Talk:Kekhashru Mistry

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 22:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kekhashru Mistry (1911)
Kekhashru Mistry (1911)

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 22:50, 30 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • checkY Article is long enough (3375 characters), new enough (moved to mainspace 20 November, nominated same day), and article is within policy
  • checkY Hook is short enough, interesting, in the article and well cited. I added link to aide-de-camp in hook, as not everyone will know what this is
  • checkY Image is freely licenced (out of copyright in US and country of origin- I added PD UK tag to image), in the article and looks good at low resolution
  • ☒N QPQ not yet done. Ktin please provide a QPQ for this nomination
  • Overall, article is fine but QPQ is required. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Joseph2302: Thanks for the review. QPQ is now completed and has been updated. Please have a look. Ktin (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
checkY QPQ done
Good to go now that QPQ has been done. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Joseph2302, much appreciated. To the promoting admin / prep-builder, please promote this one with the image included. Happy to wait until a prep opens-up with an image slot available. Ktin (talk) 16:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To T:DYK/P7 without image

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kekhashru Mistry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 16:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image is suitably tagged.

  • What makes thecricketcauldron.com reliable? It appears to be a blog.

That's the only issue. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:32, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mike Christie, I can't tell if cric HQ, whatever it is, verifies that sentence. This is their "About" page, and it inspires no confidence; plus, since it's such a data-oriented site (and I'm phrasing that diplomatically), the reference is very unattractive. Is it necessary? Drmies (talk) 16:37, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I asked about CricHQ in another GA review; I hadn't realized we had an article on them, CricHQ. Taking that article at face value they seem to be a corporate entity with an editorial staff, which I figured was good enough. I hadn't clicked through to spotcheck, and you're right, it doesn't seem to support it. Ktin, can you comment? I'll see if I can figure out how to search their stats a little better and find a better URL. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It does support it -- you have to click on the "2nd innings" tab. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Mike Christie. That is correct. To make it easy, I have updated the ref link to a deep link to second innings. I will also try digging more on this Cricket Cauldron thingie. Ktin (talk) 17:07, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Following up on this thread, @Mike Christie, the author Rustom Deboo, imo should be considered as SME on the topic. He is a writer / journalist who writes on cricket related articles for ESPNCricinfo, Emerging Cricket among other publications. Ktin (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I do see that he's written on cricket elsewhere. I only see two stories from him when I search ESPNcricinfo, though; and since he's freelance I don't think that adds up to much. If you can show he's a regular contributor at a cricket or sports reliable source, I agree that would be fine. Alternatively you could contact him and ask what his sources were for the article -- he might point at something that we can access. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me see what I can do. I do have the Kidambi ebook and that might give us most of the answers and then we might have to look at actual scorecards of the period. Ktin (talk) 00:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mike Christie Done and done. All references have been substituted. Ktin (talk) 01:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Great! Glad you could find the refs. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:31, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]