Jump to content

Talk:Kolkata Knight Riders/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Major improvement needed

This page looks like bullshit..In some other IPL teams' pages, such as that of CSK, there are different pages for every season like CSK in 2008, CSK in 2009 etc...We dont need that but at least move the whole Team history to a different page..Then there should certainly be a page called List of KKR cricketers...there is one called list of CSK cricketers...And it wont be necessary to give the fixtures and results of every season in one page if we create pages like KKR in 2008, KKR in 2009 etc..

These changes have to be made or else the page is going to get bigger and shittier... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.3.160.184 (talk) 09:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Ganguly and Fake IPL Player Controversy

This heading is misleading..and the two shouldnt be combined together. It gives user the idea that Ganguly is the prime suspect in starting this blog and that the two events are somehow connected.

The blog might have started after Ganguly was sacked, but it doesn't mean it started because of that.

Those two sections have to be separated IMHO. Ninadhardikar (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

GA nomination

The article needs a lil bit of work regarding citations/references and more expanding. I'll be working on those issues to tr--Meryam90 (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC)y and upgrade it to the level of a Good Article.

I would advise removing the nomination until the article is ready. Nev1 (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The nomination can still be pending if there is no reviewer present to conduct it at the time being.--Meryam90 (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
And if a reviewer turns up in the meantime it would be a waste of everyone's time as it is already obvious what needs to be done to raise this article to standard. Nev1 (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The viewer would make suggestions that we would work on and then we can approve them within the process of a GA review and all would be well. Where is the problem in that? plus, the references issues are almsot done with. --Meryam90 (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
If you know what needs to be done it would be a waste of a reviewer's time to tell you. And the referencing is a long way from being up to scratch. Nev1 (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I know what is needed because I am GA reviewer myself. even if I do everything I know is needed, a reviewer would still make suggestions and comments. Let's not make a big deal out of nothing. Just work on improving the article and when a review would come over, he'll just do his job as required. As for the references, they are close to be done indeed.--Meryam90 (talk) 17:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Results table

A table summarising the team's results against each team isn't unreasonable, but the current format gives results for each match since 2008. This is impractical and doesn't belong in the article IMO. Nev1 (talk) 15:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The result summery is the consistent format and it is very easily manageable, it is necessary since there is no separate page in wiki that gives the results for all teams and because there is a mere 16 matches played in each season, which makes it a reasonable number to have them for each tournament. it also states in a very detailed manner all the informations needed about a single match played by the team which would otherwise be very tiring to write in text in the tournament's separate section.--Meryam90 (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Take a look at other articles on sports teams. For instance Manchester United F.C. and Manchester City F.C. (both Featured Articles) don't have results for each and every match. There's only one cricket article which is either GA or FA (Ireland cricket team) and you won't find a list of results for each match there. India national cricket team used to be a GA and even that didn't have the tables you'll find here. The format here is not an improvement. It surely must be obvious that it simply takes up too much space at the moment and this will only get worse with time. Nev1 (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
You can't possibly compare Cricket with Football/soccer, do you know how many matches one football team plays in one season? add to it the international tournaments? It can reach 100s. Neither can you compare with national cricket teams because those play TEST, ODI and T20 and so many matches within a year that it is VERY hard to keep up even of actually tried to. and secondly, like I said since each season has ONLY 16 match TOP. it is easily maintained and still doesn't fill the article too much . WHEN the IPL reaches such MANY seasons that it becomes difficult to keep all tables within the article, they can have their own page by then. For now, 5 tables don't seem to require such thing. but the idea of omitting them completely is not on the cards at all. --Meryam90 (talk) 17:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
For a team that has played 66 matches already it's impractical and I've removed the tables for that very reason. If you disagree I usggest you raise the issue at WT:CRIC. Nev1 (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
That's 66 matches in 5 years. what would it be compared to 100+ in one year by a football or a nationa cricket team? plus the tables still do not jam up the article as it only?? and like I said, if you have a certain problem with the tables, you can create a separate Page and move the tables to it, but removing them for good is not up for question. --Meryam90 (talk) 18:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
No football team plays hundreds of matches in a single year, but that's not the point. The tables swamped the article. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, to summarise events, not act as a roster for results. There are plenty of other sites that can do that. I realise other IPL teams have the same tables, but to be honest those articles aren't in great shape. Nev1 (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The tables aren't even close to roasters you find in other sites which are usually gone after the tournaments are over, they state major informations in a condensed way, date, opposite team, vanue/ground, Man of the match and the final result. If we'd state that in the section of the history it would make the article even MORE jammed and not very nice looking. Those informations of the history of games for the team would be lost of the tables are deleted. So either we create a new page or we keep them as they are. --Meryam90 (talk) 18:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

It is debatable whether this material belongs in an encyclopedia at all. Nev1 (talk) 18:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Agree with Nev, there's no need to list every single result for the team, this can be found in the relevant article for that years IPL. Imagine if the team was around in 30 years, are nearly 400 matches (at the current playing rate) going to be listed? Impractical. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The it can easily be moved to a separate page, the article itself isn't long enough and the number or the enght of tables doesn't cause much trouble. Plus the contacts for IPL are for 10 years, making that 160 matches to teh max and predicting isn't exactly the most valid reason, speaking of the current state of the article, it is reasonable for keeps.--Meryam90 (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Some English county's have pages dedicated to a single season. For example, Somerset County Cricket Club in 2011 is an excellent article created by User:Harrias. I would suggest these would be a good way to go about listing match results, plus it allows other details which would be out of place in the main article, such as the background to the season, comings and goings, squad, stats, ect. Some, such as Somerset County Cricket Club in 2009 have even reached GA standard. Worth considering. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kolkata Knight Riders/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 15:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Kkr new look.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kkr new look.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kkr new look.JPG)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

wasim akram

why is there a bangladeshi flag next to wasim akram's name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.65.155 (talk) 22:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)  Question: Where? I see a Pakistani flag in the infobox? Cheers, you've been confused. Dipankan (Have a chat?) 10:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Userbox

Userbox for KKR fans created by me:

KKRThis user supports the
Kolkata Knight Riders.

Copy this code to add it to your userpage. {{User:Milesandkilometrestogo/Userboxes/KKR}}

Milesandkilometrestogo (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

— Hey, nice effort! and a great idea.. !

Wrong Redirect

The link Kolkata Knight Riders tour of Australia redirects to this page, but I don't see why. Nothing related to them touring Australia is part of the article. I suggest this redirect be removed. --Tary123 (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The KKR toured Australia in 2008 and played 6 practice T20 matches with Queensland. I plan to create an article for the tour in some months, but let it remain a redirect till then. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 14:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for letting me know! --Tary123 (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Image of SRK, Sourav Ganguly and Gauri Khan

The caption to the image reads as "Sourav Ganguly with the symbol of the Kolkata Knight Riders, flanked by Shahrukh Khan on the right and Gauri Khan on the left."

As far as I know, the positions in an image are either:
1. Percieved from the reader's POV; or
2. stated with reference to some object/subject in the image.

So the correct caption according as of those two ways should have been:
1. "Sourav Ganguly with the symbol of the Kolkata Knight Riders, flanked by Shahrukh Khan on the left and Gauri Khan on the right." ; or
2. "Sourav Ganguly with the symbol of the Kolkata Knight Riders, flanked by Shahrukh Khan on his right and Gauri Khan on his left."

I have adhered the first one in my edit.

(PS: What's the 'alt=' caption for? The one describing them as objects..?) Abhinav—Ŧ—� 04:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

New page

plz someone create a page called 'List of Kolkata Knight Riders cricketers'. Very essential. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.3.164.97 (talk) 19:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kolkata Knight Riders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:06, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Tom Curran replaces Mitchell Starc ARM170305 (talk) 16:33, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2018

Add Vice Captain Field in the Index - Robin Uthappa SHOOT23 (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —KuyaBriBriTalk 21:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kolkata_Knight_Riders/Archive_1&oldid=879302313"