Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of India ODI cricketers/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by Giants2008 23:21, 6 February 2012 [1].

List of India ODI cricketers[edit]

Featured list candidates/List of India ODI cricketers/archive1

Featured list removal candidates/List of India ODI cricketers/archive1

Nominator(s): Vyom25 (talk) 12:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because the list is now updated and many changes have been made. It was a featured list in the past but lost it's place may be because lack of continuous updates. I have also added a new section for all the captains. An image is also added to this list. Vyom25 (talk) 12:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

* Could do with a link to Indian team in the lead -Done

"India is among the ten Test-Playing Nations so India has permanent ODI status." Firstly this sentence needs a reference and secondly the sentence reads awkwardly so I would rewrite it -Done
"He also holds the record of winning 62 Man of the Match awards, most by any player in the world" second part of the sentence is awful, needs rewriting. -have a look
references should come after punctuation, so ideally there should be a comma before ref 10 -Done
"India has highest score of 418/5 batting first and 347 all out batting second." so many things wrong with this sentence its scary. The more I read the more i'm unsure what it's supposed to tell me- have a look
~~Link West Indies~~ -Done
Problem with player no 57, his cell is out of kilter with the table -Done
As I mentioned on the t20 nom, i fail to see the benefit of the colours, they obscure sorting keys and its clear by the key what stats related to what discipline- Done

It can be removed but colours are used on all other similar lists.--Vyom25 (talk) 07:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so but it has no benefit, its clear what stats relates to what discipline. Plus the reader at the moment is unaware that those fields are sortable, so I think its best its removed. NapHit (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Table needs to comply with WP:ACCESS, see MOS:DTT for more info~~

in what manner please suggest. ---Vyom25 (talk) 07:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add colscopes and rowscopes to the table so it complies with WP:ACCESS, have a look at some of other lists at FLC, they should have these. MOS:DTT explains how it should be implemented. NapHit (talk) 11:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it's done--Vyom25 (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly the rowscopes need an exclamation mark before them, i've done the first cell as an example. FYI you can remove all the align centers that separate the players as I've added code at the top of the page which does this job, and the info needs to be on separate lines otherwise the whole table will be shaded. NapHit (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it's done have a look.--Vyom25 (talk) 10:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

use sort dash instead of normal dashes Done

This hasn't been done, you still have normal dashes in the table. NapHit (talk) 11:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

now it's done initially I thought that sort dashes only used in year section and that was fixed by other editor. But now it's done have a look.--Vyom25 (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~no, hs, balls, maidens, runs, wkt, ca and st columns don't sort properly~~ -Done
~~Don't force the width of the captain's table it leaves a lot of blank page which is not desirable~~ -Done

I put the table in the centre of the page as well, like the main table before it for consistency. NapHit (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Figures should be aligned centrally in the table -Done
There are some discrepancies between the table headers and the key, e.g. mdns in key yet maidens in table -Done

still one wrong you have ave and avg. NapHit (talk) 20:32, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yeah sorry missed one but now it's done.--Vyom25 (talk) 06:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Unclear what is referencing the tables~~

Cricinfo is used for all the statistics. However, I can put reference next to every player like done here.--Vyom25 (talk) 07:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No just seen the references near the table, appears to cover everything, so this is fine. NapHit (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised this list had a peer review before it was nominated, where some of the The Rambling Man comments were not addressed, in light of this I suggest you withdraw the nomination as hits pointless having a peer review and not addressing comments made by one of the directors and then nominating the list. NapHit (talk) 16:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well sir I have addressed most of them. As for the suggestion on name sorting you can see here. Please let me make it clear that I don't mind withdrawing the nomination. But I would seriously like to work on your suggestions.--Vyom25 (talk) 12:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

you haven't addressed any of them, if you're not going to bother listening to advice then what is the point of nominating the list? If you address my suggestions then fair enough, but at the moment saying you've addressed most of them when you haven't at all, doesn't look very good. NapHit (talk) 12:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

there is some misunderstanding I haven't even started yet.--Vyom25 (talk) 13:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oh ok I was talking about suggestions given by The Rambling Man not yours.--Vyom25 (talk) 13:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still Opposing. I'm still not happy with the prose, its shaky in a lot of places. For a start have a look at the difference between the opening sentence in this list and in List of India Twenty20 International cricketers. The sentence in that list sums up what twenty20 is much better than the sentence here which rambles in about ODIs. India should be mentioned in the first paragraph not the second as they are the focus of the list not ODIs. The readers doesn't have much idea of the success of the Indian team, have they won any ODI tournaments, e.g. World Cup, this should be listed, so the reader has an idea of the status of the team. The best thing to do is have a look at the T20 list and note the differences between the prose, because at the moment, its like day and night. NapHit (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 22:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose – Unfortunately, I don't think this is that close to meeting FL standards. I see a reference before punctuation (should be after), multiple instances of spaces not provided between sentences in the Captains section, many hyphens in the tables that should be dashes, and a lack of sources for the captains table (even the main table's sources aren't that clear). Prose is also concerning; the worst bit I saw during a brief scan was "Ganguly,Azhar India's two most capped captains come close with 54% win rate." A lot of work is needed before this can reach the required level, and I'm not sure it's doable during this FLC. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please have a look now I have fixed most of things you have pointed out. more suggestions are welcome.--Vyom25 (talk) 07:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of the first things I saw when returning to the list was this sentence: "India is a full member of International Cricket Council it has permanent ODI status[1]." Perhaps try "India is a full member of the International Cricket Council and has permanent ODI status.[1]" -have a look also added 'a' before permanent

Ref should be after the period, not before. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Vyom25 (talk) 06:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"India played first ODI in 1974 since then a total of 193 players have represented the team." Add "its" or "their" before ODI and a semi-colon before "since", and this may be okay. Until then, it's shaky. -Done

Should be "its" without the apostrophe. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Vyom25 (talk) 06:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Since 1974 India has played 792 ODI". Last word should be ODIs.~~ -Done
~~Currently, Sachin Tendulkar holds the record for playing most number of ODI matches with 453." Add "the" before "most", and consider removing Tendulkar's first name since it was given earlier.~~ -Done
~~Add a space after reference 6.~~ -Done
~~"India's lowest total in an inning is 54 runs." "inning" → "innings"?~~ -have a look
~~What's Sehwag's first name?~~ -Done
~~Captains: "A total of 21 players captained Indian ODI team so far...". → "A total of 21 players have captained the Indian ODI team..."?~~ -Done
~~Add "a" in "Kapil Dev comes second with 56% win rate."~~ -Done
~~In a later sentence on Dev, decapitalize "First".~~ -Done
~~Add space in M.S.Dhoni (at least one).~~ Done
~~Add another space after reference 18.~~ -Done
~~"Azharuddin and Tendulkar and Dhoni" → "Azharuddin, Tendulkar and Dhoni".~~ -Done
~~Formatting of access dates in refs 13 and 14 are different from the rest. It would be better if this was made consistent.~~ -Done

Still needs more work before I'd be comfortable enough to drop my oppose. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two more while I'm here: external links should go after notes and reference, and the hyphen in the title of ref 13 should be an en dash instead. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

have a look--Vyom25 (talk) 06:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose due to the unresolved issues above, and generally bad presentation and language. Harrias ^talk 14:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

which ones if you point them out specifically it would be helpful.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the above concerns. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.