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments from Vensatry
 * Currently -> As of ...
 * Done – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "He also hold the highest fifth-wicket partnership with ..." -> He also holds ...
 * Done – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Given McGrath still holds the record for most wickets by a fast bowler in Tests, I think the fact warrants a mention in the lead.
 * Done – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Why isn't there a mention about captaincy records in the lead?
 * Great pick up Vensatry. I have added the captaincy records to both the lead and the body. – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Per WP:ALT, you need to mention the names of the players in these lists - talking about File:1902AusTeam.jpg
 * Sorry Vensatry, I am at a loss of what you mean here. If you are implying that WP:ALT states that when there is a team photograph, the alt text should list each person in the photograph, well that simply not true. The purpose of alt text is to provide additional information to visual impaired people using screen readers. It should be short, clear and concise. In the image you have raised, it is a photograph of the 1902 Australian cricket team. The team set two records which still stand. The alt text reads "Australian cricket team that toured England in 1902". The caption then states what records the team set. I hope that I that cleared things up. – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. &mdash; Vensatry (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


 * What does "=" signify in the table?
 * It means "equal" or "tied", eg equal second or tied fifth – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Is "scoring a duck" a record? Ditto with "Worst figures in an innings".
 * Not all records are positive, eg. Greatest and narrowest loss in the team records section. I have included these as it gives balance. – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Page no(s). needed for PDF references
 * Done – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Some refs. are archived while others aren't.


 * Only those refs that do not appear in the Internet Archive are without an archived url. – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

&mdash; Vensatry (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the review . I will address these concerns shortly. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 23:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have addressed each of your points above. I hope that is to your satisfaction. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , do you have any further comments on this list? – Ianblair23 (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Support, meets the standards. &mdash; Vensatry (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks very much for the review. It is very much appreciated. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Support – A lot of good work has been done to improve the writing in response to my comments, and I think it meets the standards now. Do be sure to do a quick read-through before your next nomination, so that you don't end up facing a long list of issues that you need to fix in a hurry. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:07, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks very much the support and your comments. I will take it on board moving forward. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. -- Pres N  01:05, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.