User talk:Batagur baska/Archive 1

Main page: User talk:Batagur baska

Bengal cricket team

Does the squad table need that much information about player's history? The long notes make the table hard to read and comprehend. Krishnakrm (talk) 09:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Krishnakrm. I have seen many similar lists elsewhere on site so not attempting anything new. There are good reasons for notation. I am aware site community is seeking deletion of many "stub" articles that cannot be expanded and so many Bengal cricketer articles will be culled. Practice in other lists when no article, is fit what is known into notes section of tables. I accept my notes as written could be much improved but I am still developing and it is necessary to start with what we have.

To give you example, please to see Suvankar Bal. I have tried to expand that but little can be found. Before I edited, it looked like this and it is on hitlists like [1] you can see in "What links here" tool. So, it will be culled and, without notes in list nothing left.

If my list is big issue, I suggest discussion at cricket project. Thanking you. Batagur baska (talk) 10:03, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

You can add the player statistics, other teams he played for, etc. in the infobox of the player's profile like this [2]. Also using cricinfo link instead of cricketarchive would be better as they are under a paywall.Krishnakrm (talk) 12:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Krishnakrm, you are right except not all players have articles and as I said, it is likely more will be deleted in near future. Batagur baska (talk) 15:16, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Using both would be better. And fewer columns in the tables (which also don't need to be sortable) would be preferably - Batagur baska knows exactly what I mean by this I think. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:00, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Of course. These tables are not rocket science. I agree this one is better unsorted but not sure how reducing columns might help? Open to suggestions on that. Batagur baska (talk) 15:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll show you what I'd do with the Os as there's only two of them Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Go ahead. The template is there so feel free. Batagur baska (talk) 15:57, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

So, my preference, as you know, is to have fewer columns and more flexibility. This will take the need for the massive key table out as well. I consider a "matches" column, but this is harder once you get into the List A era, so it's easier to summarise. The two cricketers in the Os show different sides of the coin here - Mohammad-Al Obaidullah is unlikely to survive AfD so is the reason you're looking at this list. I think I've just about got everything important about him in the table notes, but done it in prose rather than by using statistical shortcuts. To me, that's better, but if you prefer lots of stats then go ahead - you can undo my edit and use the columns you have (but do see below). Both sorts of table exist and seem to be tolerated. I would find what I've done easier to use, but that's me; others prefer pure stats, although I think those tables would find AfD tricky if they were ever taken there. Ojha, on the other hand, is an obvious keep at AfD so my view is that we need to write little about him in the table. You could add to it, but too much more strikes me as a waste of effort - the aim here, for me, is to summarise the articles that would be very likely to be lost at AfD.

On the tables themselves, I don't think the source above is helpful - you're going to source them all in the table, yes? And there's no need for the ''' bolding if you have ! at the front of the row - that does it already. Personally I would keep text at standard size - perhaps an advantage of my layout - and I would try to avoid too many widths being specified. The way I've done it allow for rows to not fill the entire width of the page is the amount of text is low. For users with very wide browser windows that's probably an advantage. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I originally created the table because I'm aware of the forthcoming AfD cull. Even a cursory scan through the Bengal player articles is enough to show that many will be deleted, such as Suvankar Bal mentioned above. I think your structure is very good because it's simpler and it keeps stats at arm's length. I concede the major constraint of mine is that it demands too much detail. Dates and styles, if desired, can go in the notes. There's not a lot of point in using RHB/LHB anyway. It's easy to say he is a googly bowler, a wicket-keeper, or a specialist third man without needing to complete a specific box. I think it perhaps comes down to horses for courses because while a site like CricketArchive needs detailed precision, one like this does not and it is always best to keep things simple. So, yes, I will go with it. I'll convert the A and I sections which I'd already done and get around to the rest in due course. Thank you again and well done. Batagur baska (talk) 16:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I see that you've reverted Bengal cricket team back to your preferred version, in spite of the fact that most people don't agree with it. There is a standard layout for cricket team squad tables, and it's this version not your version. The year someone made their debut for this team isn't relevant and notes like Experienced opening bat who has been a standby for India Test squads. are not encyclopedic content, and if they're directly copied from other websites then will also be WP:COPYVIOs. Also, the place to try and get a consensus for a major change would be the article talkpage or WT:CRIC not here. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't open the discussion here and I did invite Krishnakrm to open one at WT:CRIC but he declined. As you can see, BST made some very helpful suggestions which I took forward. Krishnakrm did not respond further and so I assumed he was satisfied. This was over a month ago and now Krishnakrm has removed the new table, which is fully referenced, without even an edit summary comment. He has replaced it with something that is incorrect (or at least incomplete) without any references. If you think notes like the one for Abhimanyu Easwaran should be reworded, then please change them.

The information has been taken from both CricketArchive and ESPNcricinfo but is expressed in my own words so I think any suggestion of COPYVIO is completely uncalled for. As for the sources, they are reliable.

On the subject of sources, I have looked at several squad lists across the main countries and I do not see many, so all of those tables could justifiably be removed. I did find one table with a global source dated 2021 which is the nearest to be achieving compliance with WP:V, but even that is dubious because it is the club's own site and so not an independent source.

I suggest you open a discussion at WT:CRIC as it is unlikely many editors will be watching the article. The rationale for the table is expressed above and will not change because it is a fact that thousands of cricket stubs are going to be removed, and we will need information about the players concerned in tables or similar collections. Batagur baska (talk) 11:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

If the primary reason for making the squad table into a descriptive one like your version is the lack of details in player's individual pages, shouldn't efforts be made to add details in those pages instead of Bengal cricket team page?

The player pages won't be deleted if it has enough information. Krishnakrm (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, that's true, of course. The problem is that the majority of the articles were created as stubs and it is highly unlikely they can be expanded so I am saving what information we do have. There is a solution to this impasse which is to transfer the squad table content to List of Bengal cricketers, where I have created a similar layout based on many other list articles. I'll do that but first I will make sure we have all the current players because the VJH has been running since the last update. Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 11:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

You are doing excellent work in List of Bengal cricketers page. I would certainly agree to having player stats and description in that page.

Vijay Hazare for Bengal team got over yesterday. The table I updated had all players who played a match in the SMAT or VJHT this season + long format specialists who played at least 3 matches in last Ranji Trophy. You are free to add players if that criteria is arbitrary. Krishnakrm (talk) 11:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

There are a few, perhaps, like Suvankar Bal who played last year and might reappear in the Ranji, but I think we should probably leave them for now. I'll restore your version and take my data to the main list. It is good to sort this out. Thank you for your good work in keeping all team squads updated. Best wishes. Batagur baska (talk) 13:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Mohammed Shami

Hi, I'm from Bengal. On noticing your frequent edit on the article in headline, here are few suggestions ---

•Editing the template of achivenents in the begining, as it lacks complete information. •Finding a better image for IPL section- one I added is really incongruous.

•Removing hyperbole stuff. Red Round Thing (talk) 10:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi. The edits I'm currently doing amount to minor corrections and the like only, although I did some work on Shami a few weeks ago to try and make it more readable. You are free to edit the article as you see fit, per WP:BOLD, as long as you observe essential policies like WP:V, WP:POV, WP:OR, and so on. You would certainly be in order to remove anything hyperbolic, and you will see plenty of that in articles about prominent players. If you do remove something, best to say it's unsourced or breaches POV or suchlike in the edit summary.

Not sure what you mean by "template of achievements", though? If that is the infobox, I don't think there is much to be done at present. Images are something of a minefield and I only move existing ones around, so I can't offer any advice about that.

I know that's not much but I hope it helps. Good luck. Batagur baska (talk) 16:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Indian cricket team in South Africa in 1996–97, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Not. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

AWB converted a pre-existing error into a disambiguation. Weird! Amended not → not out. Batagur baska (talk) 10:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

AWB edits

Why are you delinking ESPNcricinfo from references, and even making completely irrelevant changes such as this. There is no need for the first, and the latter explicitly goes against the rules of use for AWB: "Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit. If in doubt, or if other editors object to edits on the basis of this rule, seek consensus at an appropriate venue before making further similar edits." AWB is a great tool, but please make sure that you are using it to make a beneficial change to the encyclopedia, not just to rocket your edit count up. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 16:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit count hasn't occurred to me, although I accept that it must be accelerating at present because I am working through Category:Cricket in India which has over 7,000 articles. You seem to be concerned about ESPNcricinfo being delinked in the few articles you have on watch, but the problem with its use in sources is that it is frequently named incorrectly and is often over-linked. There was one article in which it was cited about twenty or more times and all of them with a link. The same applies to CricketArchive, though to a lesser extent.

I agree that it may seem unnecessary to remove spaces but that is one of several checks I had included to assist with correcting certain eventualities. Actually, I will remove that from the settings and deal with spacing issues manually, as I am already obliged to do with infobox issues.

AWB is useful within its limitations, but it is not very sophisticated and I have found it is necessary to cover several possibilities if the corrections are to be effective. Where there are excessive problems, especially in many of the larger articles, it can be necessary to re-run the utility to ensure a catch-all.

Although you may think I am only doing minor corrections, my actual purpose is to identify articles in real need of revision — such as Farokh Engineer, which was in an appalling state and remains a work in progress — and articles, countless ones, that really should be redirected to lists. On a long-term basis, I intend to "roll out" the tabular structure I have installed at List of Bengal cricketers to all Indian player lists and so be ready for the inevitable redirection or deletion of the articles which fail WP:GNG.

I hope that explains what I am trying to achieve. It may be unorthodox but it is one way of getting to grips with an immense problem, which is frankly that articles about Indian cricket are generally in an unsatisfactory state, including many that should be scrapped and restarted from scratch. I do not expect to be using AWB for this purpose much longer and I will then return to editing individual articles and lists, which will mean only a small number of edits per session. Batagur baska (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Also same point, but for using AWB to change accessdate to access-date like this. It makes zero difference to articles, and so is just WP:COSMETIC editing. In fact, there were lots of users and bot that got in trouble for making accessdate to access-date edits in mass here, it doesn't do anything to improve the encyclopedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I read a discussion in which one person was complaining about use of accessdate without hyphen because of problems it can cause, so I thought I had best include the check. As you say, it seems to make no difference so I'll take it out. I can't remember where the discussion was but it looks as if the person was mistaken. Thanks. Batagur baska (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, so the main point here is that the changes aren't necessarily problematic, but if the only change you are making to a page is such a minor one, just skip it and move onto the next article. If you are making other, substantiative changes to a page, then also making these minor changes is fine. With regards to your point about "You seem to be concerned about ESPNcricinfo being delinked in the few articles you have on watch, but the problem with its use in sources is that it is frequently named incorrectly and is often over-linked." Yes, updating older titles from Cricinfo to ESPNcricinfo has a small benefit, though it is negligible given that there is unlikely to be any confusion about what it is referring to. For the second part, it is perfectly acceptable to repeat links in citations, see MOS:REFLINK: "Citations stand alone in their usage, so there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article; e.g. |work=[[The Guardian]]." If you're going to make changes like this, make sure you understand the MOS. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 17:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I'll set AWB aside for now and concentrate on specific articles. I can see a use for AWB in category/template placement, but it doesn't have the versatility needed for efficient textual repair across a wide range of articles. Thanks. Batagur baska (talk) 20:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

You've been a really welcome addition to the Cricket Project. It's been great to see your article creations and edits around the Bombay/Lahore/Madras matches :) When your real life project comes together, will be great to see you back here! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words, StickeyWicket. I will look in when I can and try to help out. Best wishes for 2024. Batagur baska (talk) 11:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:International domestic cricket competition stubs

A tag has been placed on Category:International domestic cricket competition stubs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Batagur baska. Thank you for your work on Lahore Tournament. BeanieFan11, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|BeanieFan11}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @BeanieFan11:. Thank you for doing the review. The article is really just a start at present and I think much more information may be found in the main sources. Best wishes. Batagur baska (talk) 19:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Changing importance mass editing

You changed the importance of 100 articles in the space of 25 minutes between 20:32 and 20:57 UTC today, which means you're spending an average of 15 seconds per article. This rate of editing is excessive, are you running some sort of automated tool/unauthorised bot to do this? If not, spending 15 seconds to evaluate an article is not enough time to avoid mistakes. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am creating lists beforehand, so I check what goes in and what does not. I execute the list via AWB which is fast. If you don't agree with any of the changes, I have no objection to them being reverted. However, if you check the mid-importance category yourself, I think you will agree that it contains a lot of articles that are of minor importance only. I am trying to sort out the class and importance ratings generally but the real purpose is to identify stubs that should not be deleted if and when the cull should take place. It is a work in progress which is large-scale and I need time to complete it. Batagur baska (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

WP:MEATBOT would be worth reading, as if the edits are seen as disruptive, then that could lead to issues/blocks for you. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I've read that. I suppose the time taken in checking before running AWB would be about the same as checking while AWB is in progress. I'll go back to loading the full list and then skipping the ones to be excluded. Batagur baska (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

In fact, I will abandon the importance aspect because it is entirely subjective and, actually, it has no real importance! Batagur baska (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Batagur baska. Thank you for your work on List of North East Zone cricketers. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, North8000, and thank you for reviewing the page. As you say, it is only a start at present but it is on my to-do list and I will try to add more content in due course. They're still a new team but they have potential. All the best. Batagur baska (talk) 22:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to join New pages patrol

Hello Batagur baska!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)