User talk:Loganberry/Archive9

Template:!stub

A template you created, Template:!stub, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My revert

Thanks for the explanation, and apologies for an erroneous revert. I learn something new everyday :). Ginsengbomb 02:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Worcestershire County Cricket Club logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Worcestershire County Cricket Club logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 09:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CSX209inNNVA.jpg (watermarking)

Sorry for the late reply. I was informed of this only after I watermarked the picture. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and do not know how to edit photos, feel free to fix my error. Thanks for the notice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by William Grimes (talk • contribs) 01:58, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

merged Fur diaspora with Fur people

Hi,

Back in late 2006 you suggested that Fur diaspora might be merged with Fur people. Nobody commented on it in the past 10 months or so and nothing happened with the diaspora article, which overlapped "Fur people" except for one simple sentence, which I added to the Fur people article. I decided just to be bold and do it rather than go through any further processes because I see no interest in the matter on anybody else's part. If you disagree with the move or with the way I did it, please tell me and we can work out some other move. I'm also going to see if I can contact the creator of the Fur diaspora article. Noroton 03:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Jimmy Cumbes

I've no problem at all with the merge - good spot, actually - but is "Jimmy Cumbes" the right place? His CricketArchive page calls him James, while Cricinfo's bio calls him Jim - as does the Aston Villa card shown on the latter page. I'm fairly sure he wasn't widely known as "Jimmy" in the cricket world, but I'm willing to be persuaded that he was in football. Loganberry 22:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

So, should I redirect both pages to Jim Cumbes? Onnaghar ^{talk ! ctrb} 14:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Onnaghar ^{talk ! ctrb} 14:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Fightin' Texas Aggie Band

Suggest you take a look at the POV discussion at Talk:Fightin' Texas Aggie Band ThreeE 20:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/USER discussion concerning (ThreeE)

Hello, Loganberry. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning ThreeE's conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by "ThreeE" in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ThreeE, where I would appreciate your participation and comments. — BQZip01 — ^talk 11:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I'm asking is for you to take a peek. You need not have been involved in the discussion directly in order to comment on the conduct of ThreeE, as are all Wikipedians (specifics are mentioned on the page). — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I ask! :-) I just wanted to clarify in case you weren't familiar with the process. Have a nice day. :-) — BQZip01 — ^talk 17:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

I've put a comment on the Cricket Project Talk Page in response to your point, and suspect that what I've written could be construed as critical of you and/or your work, which is certainly not my intention. In fact, the opposite is true: I have great respect for your contributions and regard your work on the Worcestershire cricketers as the model for all county cricket. But... while I agree with your remarks about POV assertions needing to be credited (or deleted), I don't absolutely agree with you about references! I hope you'll respond: I think there are too few people who think about these things, with the retirement of ALoan and BlackJack and the less and less frequent interventions of people such as Tintin and Stephen Turner. Johnlp 21:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, we seem to have created a bit of a problem for you on the Cricket Talk page. I've had a look at the WP:Citing Sources page: it's kind of helpful in that it says citations should always be provided for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and it also says that where longer passages are derived from a single source then putting that as a footnote rather than an in-line citation is fine (I'm paraphrasing it: it's written in a very woolly style!)

On the basis that your Worcestershire bios are (sadly) not very contentious (until now!), I suppose we could regard them as unlikely to be challenged, so a more relaxed approach to referencing might be okay. But there then remains the question whether a reference to, say, the front page of the Higginsiana in cricketArchive.com is enough (which I would agree with) or do you need to cite the individual sub-pages beneath the Higgins front page (which is, I think, Andrew Nixon's position). My instinct is that readers should be presumed to be intelligent people (patently highly intelligent, if they're reading biographies of early 20th century cricketers) and that leading them to the front page is enough, as that page contains links to all the rest. I suspect there is no "right answer" to this: I'll probably end up continuing with my minimal referencing, and Mr Nixon can go on finding six references for each fact on every Irish cricketer!

I'm putting this here, rather than on the cricket talk page, because I don't want to monopolise discussion there. If you think it'd be helpful on the talk page, then by all means move it there. I hope, whatever the outcome of your dilemma, you won't be diverted from your contributions! Johnlp 18:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VER doesn't talk about it, but IMHO citations should also look at helping the readers look up interesting information quickly. If I were reading the Higgins article, the currently linked scorecard would be the only one that I want to look up not because of Higgins' 5 WI but as the mention of a team getting out in the fifties in both innings is intriguing. I am not sure how many people do this though. Tintin 00:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Higgins (cricketer)

I try to make sure the articles I come across that belong in WPB have the appropriate template and that it has some sort of rating. I openly acknowledge that I'm not always 100% accurate. I think that's clearly a start class or better article, so I'm bumping up to start. If you strongly feel it's B, feel free to bump it up farther. Erechtheus 02:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Seen WT:CRIC#Cricket? --Dweller 14:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, you're a very experienced editor and referencing's not too hard - especially for a general article like Cricket. (And The Rambling Man's brilliant at tidying up the format of the references) Take the plunge! --Dweller 14:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. OK. Thanks. --Dweller 14:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Bird

I'm proposing this for DYK.... I think these cricket articles are good ... and I'm not a crisket fan, just a wiki fan

...that Ronald Bird was on the staff of Warwickshire County Cricket Club in 1934, but he never played for them. His debut was eleven years later for Worcestershire?Victuallers 22:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Padgett

I found this article on Doug Padgett which mentions him being Yorks youngest player. It also has some other info which can be included in the article. The quotes are on wikiquote so shouldn't probably be on the page, I found a slightly differant (10/15 mins) tale of the Vaughan one. The "greatest cricketers of the modern era" to describe Vaughan, Gough and Hoggard should be deleted IMO.--Jpeeling 14:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Professional England Captains

I think we must remember that the first tours were only given Test status at a later date. It would probably be fair to say that Hutton was the first professional to be officially appointed England captain, but he wasn't the first professional to be England captain. Andrew nixon 15:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:U2 at Cardiff Arms Park.jpg

Hi, Point taken, no problems if you wish to edit it out. Seth Whales 08:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]