User talk:Nigej

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Nigej, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RHB 17:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Playfair Cricket Annual

Is the line about Peter Wynne-Thomas necessary ? Its significance is not obvious and it sort of stands out. Tintin 18:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks fine now. Thank you. Tintin 08:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you a member of ACS ? Tintin 10:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Certainly am. Since 1982 (frightening!) Nigej 19:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Wisden had included the number of runs scored by WG in all matches, calculated by G Neville Weston, which came to IIRC 99840. Has this been revised too ? Tintin 10:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I presume the latest number is that calculated by J R Webber in his "The Chronicle of W.G", all 1100 pages! He follows the ACS for first-class (ie 54,211). For minor matches he has 44,556 for the 1,066 matches he has traced. However in several seasons he has found references to other numbers (I think these are season totals normally) which give a total of 46,837. So his total runs is either 98,767 or 101,048 depending on which approach you prefer. As usual the situation is a nightmare. He has 97 minor cricket centuries giving 221 in all Nigej 19:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an interesting quote from Hobbs here. Shall I add it ? Tintin 10:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. Strangely Arlott's 'Jack Hobbs Profile of 'The Master' does seem to mention the tour at all, admittedly only a short biography. Nigej 19:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Just in case you have investigated the cricket sections of Wikipedia a great deal, you should find the works of User:BlackJack interesting. Tintin 09:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Isn't reproducing the front cover of the 2007 Playfair a breach of copyright? JH (talk page) 19:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Correct answer is - don't know. Based what I've done on the Wisden Cricketers Almanack page so if I'm in error presumably they are too. Seems to be something called 'fair use' under US copyright law which I have assumed applies here. Whether US copyright law applies to this Wikipedia image of a book published in Britain is unclear to me. Needs an expert.
It is not a breach of copyright provided it is a low resolution image. Tintin 05:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
It certainly isn't high-resolution. Could be middling-resolution I guess whatever that means. Seems to me the quality is sufficiently low compared to the original. Am I allowed to have small scans ofearly editions eg 1948, 1963 for comparitive purposes? Nigej 08:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Have replaced original scan with lower quality version. Much smaller too! Nigej 08:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you have early editions of Indian cricket by any chance ? Tintin 10:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Afraid not. Don't have any at all. Nigej 12:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Sorry for bugging you again but do the PW-T articles which are the refs for the Playfair article say anything that is worth including in Indian cricket ? Tintin 05:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
There was a short article in Cricket Satistician 63. I'll have a go updating the Indian Cricket page. Nigej 08:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Tintin 11:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philadelphian cricket team in Jamaica in 1908-09

Hello. I see that you've moved this article back to the two year format. The rationale of your edit summary seems reasonable enough. Do you know if this has been brought up at the wikiproject before for a consensus? If it has, I'll leave it alone, if not, it may be worth clearing up there. I still think that one date is more clear as the Philadelphian cricket team was only there for a three matches in 1909. What do you think?--Eva bd 16:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I can see the pros and cons either way. There is a particular problem in places like the West Indies where they could play at most times of the year (generally in the WI no first class matches were played May to July, and indeed few in October to December). For the WI tours I've started so far I've used the pre-existing name which has eg (RS Lucas' XI cricket team in West Indies in 1894-95) two years in the title even though that tour started in January. Note eg AA Priestley's XI cricket team in West Indies in 1896-97 where they sailed from the UK in late December 1896 but didn't play matches until January 1897 - 1896-97 or just 1897? Also note the Jamaica v Trinidad matches of August 1905 see 1905-06 West Indian cricket season. The ACS in it's publications has these as 1905-06 season but CricketArchive has them as 1905 season but for matches in September CricketArchive do use two years (personally I prefer 1905-06 for these). Problem with changing to one year is that there are implications for lots of other tours, pretty much everywhere except England where most pages have the two years currently (eg New Zealand cricket team in Australia in 1898-99 to choose one at random). I suppose the page could have said 'Philadelphian cricket team in Jamaica in the 1908-09 season' but again there are implications for loads of other pages. Nigej 17:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
To answer your question. No I haven't brought it up at the wikiproject. Wouldn't currently know how to that anyway I'm afraid. Nigej 17:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help

It would be great if you could add anything more to Anandji Dossa. He is probably the biggest name in Indian cricket statistics but there isn't enough available for an article. I created it two years back in the hope that someone will expand it but it is still a three-line stub. Tintin 13:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Have added what little I can findNigej 07:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Tintin 09:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Challenor

Thanks for your good work on this article. I've long felt that it was inadequate, without having got around to doing very much about it myself. I did increase his importance rating from "low" to "mid" a few weeks ago, but wonder if I was over-cautious and should have made it "high". JH (talk page) 20:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 23 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harold Austin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Smee 22:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I couldn't help but notice...

Nigej, do actually have possession of any Lillywhites? I couldn't help but notice that you created an article about them. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 18:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I've most of the Reds (except 2 early ones), quite a number of the Greens and just a few of the Guides Nigej 13:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
You fortunate thing, you! Do you have any from 1881 to 1883? Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 13:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes I have Red and Green for those years. Also Cricket for some of 1882 and 83. Be glad to help but out but am living away from home currently so only answering email every few days. Hopefully back in action in a few weeks Nigej 13:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 09:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PlayfairCricketAnnual1948FrontCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PlayfairCricketAnnual1948FrontCover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do please reconsider

I don't like to see another genuine editor thinking the WikiWorld is against him. I've been there at least five times! I'm afraid I get drawn in too deeply at times and I might unintentionally forget that someone else has done good work, as you have. I did promise myself when I returned from CZ recently that I would not get involved with any ACS issues again; but I have almost immediately broken that promise and I don't feel good about it. If I have written anything that has given you offence, I apologise. Best wishes. BlackJack | talk page 19:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)