Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hong Kong ODI cricketers/archive2


 * 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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 09:23, 25 April 2012.

List of Hong Kong ODI cricketers

 * Nominator(s): AssociateAffiliate (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the FL criteria and follows a similar design to current FLs such as List of Bermuda ODI cricketers (which was recently promoted). The list is also complete and as Hong Kong don't play at this level anymore, it is unlikely to change in the near future. It was previously a featured list nearly four years ago. Feedback most welcome! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. Why is the territory not playing anymore ? Jeremy (talk) 11:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The territory still plays, it's currently taking part in the World Twenty20 Qualifier in Dubai. They don't play ODIs anymore, well they never have in their own right, but were twice accorded ODI status for the 2004 and 2008 Asia Cups.  Non-Test teams were not included from this year onward, so this years Asia Cup is an all Test nation affair.  Hong Kong do have a chance next year to gain ODI status in their own right in the 50-over World Cup Qualifier. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Comments –
 * "and Tabarak Dar. Dar...". I know it's hard in a case like this, but do try to avoid having a repetition like this from one sentence to the next.
 * The comma after "Three players have each taken 4 wickets" would be better served as a semi-colon.
 * Title of ref 4 needs an en dash to replace the hyphen. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Response - rejigged the Dar sentence. Semi-colon put in, en dash added to ref 4. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 10:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Image review: The one image used appears to be free and is properly tagged.  Good raise  11:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments from  Harrias  talk
 * I'm not keen on the first sentence: while a list doesn't need the subject emboldened at the start, I just feel the current start is a little weak, but others may disagree.
 * The BBI column sorts incorrectly, 2/62 should be listed below 2/51 for example, not above.
 * In the Runs column, James Atkinson sorts in the wrong place.
 * Given none of the players got centuries or half-centuries, I'd remove those columns altogether.
 * I'd suggest that the Cricinfo links should state "ESPNcricinfo", given that is the address of the site, and the title it "trades" under.  Harrias  talk 19:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Response - I've changed the opening sentence a little, reads a little more simply and flowing now... well I hope! I've added ESPNcricinfo. Corrected Jamie Atkinson, he now appears in the right place. I have removed the 50s and 100s columns. I'm trying to fix the BBI column, but after a 12 hour ward shift, I'm nigh on braindead! I'll have a go at that task on the weekend. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * How would you suggest I fix that so that the BBI column sorts correctly? Any ideas Harrias? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Have a look at how I've done it on the List of Afghanistan ODI cricketers page. Essentially, it is w/yy where xx is 100-yy, and w is the number of wickets taken. If you are still having trouble, let me know, and I can go through and do it for you!  Harrias  talk 20:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Support NapHit (talk) 16:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Would switch the opening sentences to explain what ODI is before talking about HK ODI players. Would then take the opportunity to say that HK played in ODIs between 2004 and 2008 and that during that time 20 players represented their country.  This will also make sure you don't use the full version after you've abbreviated it. - Done
 * Consider making (pictured) italicised (like you seen on the main page) in the lead image caption. - Done
 * "ever" is redundant in the caption. - Done
 * "An ODI differs from Test matches in " - sing vs plural. - Done
 * " gained ODI status in their own right, but have been accorded ODI status twice" confused, so the "accorded ODI status" was temporary? Was there a reason for this? - Done, well explained why it was only accorded on a temporary basis.
 * Second para has a lot of short, disconnected sentences which really impacts on our goal of "professional prose". Suggest you look at ways to merge some of the short sentences and thus improve the flow. - Done
 * "Their next ODIs..." comes after a reference to Pakistan. You should be clearer here. - Done
 * "Should they qualify for the 2015 World Cup their matches in the World Cup would have ODI status." cited? - I think it's so blindly obvious that no direct sources exist! I can't seem to find any.
 * "In total, Hong Kong played four ODIs.[5] Three players played in all four ODIs: Afzaal Haider, Najeeb Amar and Tabarak Dar." consider merge, "Hong Kong played a total of four ODIs,[5] with three players representing the country every time." (or similar), just thinking on my feet... Just another example of merging a couple of short sentences about a similar topic to improve the flow of the prose. - Done
 * "Of the 20 players who have appeared in ODIs for Hong Kong" by now we should know we're reading about ODI HK cricketers, so this could be "optimised". - Done
 * "Three players have each taken 4 wickets" 4->four and this may read odd to those who don't realise that wicket-keepers don't take wickets. - Swapped around, so bowlers are mentioned before wicket-keepers.
 * Sorting by "First" or "Last" in Safari gives four separate results with each of four clicks.
 * "Win% – Winning percentage" in the key but where in the table? - Done
 * Same with "100" and "50"... - Done
 * BBI col needs work, 2/62 is not as good as 2/51 for instance (when sorting BBI from best to worst).


 * Comment - A long list Rambling Man! I'll get round to these shortly I hope, fairly snowed under at the moment.  I'll endeavour to find a free moment this weekend. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Response - Done some, will have a go at the rest hopefully later today. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


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