Talk:Pakistani cricket team in England in 2006

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Cricket Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Cricket To-do list:

Article assessment

Check Category:Unassessed cricket articles for class and Category:Unknown-importance cricket articles for importance: see Assessment Department for details

Verifiability

Update fair and unfair play, fast bowling, first-class cricket, googly, innings, leg break, limited overs cricket, not out, Pakistan Cricket Board, spin bowling, underarm bowling, wicket, and other fundamental articles classified by the WikiProject as high-importance so that they meet WP:Verifiability policy standards

Cleanup

There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format)

Infoboxes

Add infoboxes to the player articles found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/requested infoboxes

Cricket people

Create articles about 19th century players who are listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/19th century players
Create biographies about Bangladeshi players from the task force redlink list
Check the listing of key bios at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Key biographies and improve these to at least B-class.
Create batting/bowling graphs for cricketers who have excelled in international cricket.
Create articles for redlinks present here and here

Cricket teams & countries

Domestic cricket coverage is needed for Bangladesh, Canada, Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe;
Create articles from redlinks and improve existing articles in List of current first-class cricket teams; National cricket teams; Under-19 national cricket teams
Create articles about cricket in these missing countries
Create or expand articles on international tours from items in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/summary of international tour articles
Create a link as such on Template:Cr-Aus/doc for Cricket Australia XI

Images

Add pictures (and remove template from address requests) in these Category:Wikipedia requested images of cricket people
Add pictures for grounds missing photos from here

On this day in cricket

Expand the anniversary coverage for Portal:Cricket at Portal:Cricket/Anniversaries

Umpires

Expand ICC International umpire panel; ICC Elite referee panel; ICC Associates and Affiliates umpire panel

Women

Expand Women's cricket, Women's Test cricket and articles about women's cricket generally especially biographies and tours

Update

A number of lists need to be updated, can be found in Template:International cricketers and Template:National cricket captains
Regularly updating cricketers' career stats.

Other

Export all cricket terms present in List of cricket terms to Wiktionary

My best wishes to pakistan 4 the upcomming england tour & in future as well. i hope pakistani cricket team will do better in england.--66.198.31.2 11:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)faisal khan from karachi pakistan.[reply]

Fourth Test[edit]

The previous revision of this section had a whole heap of allegations not supported by the cited article (eg: Hair did not inform the Pakistanis of any changes in the field, Hair directly insulted Inzamam and called him a cheat) and editorialising (eg: Hair's actions violated etiquitte) reported as fact. I've modified it to reflect that the article is quoting allegations made by Inzamam, who appears to be saying that Hair's actions carry an implied accusation of cheating, rather than actually quoting Hair verbatim. Thedangerouskitchen 14:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The issues raised are emotive. Yet we need to report what happened neutrally. That means we need to keep away from implying that the Pakistanis or the umpires are cheats. The facts are straightforward: both umpires believed the Pakistanis had engaged in ball tampering; the Pakistanis strongly refute that; the umpires awarded the game to England after Pakistan did not resume play; some time after the umpires awarded the game, and after discussions with David Morgan and Mike Procter, the Pakistanis made it clear that they did want to resume play, which the English were also willing to do; the umpires then refused to come onto the pitch as the game had already ended when they decided to award England the game. We should stick to these facts. Which parties are to blame for what happened, we do not know (though we may well have opinions on). So which parties are to blame should not be covered in the text, jguk 16:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ball tampering - the wording[edit]

As people may note from law 42 of the game, and indeed the official responses yesterday have referred to ball tampering (which is a colloquial term) as its correct name of unfairly (or illegally) altering the condition of the ball. Should we not refer to it as such in the section Fourth test and have a link such as [[ball tampering|unfairly altering the condition of the ball]] for this is the more accurate term? --M0RHI 17:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd wait for someone with a bit more importance than me to say something, but for now I agree. Nic the Man 11:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]