Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 promoted by Dabomb87 03:26, 6 July 2012 [1].

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev[edit]

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): —Vensatry (Ping me) 07:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the list meets the criteria. After the previous nomination the article underwent a thorough copy-edit, reviewed by a few editors and suggestions have been implemented. It is based upon the existing FL, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Waqar Younis. —Vensatry (Ping me) 07:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "between 1978 and 1994, took a number of five-wicket hauls during " that run-on doesn't work. Perhaps "between 1978 and 1994. He took a "XX" of five-wicket hauls during " where "XX" is the actual number of fifers.
  • " third highest" usually would be hyphenated.
  • "as a Cricketer of the Year in 1983 " would be better as "as one of their Cricketers of the Year in 1983".
  • I find ref 9 difficult to see how it cites what you're claiming, and I'm not sure what ref 10 adds to the article.
    • It's quite evident from the source that no other cricketer has scored 5000 plus runs got and over 400 wickets. Removed ref#10. —Vensatry (Ping me) 07:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, but I could equally say that Kallis is the only player to score 12000 runs and take 200 wickets. What's so significant about 5000/400? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Hmmm may be, but the lower limit that I've fixed for this fact is 400 wickets. —Vensatry (Ping me) 07:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • What I'm saying is that you've selected arbitrary numbers to make a factoid. Is it notable? Is this 5000/400 reported on independently by reliable sources? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • This isn't a factoid. This fact was published on 1 2 3 4 5 and can still show a few more sources. I wanted to mention this fact so as to statistically show Kapil Dev's ability as a great all-rounder. This article was featured in the main page with this fact as the hook. —Vensatry (Ping me) 08:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • The fact it appeared as a DYK is irrelevant. I'm pleased to see independent coverage, but still not sure why 5000/400 is any more signicant than 12000/250... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • Why I brought the DYK thing here was I just wanted to include a fact to make it appear on the main page and it has got nothing to do with this FL review. You can very well say that Kallis has 12000/250. Normally for records we go by 1000 runs/100 wickets, 2000/200, and so on. —Vensatry (Ping me) 13:16, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "his first and only five-wicket" just "his only..."
  • Safaraz Nawaz appears to be called Safraz Nawaz.
  • Would prefer to see the cols of the ODI table the same width as the Test table.
  • "ESPNCricinfo" -> "ESPNcricinfo"

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "He took 24 five-wicket hauls during his career for India" the for India bit is redundant as we've established he played for India would put "...during his international career"
  • in the tables you have
  • Support the list meets the criteria. I've reverted back to the last version before the addition of colours, it was too much hassle trying to fix the issues that arose because of it. As there is little benefit to be gained from having them, you might as well not bother. Sorry for wasting your time with this, anyway great work on the list. NapHit (talk) 22:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've added colours since that looks to be a very good idea. —Vensatry (Ping me) 12:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

  • Noticed "third-highest" in the lead and "second highest" in the lead photo caption. Whether a hyphen is in the middle or not should be made consistent.
  • In reference 6, Wisden Almanack should be italicized as a printed publication.
  • Ref 11 has what appears to be a missing second number in its page range. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:21, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from ZiaKhan 12:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Why is "ESPNcricinfo" two times in ref# 27?
  • Replace hyphen with en-dash in ref# 32.
  • Is ESPNcricinfo a publisher or a work in the External links? ZiaKhan 22:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it necessary to italicize website titles in EL? In most of the GAs and FAs, I see neither of them ("Cricinfo" and "CricketArchive") being italicized. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure but you should use the same parameter in the EL as in the refs. ZiaKhan 11:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Meets the criteria. ZiaKhan 12:05, 5 July 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_international_cricket_five-wicket_hauls_by_Kapil_Dev/archive2&oldid=1090670389"