Talk:ESPNcricinfo

These edits

Someone should look over these edits to make sure they are good as they seem to have changed the POV significantly [1] Nil Einne ao kbz cnova sirn knos awear —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.178.78 (talk) 23:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Intro section too long

The length of the introduction section is too long, both per general Wikipedia style and in proportion to the rest of the article. Only the first two paragraphs are really a general introduction anyway, with the remainder of the section dealing with the corporate history. Normally I would just add a section heading between the second and third paragraphs, but despite sitting here for several minutes I can't come up with a suitable title for it! Thryduulf 10:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio

This edit here is almost entirely copies from this site here. If this is to be replaced, then the information needs to be sourced correctly meeting Wikipedia's licencing requirements. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 07:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Obviously the edit was a copyvio, but would that site be appropriate, for the time being, as an external link? There's stuff in there that I for one found really interesting, assuming it's true. Damanmundine1 (Talk) 12:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. I found it fascinating as well. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 19:29, 14 October 2007 dec (UTC)

Given the source, it's as accurate as you'll get anywhere --FleetfootMike 11:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC) (ex-CI staff :) :) )

As someone who was there, I can vouch for it being pretty much spot on, if not complete. The biggest inaccuracy I see is the claim here that CI was started only by Simon and Badri. Simon was certainly the key, but the statement ignores the effort of three or four others who were fundamental to getting CricInfo off the ground. All are named on the bluwiki article, though their stories are not complete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.142.196 (talk) 05:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article be named ESPNcricinfo?

There is an article called ESPNsoccernet. What's the difference between the two names? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.49.44.138 (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Cricinfo 365

There was a time when it was called cricinfo 365, a merger between Cricinfo and 365.com, a betting site. They split shortly before Cricinfo merged with Wisden, but I don't know the exact details of it. I know that cricket365.com became a spin off of the 365.com section of it and still exists today. This should be in the article somewhere. 203.52.130.158 (talk) 23:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Another element of its history that might be worth mentioning is the renaming from "Cricinfo" to "ESPNcricinfo". The article was renamed by the "17:18, 26 November 2010" edit. From my poor memory, this could be around the time that the web address www.cricinfo.com started redirecting to www.espncricinfo.com. You can see that the renaming did not take place immediately at the time of the 2007 take-over, as there is no mention of the ugly one-word "ESPNcricinfo" in here or here. And this 2008 article says "Andrew Miller is UK editor of Cricinfo" at the bottom, whereas this 2011 one says "Andrew Miller is UK editor of ESPNcricinfo". Open4D (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

History of Cricinfo

To mark its 20th anniversary, Cricinfo is featuring a two-part history of the organisation, written by Badri Seshadri. The first part is now up here. This could be an important resource for improving the History section of our article. JH (talk page) 09:34, 26 September 2013 (UTC)