Talk:Michael Vaughan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 FA appeal for articles related to the 2007 Cricket World Cup
These articles have free pictures of acceptable quality which make them viable to be shown on the Main Page if they become FAs in time for the World Cup. Players and coaches: Teams: Issues: Main: Copyediting requests: Peer review: |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group. | ||
 |
Michael Vaughan is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by editing the article Michael Vaughan, or visit the project page for more details. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Skin condition?
I remember seeing on the television that Vaughan had very stretchy skin. Does he suffer from a skin condition? This was a long time ago and I am sure he said that he could pull the skin from his neck over his chin. Does anyone remember seeing this?
[edit] Second child born?
A recent edit says that Vaughan's second child was born last Friday. The strange thing is, I was looking for the child's name and I couldn't find a single news story about it. I don't see why anyone would make that up, but can someone confirm it? Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- OK, thanks. Stephen Turner (Talk) 13:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Statistics against each country
I removed the detailed statistics against each country, because it was already out of date. It was added by an anonymous editor, and hasn't been updated since it was added. It can easily be retrieved from an old version if someone does want to update it and keep it updated. Stephen Turner (Talk) 13:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] England Captaincy
Since Vaughan has been ruled out for AT LEAST six months (probably more like twelve months), it makes sense to change the captaincy box over to Flintoff. Whatever 'the rules' say about the appointment needing to be permanent before such a step is taken, I think everyone ought to take stock of the reality of the situation. I see it thus; Flintoff (barring the first test at Lords tomorrow and God forbid another injury) will be leading the England side for at least six months, maybe twelve, maybe permanently. To all intents and purposes, he is now the England captain. It is no disrespect to either Vaughan or 'the rules' to change the captaincy box over. So I have. Istartfires 16:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Conclusion
Any objections to me summarizing the conclusion section: it's a bit long at the moment and seems to catalogue the whole of his recovery from injury in 2006 on a week-by-week basis! --Dave. 10:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- I personally don't think these articles should contain minute-by-minute updates on scores/injuries etc - we have BBC sport for that. However many wikipedia sports articles are updated daily. I would certainly back a summary of the conclusion section. I don't think it needs specific dates, but the guidelines are (I think) to use eg 6 February 2007 (which then formats according to your date preferences) but not February or 2007 or 6th February etc. (WP:MOSNUM) roundhouse 11:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Not sure I understand your point about the format of dates - I'm not talking about removing the dates or re-formatting them, I'm looking at summarising the section a lot more briefly, rather than the lengthy information about when and where he returned from injury, whether he fielded or not, how many surgeries he had, and how many matches he missed. I don't object to the article being updated regularly, just noting that perhaps it's gone past the point where we need that level of detail. --Dave. 11:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I made the remark re dates in response to your recent edit (exact dates 'should' be formatted). I agree re the summary - today's news in detail is interesting today but not in 6 month's time. At some point the details should be replaced by a summary; anything pre-Ashes I would say. I'm not going to revert any recent details; it just seems to me that it is duplicating material which is better done elsewhere (and is not encyclopedic). roundhouse 13:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Ah, got ya. Thanks. --Dave. 14:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Family
Is it really necessary to include each and every detail regarding Michael's daughter's birth and the uproar that was created due to the fact that he left the field in the middle of a test match? Can the 'Family' section be summarized like the 'Conclusion' section? After all, even Michael is not too open about his private life!
- Elsewhere in Wikipedia children's names are removed ... I would be in favour of a summary omitting names. roundhouse 12:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Awards
In the Awards section, is it necessary to mention that Michael Vaughan became the first cricketer ever in the history of the game to feature on the cover of Cricket's bible Wisden in 2003, leading to a massive change from tradition?
