User talk:Robertson-Glasgow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Now that you are here, I hope you will begin to contribute to cricket articles :-) Tintin (talk) 16:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Grace & Spofforth[edit]

WG made also sorts of financial demands when he toured Australia and made himself very unpopular there. I remember reading about that somewhere but I don't personally own any books about WG so I can't check it out. You would be best to ask for help on [1]. All the best. --BlackJack | talk page 19:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Cheers, mate, Robertson-Glasgow 11:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Your user page[edit]

Hello again. I noticed that your signature shows up as a red link. I don't know if you are aware but you can create a user page in which you may add info about yourself or the articles you are working on or links to useful features in Wikipedia. There is plenty of help and advice available if you want to set up a user page but it isn't obligatory. Best wishes. --BlackJack | talk page 09:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll get around to that when I need something to do. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 11:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)



Hello, Robertson-Glasgow, 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! 

I hope you find some of the above links useful. You may also want to look in on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Richard Cashman's Spofforth Biography[edit]

Yes I do (I was coincidentally having a browse of it again a couple of days ago). I'll get it out tonight. Regards — Moondyne 01:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, mate. I wait with bated breath. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 07:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi R-G. Sorry for the delay but I've got it now (I had a small family crisis last night and with all the commotion I confess it slipped my mind!). If you could email me - use the "E-mail this user" button on the left (on my user page), I'll reply by email with a .pdf attachment. It'll be a scan of the whole chapter on the 1882 tour (~10 pages). It's about 9pm here now so it won't be until tomorrow morning Perth time (ie. in 12 hours). Regards. — Moondyne 12:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Its on its way! — Moondyne 01:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Cashman should have an article too ! Tintin (talk) 07:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I think that I could help with that. There's a fair amount of biographical information about him on the web. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 07:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Agree. Cashman's got a fair body of work now and he does make a good read. Remember to quote some reviews of his work by others so he meets notability criteria - see WP:BIO. — Moondyne 13:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Studd book[edit]

On the newsgroup, someone called Cicero is offering a copy of Grubb's book C.T. Studd Cricketer and Pioneer free to a good home. I thought that you might be interested. JH 11:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, John. Your message in one of the other groups alerted me to this and I've taken full advantage. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 01:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Thornton extract. Tintin 19:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. Do you need anything else, mate? I'm always generous when it comes to cricket and its illustrious history. Robertson-Glasgow 15:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
We don't yet have an article on Thornton. So may be we should do one on him ? Tintin 03:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Great idea. I've got a definitive article on him by Gerald Brodribb, as well as Thornton's "Talk" with A.W. Pullin. Unfortunately, I am uncertain as to how I am supposed to set up an article, and I have very little time to read the instructions on how to do so. If you could open a page for Thornton, I would gladly do the rest when I have the time. Robertson-Glasgow 08:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your books on WikiProject Cricket/Library[edit]

Hello, Albinomonkey. I was browsing through the list of books that you own on and wondered if you might have a look through them for information on Spofforth and the 1882 Test Match for me. Thanks, Robertson-Glasgow 12:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem I'll have a look through them tomorrow morning - is it his work in that specific match you are solely interested in, or Spofforth in general? – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 13:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

No, just that match, please. Thanks a lot, mate. Robertson-Glasgow 16:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
There is quite a bit in the books I have on that match, I've got the best parts about Spofforth's contributions here – if there's anything else you're after just ask.
Australian Cricket: The Game and the Players
200 Seasons of Australian Cricket
Hope they help... if there's anything else you need, just let me know. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 00:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for helping me out with that, Albinomonkey; it really is much appreciated, and I will put it to good use in the relevant Wikipedia articles. I would be extra-grateful, though, if you would cite the page numbers of the books from which those quotations came and see if that C.P. Moody fellow is quoted any further in Australian Cricket. What you reproduced there was the first from him about this match that I have ever read, and I would be interested to see if he has more to say.
Also, would you mind seeing if there is any information on the following two points of interest in that match? Firstly, do your sources have anything to say about C.T. Studd's supposed nervousness in waiting to go out to bat - if A.N. Hornby is quoted on that, it would be quite brilliant - and, secondly, what about something on the controversial run-out of Sammy Jones by W.G. Grace (of special interest being umpire Thoms's rejoinder to the Doctor's appeal)? I am probably getting a trifle greedy in asking this of you, but a million thanks nonetheless. Robertson-Glasgow 17:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry it slipped my mind to add the page numbers, they are (in order of the quotes above): p946, pp371-372, p55 and p57. There is a little further from Moody (p.372 of Australian Cricket: The Game and the Players):
The bibliography of this book lists a couple of books by Moody if you would be so interested as to search for them: Australian Cricket and Cricketers (Adelaide, 1894) and Cricket Album of Noted Australian Cricketers (Adelaide, 1905).
No quote from Hornby about Studd, but there is this from E.Peate (p372 again):
I think the alleged death in the crowd and the man chewing through his umbrella are mentioned in our article, but my book also says that "the scorer's hand trembled so that he wrote Peate's name as "Geese"" (p372), if that's of any interest at all.
Both books mention the contentious run out:
AC:Game and Players (p.371):
(p. 560):
200 Seasons (p 55):
Hope that's helpful. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 04:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I really cannot thank you enough, and I am more than willing to return the favour if needs be; my cricket library is almost 700-books strong, so I should think that, if there is anything about which you would like to know, I would be able to help you. Nevertheless, many thanks once again, sir. Robertson-Glasgow 04:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


Many thanks for your helpful contributions. JH (talk page) 19:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


His family called him "Gilby"

Is this true ? There was a famous occasion when Martha Grace admonished him after he got out, "Willie, Willie, haven't I told you over and over how to play that stroke ?". Tintin 15:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I added a fact tag just in case you take too long to come back. Feel free to remove it if you are certain about it. Tintin 16:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Looks okay now. Tintin 14:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hit for six[edit]

CK Nayudu apparently hit a 150 yard six in the Madras Presidency Match in 1921. Does Hit for Six say anything about it, specifically, does Brodribb agree with the distance ? Tintin 03:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. My source says that the hit was easily above 150 yards from the batting crease. So I'll have to go with that even if it may not be entirely accurate. Tintin 17:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

"Those damned dots"[edit]

As somebody once famously said. I believe that it's usual in American English to put full stops in abbreviations such as "MCG", but it's not usual in British English. Personally, I think that "MCG" looks much better than "M.C.G.", but YMMV (or Y.M.M.V.). :) JH (talk page) 09:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. JH (talk page) 12:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

George Griffith (cricketer)[edit]

Following our discussion on rsc, the first draft of the article is now up. Please feel free to expand it with anything you feel is appropriate. JH (talk page) 19:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look at it. JH (talk page) 08:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm looking at it now. Thanks for your hard work. It's now a very substantial article. A few points:
  • Do we have a more reliable source for the "Lion Hitter" apellation than the seemingly not altogether reliable memory of one man?
  • You must have a second source for the 1861-2 paragraph, as there's now more there than seemed to be in the one that I unearthed. That second source ought to be cited.
  • After both of our efforts at chopping the article about, I'm not sure that all the footnotes are still in the right place in the text. (BTW, I think that the Wiki convention is that they should only be placed at the end of a paragraph, not in the middle of one.One solution might be to break the text into smaller paragraphs.)
  • You're a romanticist in the Cardus tradition, :) but that doesn't always sit easily in an encyclopaedia article. I've toned down or snipped a few of the more florid bits, but it's still a bit POV in places.

JH (talk page) 10:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Good luck with the exams! JH (talk page) 12:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


RG, just adding a tag won't help. Only admins can protect or semiprotect a page and they have an extra button (invisible to ordinary editors) for that. The tag is added just as a notice. Leave a note in WT:CRIC if you want to protect it. Tintin 06:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Tintin is correct. I've given it a 14 day semi-protection (established users only can now edit it) to see if things calm down a bit. —Moondyne 10:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Barker[edit]

He now has an article. :) JH (talk page) 20:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. JH (talk page) 08:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

"Many would dub that a preposterous understatement." That doesn't seem very encyclopaedic in tone, especially the "preposterous". And the "many would dub" might be called "weasel words" by the unsympathetic. JH (talk page) 21:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


Do you have the Don Bradman and Alan Kippax pages on your watchlist ? They have undergone substantial changes in the recent past (and Bradman has spawned off half a dozen offsprings) which you should be interested in. Tintin 08:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The usual stuff. The content, language, whether anything significant is missing etc. DGB is under peer review and Kippax, FAC. Tintin 12:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


Good work you're doing around cricket articles - glad to have you. No doubt you got your name because you're really "RC". (that joke is (c) Dweller, 2007). Wondered if you'd like to take a look at the thread at WT:CRIC headed "Cricket". --Dweller 12:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

No worries... I just mean I'll create an exact copy of it at somewhere like User:Dweller/Cricket and we can work on it there... before moving it back into the "mainspace" at Cricket. Tintin was worried about reworking such an important article while it's "live". --Dweller 23:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


I had understood that the 6 byes story was apochryphal. His last f-c game was in 1907, and I think at that date for a six the ball still had to be hit (or not hit!) out of the ground. JH (talk page) 21:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I suppose one could say something like "It has been claimed, probably apochryphally,...". It would be nice to be able to cite somewhere where the story is recounted, though. As for the beamer story, I hadn't heard that one. I find it hard to believe that a beamer passing the batsman at head high, or even a bit higher, could reach the stands without bouncing. JH (talk page) 09:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
According to User:Johnlp: There is a citation for the Wallingford incident on page 15 of a 1983 book called The Cricketer Book of Cricket Disasters and Bizarre Records, edited by Christopher Martin-Jenkins and published by Century Publishing (ISBN 07126 0191 0). I have to say that I don't believe it's possible, but on the basis that Wikipedia is about things that are verifiable, not necessarily things that are true... JH (talk page) 22:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

A History of Cricket[edit]

I decided that it was high time that I had this on my bookshelves, so have just bought both volumes of the 1962 edition. I've only had time for a quick skim so far, but confess myself a little disappointed. Altham doesn't strike me as that good a writer. Also, it might have been more accurate to call it "A History of English Cricket". There seems to be little about events in other countries. And even within England, there seem to be some surprising omissions. Nothing on London County, apparently, or on Philadelphia's tours of England. Bart King isn't even mentioned, if the index is to be believed. JH (talk page) 19:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that my ignorance of Harry East is total. I'll be interested to hear anything that you can unearth about him. JH (talk page) 09:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Lovely quote. Thanks! JH (talk page) 17:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Ian Chappell[edit]

Hello crusoe, I have just nominated this article for FA, I would appreciate any comments you have. Cheers Phanto282 09:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

George Freeman[edit]

Sometimes it can be surprisingly difficult to tell if a player already has an article, because there are so many possble permutations: Fred Bloggs, F Bloggs, F.Bloggs, F. Bloggs, Fred Bloggs (cricketer) etc. I tend to check under the most likely Categories to see if the player appears there. JH (talk page) 09:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Albert Craig (The Surrey Poet)[edit]

I thought that you might be interested in what I've just managed to dig up in connection with this article. The pre-WW1 writer E.W. Hornung, who wrote the well-known books about Raffles, the gentleman-burglar and fine cricketer, set a chapter of one of them at Lord's, and the text is available online. The link in the second entry in the Notes section of the Craig aricle will take you to it. And should you want to download and read the whole novel, it's available on Project Gutenberg JH (talk page) 20:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced additions[edit]

Wikipedia relies on information that can be verified and prohibits original research and editors' opinions. See WP:V and WP:OR. If you add new material to articles, please add references showing the source where you got the information. See WP:RS. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Anything in particular for which you need a reference? Robertson-Glasgow (talk) 12:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

No, because I have deleted the unreferenced new material. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've restored your contribution and provided a link to an Internet source for the material. Thanks for your contributions and best wishes with your editing. :) Cleo123 (talk) 04:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring![edit]

Isaac Hodgson[edit]

I confess to never having heard of him. For the period, his average of 15.8 strikes me as pretty mediocre. For every generation of players, there's always been some old guy to say that the previous generation was better, so I wouldn't be inclined to take too much notice of the Yorkshire Post. JH (talk page) 09:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget that the standard of the teams that the All-England XI faced was not always very high. There were a lot of cheap wickets to be had, as Clarke's own remarkable figures indicvate. Anyway, to summarise: you reckon that Hodgson was better thajn Peate was better than Peel was better than Rhodes. :) JH (talk page) 17:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for misunderstanding. I had originslly missed your link to East's article, but have now read the piece. There's a lot of interesting stuff there, though I can't say that I much care for East's writing style. It's interesting that Clarke didn't feel that Hodgson's merits as a bowler outweighed his deficiencies as batsman and fielder. My feeling is that if Hodgson had really been as good a bowler as claimed, Clarke would have wanted him playing for his own side. JH (talk page) 10:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I see that you've already done some work on the article. His dates of birth and death ought to be in, and the stuff about the other Isaac Hodgson ought to be hived off into a seoarate article, with just a standard dab message at the start of the xcricketer's article. As to East's prose, he strikes me as striving too obviously to mimic Cardus, and to never use a short word if he can find a long one. JH (talk page) 10:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I've now added some relevant categories and hived off the other Isaac Hodgson. At the start of the cricketer's article I've put in a dablink of the sort that I mentioned. (dab = disambiguation) JH (talk page) 19:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Jim Laker[edit]

of whom greybeards said, "You can hear the ball bounce as he lets it go." Did you really mean to put "bounce"? It doesn't seem to make much sense in the context of the bowler releasing the ball. JH (talk page) 16:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I cut 'n' pasted that quote from the obit penned by John Arlott. It could only have meant "buzz". I'm off to change it now. Cheers, Crusoe (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Ranji Hordern[edit]

According to Palmer's Wiki article, he bowled off-breaks rather than leg-breaks. It seems that Cooper did bowl leg-breaks. What I think one could say about Hordern, is that he was the first successful Australian googly bowler. JH (talk page) 08:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be a lot of uncertainty about the methods of many early bowlers. Note that I said above that Hordern was the first successful Australian googly bowler, not the first successful leggie. Anyone prior to Bosanquet was presumably not bowling the googly. As an aside, I think it was the improvement in pitches from about the 1890s onwards that made wrist-spinners more common. When pitches were poor, finger-spinners would be at least as penetrative as wrist-spinners, with the advantage of generally being more economical. JH (talk page) 09:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I think you may have mentioned that before. However I suspect that it's more likely that Palmer mixed wrist-spun leggies with finger-spun offies. If batsmen weren't then in the habit of watching the bowler's hand, this may have had a similar impact to a mix of leg-breaks and googlies. JH (talk page) 10:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Palmer and Bosanquet were playing only some 20 years apart, which isn't a lot. Lots of people must have seen both. Did nobody apart from Hawke suggest that Bosanquet hadn't done anything new? People like Grace and Murdoch, for instance, who probably played with/against both? And there seem to have been no doubts in Australia, where they Christened the googly the Bosie rather than the Joey. Surely they would have claimed it for one of their own if at all feasible? It would be a bit like people today forgetting that Sarfraz had pioneered reverse swing twenty years ago or so. JH (talk page) 16:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you find my position annoying, but I think you need more than Lord Hawke's opinion to establish your case. It just doesn't seem plausible to me that no-one apart from Hawke would have said that Bosanquet hadn't originated the googly if Palmer had done so not that many years before. JH (talk page) 07:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem. :) JH (talk page) 09:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Dennis[edit]

Hello R-G. I've just come across this article via the 1800 season review. It is very good and provides a lot of information but there no references. Could you please provide external sources and a bibliography? Or some of the dreaded inline citations that this site now demands?

Also, who was JF Sutton and what books did he write?

Regards. --BlackJack | talk page 08:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I found Sutton via Google and it seems he is noted for one book in particular which is Nottingham Cricket Matches from 1771 to 1853, published in 1853. I can't find the name of the publisher, however, though it might be on the Notts CCC site which is down at the moment. If you quote Sutton in other articles, could you please make a full reference to this book. I'll add it to Dennis. Thanks again. --BlackJack | talk page 08:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I added Sutton's cricket book to List of works by cricket historians and writers. His entry is only half a dozen or so below your namesake! Regards. --BlackJack | talk page 09:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid the only work I have by A-C is his account of 1742 - 1751 in "Cricket magazine". I haven't reached the 19th century yet in my collection! Regards. --BlackJack | talk page 09:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Ted Barratt[edit]

I don't know if you've seen the article on Ted Barratt which I've just written. Given the period and that he was a slow left-arm bowler, I thought that it might interest you. JH (talk page) 18:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

 :) JH (talk page) 09:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your excellent additions. JH (talk page) 08:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I think that between us we have now have a reasonably complete portrait of Barratt. fact, why not draw my attention to them all? Well, there's a complete list on my User page. Francis Lacey and Frederick Toone are good candidates for expansion. JH (talk page) 08:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Oscar Pistorius: Primary school[edit]

Hi, you recently edited "Oscar Pistorius" to add that he attended Constantia Kloof Primary School. Do you have a reference to a published source for this? Otherwise, the information may have to be removed for being unreferenced, which would be a pity. If you'd like to discuss the matter further, let's do so on the article's talk page. — Cheers, JackLee talk 00:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

While I do not have any reference for Oscar's attending CKPS, I know for a fact that he did, because I went there with him. His recollections, alas, are not as fond as mine: Please respond back at my talk page. Cheers, Robertson-Glasgow 00:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I suspected that was the case. Unfortunately, the fact that you went to school with him is not independently verifiable. Can you cite a source in another language (e.g., Afrikaans) , or a printed source? An old school annual or magazine is better than nothing. Also, any chance of an old photograph of Pistorius as a child that you could license to Wikipedia? :-) — Cheers, JackLee talk 01:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. — Cheers, JackLee talk 02:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Robertson-Glasgow. You have new messages at Talk:Oscar Pistorius.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Cheers, JackLee talk 23:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Louis Hall[edit]

Glasgow-bhai, can you please add a citation for this. Tintin 10:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Found a Hawke comment that the Yorkshire team of the time had ten drunks and a church parson, but no hint that there were no parsons before him. Tintin 02:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Baconian theory article[edit]

I'd like to congratulate you for your excellent recent edits to this article. I originated the article and even wrote a study which I've been trying to get recognised and published. Alas, current prejudice about Mr Shakspere of Straford prevails! It's a delight for me to see a break in my isolation and meet a kindred spirit in these matters. Please get in touch at puzzledbarry"at" and tell me something about yourself. Regards. (Puzzle Master (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC))

Actually, here's a better email address puzzledbarry"at" because I've lost many e-mails at the yahoo address in the spam filter. Look forward to hearing from you. (Puzzle Master (talk) 15:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC))
Did you get to complete The Shakespeare Puzzle? (Puzzle Master (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC))

Cosmological argument[edit]

Hey, Robertson-Glasgow! I'd like to thank you for the splendid edits you made to the article mentioned above. I think we've cleaned up the article quite well. Cheers! (talk) 01:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I was about to say the same to you. Very well done, sir. Best, Crusoe (talk) 02:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Robert Poore[edit]

I'm glad tro see that you've expanded his article. It was something I'd been meaning to do myself, but now I can take it off my "to do" list. A couple of nit-picks. A citation would be good for your contention that Poore's average in 1899 was not as meitorious as Sutcliffe's in whenever it was. "During this period, Poore never failed, his lowest score being 11 against Essex..." A score of eleven sounds like a failure to me. :) JH (talk page) 08:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I would love to help, but I am not, alack, the begetter of that contentious edit. Best, Crusoe (Talk) 08:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
In that case I'll take matters into my own hands. :) JH (talk page) 08:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Article on African nationalism[edit]

Hello. I just came across the article on African nationalism, and I noticed that you are its principal author. First, let me say that I appreciate the effort that you have put into your contributions. Nevertheless, the fact that none of them are referenced (and and that there are no sources for the entire article) is a significant problem. Please review Wikipedia's policies on providing reliable and verifiable sources for all contributions, as well as the policy on original research. If you are able to provide sources that are in keeping with these policies to support your contributions, please do so as soon as possible to prevent those contributions from being removed. – SJL 05:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

As I have not touched the article in almost a year — I was immersed in a now-forgotten course on the subject matter at the time —, I am finding it difficult to reacquaint myself with my thinking and source any of my claims. A spot of concerted googling on the part of someone who genuinely cares about the entry, however, ought to suffice. While its quality leaves much to be desired, it is impressively exhaustive and would be a pity to lose. I shall do what I can for the nonce. Crusoe (talk) 07:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I am concerned, though, by your suggestion that someone else should find sources for this information. Looking at this page I can see that this is at least the third time that other editors have requested that you source your contributions, and each time you have responded in a way that suggests that you do not take this issue seriously. Please note that while Wikipedia is a collaborative enterprise, each editor is responsible for the verifiability and sourcing of their own contributions. Whenever you add information without citations, you are breaching the norms of the community and either (a) creating more work for others (which, assuming you've done the research yourself, could have been easily avoided through proper documentation in the first place); or (b) wasting your own time, because the unsourced contributions will eventually be removed. As I said before, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but your current approach to editing is undermining the value of your contributions. – SJL 03:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Please do not put words in my mouth: I said that I would do what I could, not that someone else should do it for me; the problem is that I am unlikely to do it any better than someone else.
While I take full responsibility for my failure to keep to this site's asphyxiating policies, and am sorry for whatever bother they may have caused you, I find your tone needlessly patronising and presumptuous, especially as regards my "current" approach: we are, after all, hashing out one-year-old edits here. A mite of understanding would not be inapposite.
Kindest, Crusoe (talk) 09:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not being presumptuous. You have been contacted about this issue three other times in the past five months: March 2008; May 2008; and again in May 2008. I have now also looked into some of your other major edits, such as those made to the article on South Africa under apartheid. They are all completely unsourced: for example, 1; 2;3 and 4.

How is anyone to judge the quality of these contributions? The purpose of Wikipedia's "asphyxiating policies" is not to make your life difficult, but instead to address the real problems of verifiability and authority. In a traditional published work, the reader can judge the likelihood that the information presented to them is accurate based on the references provided and the authority of its author or publisher. Without authority to support it, Wikipedia relies exclusively on the thorough documentation of sources and, without that, it is no more useful than a personal blog. I do not mean to appear patronizing, but it seems necessary to clarify these issues for you, and I recommend that you review WP:CITE before making any further contributions. – SJL 15:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not being presumptuous. You have been contacted about this issue three other times in the past five months
All of three times in five months, eh? I have made almost 1,000 edits in that time.
May 2008
Nothing in that article was so remarkable, unverifiable or controversial as to require referencing. It was mandatory rather than necessary.
May 2008
Few are the referenced assertions about where a subject was educated that I have seen on Wikipedia.
I have now also looked into some of your other major edits,
Surely you have better things to do than to police and investigate me?
such as those made to the article on South Africa under apartheid.
Those edits, which it is rather misleading to present as four when they are to every intent and purpose one (happening as they did over two days), are well nigh as old as those on African nationalism.
I do not mean to appear patronizing, but it seems necessary to clarify these issues for you
Absolutely shameless. Do not expect my help on the initial subject of contention now, nor indeed a response to whatever snide offal you choose to spout next.
Unkindest, Crusoe (talk) 16:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Reading through this exchange again, I see that I was too hard on you, and I apologize. I am an academic, and I find it frustrating when I see unattributed contributions, but you have the right to participate however you see fit, and I did not mean to lecture you. The article in question came to my attention because I am interested in improving the quality of Wikipedia's coverage of nationalism and related subjects, and I hope that in the future you will reconsider your decision and further contribute to that article. – SJL 16:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

That's big of you. Apology accepted and reciprocated. Crusoe (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Baconian article[edit]

You will be delighted to know that Baconian theory has now attained GA (good article status)! It's currently protected, however, because a certain editor with a hidden agenda has taken it upon himself to try (unsuccessfully) to add Oxfordian links and slants. PuzzleMaster (talk) 14:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Great news and well deserved. Thanks for letting me know. How do you feel about a concerted push for higher honours? Crusoe (talk) 17:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The Thewlises[edit]

The name was vaguely familiar, but I didn't know - or had forgotten - that there were two of them. At one time I was considering writing an article about Lascelles Hall, but I couldn't find enough good material. Whoever tagged Junior's article was clearly ignorant of the Sport notability guideline. The article establishes his notability as being a f-c cricketer and is referenced. In Senior's article, you use the word "enchiridion". It's not a good idea to use a word that 99% of your readers - including me - are likely to be unfamiliar with, and I suggest replacing it. JH (talk page) 09:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Ted Peate[edit]

Hi, Crusoe. Thanks for your kind words, and your question's easy to answer. I started an article on The Sporting Times and worked up a section of it on the 1882 reports of the death of English cricket. After linking Peate in "ITS END WAS PEATE", I thought a little more at Ted Peate was justified. Regards, Xn4 (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

FAR listing[edit]

History of Test cricket from 1877 to 1883 has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. BlackJack | talk page 16:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Simon Wilde[edit]

Unfortunately someone has done a Speedy Deletion of your article on Wilde, on the grounds that it did not establish his notability. See User talk:Sandstein#Simon Wilde for my raising the matter with him. JH (talk page) 18:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"Still, isn't the standard protocol to inform the creator of an article of its failure to establish notability before deleting it?" I would have thought so. Merry Christmas! JH (talk page) 09:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


The standard of your work here deserves commendation! ;) (Isnotwen (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC))

Looking through the log of Baconian theory I see that you have contributed a substantial rewrite. There is an editor who wants to place Oxfordian references in this article, a dispute which is being discussed here Talk:Baconian theory. Do you have a view? Best. Isnotwen (talk) 12:48, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

2008–2009 Zimbabwean cholera outbreak[edit]

You contributed to the above article and I would appreciate any comments you might have on improving it. Thanks, Babakathy (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

More on Zimbabwe[edit]

The World Health Organization have a daily report on cholera deaths and infections here. If you click on the link under "Daily Cholera Updates", you'll be able to download a pdf file outlining details. In many cases this report will occur before media outlets begin reporting it. I've done the latest one (10th February, 3,501 deaths) but this won't be a regular thing for me - so if you're in the mood to adjust the article daily or once every couple of days, the information is there for us to use. Thanks for your work on the article BTW. --One Salient Oversight (talk) 09:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Lev Losev[edit]

Looks like you wanted to create Lev Losev. I just did - please add. -- Y not? 15:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Susan McCullough[edit]

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Susan McCullough. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --MZMcBride (talk) 04:42, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

British Library[edit]

I'll leave telling Tintin about your discoveries to you (assuming you wish to do so). That seems the right way of doing things. Cheers. JH (talk page) 08:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Mailed you. Tintin 08:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

You are, as usual, right, John. I'll get back to Tintin before week's end. Kindest, Crusoe (talk) 09:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello Robertson-Glasgow! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 6 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2,802 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Nosimo Balindlela - Find sources: "Nosimo Balindlela" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  2. Gill Rennie - Find sources: "Gill Rennie" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  3. Brian Stoddart - Find sources: "Brian Stoddart" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  4. Cyril Mitchley - Find sources: "Cyril Mitchley" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  5. Richard Ruppel - Find sources: "Richard Ruppel" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library
  6. Joel J. Kupperman - Find sources: "Joel J. Kupperman" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Coal (poem)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Coal (poem) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of general information regarding an article with few google hits to support it's significance.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -CamT|C 12:30, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Alick Mackenzie[edit]

Hi Robertson-Glasgow.

I note that you have an interest in Alick Mackenzie. I am a relation of Alick, he was an uncle of my paternal grandmother and we have quite a bit of information on him and his cricket career for New South Wales. I would be interested in exchanging information on him if you are keen.

Regards, James.

Be happy to, James. Apologies for the lay-off. If you'd be good enough to mail me at, I'll send you what I have and dredge around for more. Kindest, Crusoe (talk) 00:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 22:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Mr Lockwood move[edit]

I saw that you moved the page Lockwood (Wuthering Heights), and have left a message on the talk page for that article, and am wondering about your reasoning for the current title. --Davemnt (talk) 09:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Youthful naivete. Feel free to restore it. Crusoe (talk) 13:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Alfredo Vázquez Carrizosa[edit]

Hey Robertson-Glasgow, I just thought I'd let you know that I saw your article Alfredo Vázquez Carrizosa in the New Articles list-- However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article does not contain enough in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. It's nice to see you editing!Jipinghe (talk) 18:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey[edit]


New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Robertson-Glasgow! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Small Cape Town Wiki meet up[edit]

Thought you might be interested to know that a small group of the South African Wikipedians will be meeting at the Foresters Arms, Newlands Avenue, Newlands, Cape Town on the 15 December 2011 from 2pm - 5pm. Please feel free to join us.--Discott (talk) 23:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi there, i really appreciate your additions to south african laws, including that of citizens/persons/etc. I'm part of a community that is trying to understand these concept a little better, and would appreciate your knowledgeable insight on this, and similar matters. Please see , i think you need to register for free, and you could join in our discussions to make clearer the labyrinth of statutes over us. Thanks kindly! David (vigil) - at thinkfreesa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David.vigilant (talkcontribs) 11:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm unqualified, I'm afraid, to be dealing out legal advice. But best of luck to you. Crusoe (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Minister of Police v Rabie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page State (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Legal interpretation in South Africa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Defence, Social engineering, Fairness, Rule, National government, Ordinance and Amend
Kruger v President of the Republic of South Africa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Attorney

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Getting in touch.[edit]

Mr. Robertson-Glasgow,

I'm trying to figure out all this wikipedia thing, and I can't really fgure out how to get in touch with you. Could you send me an e-mail to

Kind regards,

James Kent

JamesRKent (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Thanks for your contributions to South African environmental law! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I could do with one, in this weather. Best, Crusoe (talk) 13:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited South African law of lease, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hiring (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited S v Maki, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dagga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Environment Barnstar Hires.png The Environmental Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions to South African environmental law! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 12:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

South African labour law[edit]

You're doing some great work on this page. Do you know how to use drop-down case/statute templates? It's pretty easy to do, and self explanatory - have a look at the code here:

It fits up to twenty sources, but I think ten is a good norm for each section. To put into an article, you use these brackets {{ }} and just put in the template name. I've been naming UK templates with "Clist" at the start (for "case list"), and US templates with "Slist" (for "source"). Maybe you could call SA ones "SAlist"? I expect you've come across UK labour law and US labor law. Keep up the great stuff. Wikidea 06:24, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

You appear to be creating a number of poorly referenced, or indeed unreferenced, articles about South African law, many of which appear to be full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, including:

Please ensure future articles are not so poor. GiantSnowman 20:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to ask much a similar question to the last one on your talk page, about your commentary on some recent edits of my own—"You appear to be creating a number of poorly referenced, or indeed unreferenced, articles about Scottish law"—and to draw your attention to the fact that each of the articles you cite refers explicitly to the law of South Africa. Happy to help. Crusoe (talk) 10:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Nation clarified (distracted by your user name, I guess) - but the point still stands. Do you have an explanation for these kind of edits? GiantSnowman 10:47, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't know that I owe you an explanation, but the reason these articles are so "poorly referenced" is that their subject matter is self-referential. In summarising a case, my main and best reference is, inevitably, that case. This much should be obvious. Crusoe (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
You seem ignorant of WP:PRIMARY - "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation". GiantSnowman 13:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
And you seem ignorant of the meaning of the word "interpretation." It is not synonymous with "summary" or "factual exposition." Again, happy to help. Crusoe (talk) 17:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
...but the summary is yours, and yours alone, as far as I can see. That violates WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. GiantSnowman 17:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I do tire of repeating myself, and I did think we had covered this ground already. To recapitulate: What I did was to summarise the primary source. Since I have a source, and since I cited that source, I cannot be said to have fallen foul of WP:OR. Since, furthermore, I have not interpreted that source, I have not fallen foul of WP:PRIMARY. (This much you seem, by your silence, to have admitted.) Finally, since a mere summary of the facts does not advance a position, I cannot be said to have fallen foul of WP:SYNTH. This scattershot procedure of yours—you throw everything in sight, in the forlorn hope that something will stick—is a wonder to behold. But life, I fear, is short. Kindly limit all future correspondence to the non-trivial. Crusoe (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
So you say you have "summarise[d] the primary source" but you say you did not "interprete that source" - well how on earth have you managed that? I'm also intrigued by the "silence" you accuse me of... GiantSnowman 18:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't make accusations. I was referring to your silence, now broken, on the question of interpretation, which I thought I had successfully addressed. Apparently I have failed, but I really can't do any better than I have, and you show little sign of cottoning on. Sorry. Crusoe (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Please, don't apologise, I'm clearly too thick. Either that or you're simply too arrogant to accept what I'm trying to say. I'm sure it's the former, however. GiantSnowman 18:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
No doubt. Crusoe (talk) 18:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Law of evidence in South Africa[edit]

Hi there,
Just a note to let you know that your recent edits here left a citation error or errors. I have fixed them. You appeared to have had two missing </ref> in your refs, and an extra <ref> ie.<ref>XXX<ref></ref> instead of <ref>XXX</ref>. You may want to check that I haven't inadvertantly combined two refs or split one into two. Suggest using the Show preview button and check for cite errors before saving. :-) 220 of Borg 02:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Your South African law articles[edit]

A couple of things

  • Do not put in WP:See also links to nonexistent articles.
  • Do not put in WP:See also links if the article already links to that page.

You're doing very good work. If you follow these wikipedia criteria, it will be even better. Cheers!...William 13:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

South African insurance law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Natal, Estate, Classification, Premium, Financial security, Offer, Profit and Transvaal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 18 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

South African insurance law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Mora, Unlawful, Cancellation and Stolen

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

South African criminal law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Bar, Diet, Crane, Exposure, Cage, Retribution, Relative, Vengeance, Blackouts and Lifesaver

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:South African law of sale and lease[edit]

Category:South African law of sale and lease, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Eastlaw talk ⁄ contribs 10:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Western Bank v Pretorius[edit]

I notice that you have created two nearly identical articles: Western Bank v Pretorius and Western Bank Ltd v Pretorius. I assume that they are one and the same thing and that the duplicate was created in error. I have tagged them to be merged. Let me know if this an error on my part. I would suggest that as originating author you will be most familiar with the content and be best placed to perform the merge without loss of information and make the empty article a redirect to the main article, probably Western Bank Ltd v Pretorius. Let me know if you need assistance in anyway. --Derek Andrews (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

5th Wiki-meetup 4 May 2014[edit]

Hello, Wikimedia ZA would like to invite you to the 5th Cape Town Wiki-meetup for 11am, Sunday the 4th May 2014 at Truth Coffee on 36 Buitenkant Street, Cape Town. It would be great if you could join us. Please invite who ever you think might be interested.--Discott (talk) 12:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of R v Khan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article R v Khan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R v Khan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 21:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)