READ the article before adding speculative garbage from dubious sources. Your edits have been reverted and I am now seeking protection for the article. ----Jack | talk page 16:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Jack, I appreciate your passion for the articles we are both editing. I can see you have strong opinions about sources. I think protecting the article is a bit of over-reach. Wouldn't the proper process be to discuss/debate the quality of a source and coming to consensus instead of deleting by fiat? I'm sure So-Van51 would gain from a civil discussion about why you believe the source he chose is dubious. One of the things we stress with the students is that any discussion and debate on the web in general and in Wikipedia specifically needs to be civil, which means unemotional analysis and avoiding loaded language that begs the question. We value your feedback and appreciate your expertise both on Wikipedia and on the various Cricket history pages, but I'd like you to join us in modeling civil discourse when confronted with edits with which you disagree. Thanks for your help and I look forward to learning with you on this project! Oline73 (talk) 15:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)