Talk:List of players who have scored 10,000 or more runs in Test cricket

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Spiderone in topic Contested deletion

untitled edit

Appalling. The list itself is of course interesting, albeit redundant, which is why this has passed under the radar. The text in this article has no worth and worse is poorly executed. I don't really think this is a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.122.158.212 (talk) 23:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of players who have scored 10,000 or more runs in Test cricket. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:36, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Contested deletion edit

The list is very small, as per wiki standards it is preferable with minimum 25 items in the list. @SpideroneLugnuts - Another page for your review. Thanks --Lesenwriter (talk) 22:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

It seems like a fairly well-defined list to me. Spiderone 23:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply