Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:27, 10 December 2012

User talk:Johnlp/Archive 1 to the end of 2006

User talk:Johnlp/Archive 2 to the end of 2007 and a bit beyond

User talk:Johnlp/Archive 3 to December 2009

User talk:Johnlp/Archive 4 to December 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited George Francis (cricketer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgetown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Percy Chapman

I'm working on Chapman at the moment, having got hold of his biography recently. It's not the best on sourcing, though, and I wondered if you could do a quick Wisden check for me? Anything on his University cricket (specifically his hundred in the Varsity match of 1922, but anything at all really about his general form from 1920. There are only fragments from Wisden in the biography) or on his selection for Gents v Players: (again, anything at all but specifically his 1922 century). If not, no problems. On an unrelated note, I see you are continuing the West Indies theme! Great work so far. I keep threatening to do a few early WI cricketers myself but never quite get around to it. Clifford Roach is on my list somewhere. Happy New Year! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Much obliged, and great work on Francis! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your outstanding work on Manny Martindale and George Francis. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited National Library of Somalia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Capital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Rex Davidson, not Thomas

Hello John. Have just noticed a change and redirect you made some months back and am uncertain as to why it happened. Could you please correct Rex Davidson's article so it is found under that name and not Thomas Davidson (cricketer) ? As you can see by this link Rex was the name by which he was most commonly known: http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/61080666 Cheers, Ross.RossRSmith (talk) 11:24, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Taylor and other South Africans

If you want photographs rather than line drawings, there are some available which are public domain: this links to an Australian newspaper from 1931 and the page facing the article it links to has pictures of every South African on the Australian tour in 1931-32. All the images should be copyright free as they are PD-Australia and as they were published before 1946, PD-US as well. The only possible objection may be if the images did not originate in Australia, but they are credited on the page to an Australian photographer. Using this source does not always give the best quality images, but they are OK; I've used the Sydney Mail on Abe Waddington, Roy Kilner and Learie Constantine. --Sarastro1 (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

You are right about the quality, but if that is the best available, it has to suffice, even for poor old Abe! The other problem is, with these images available, you can't have a free-use image, which would be infinitely better. This is a real problem for some cricketers where a free use image would be great. I didn't actually download the pictures, I just did a screen capture and got them that way. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the kind words! --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Iain Macleod

A small world indeed. :) JH (talk page) 20:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Leg before wicket

If you get a chance, I've expanded this article and would be grateful if you could have a look. It's a bit different to what I normally do, so it would be useful to know if it all makes sense and what is missing. I forgot what a complicated mess of a law it is... Don't worry if you haven't got time. Writing it made my head hurt, so goodness knows the effect that reading it will have! Thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, which I have used to rework the lead. Not sure about the bulletpoints though. And my Brodribb is a 1995 semi-updated reissue. I think he just sort of tacked stuff on the end of some laws though as parts are a little all-over-the-place. And the lbw section barely mentions the big changes in the 1980 code. Great book, though! --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

The images look good. The Hobbs one will be very handy, but I'm not sure about the Chapman one as Australian copyright law is a little more complicated for paintings/artwork than photographs. A little digging to establish if the artist can be identified may be necessary to show it is definitely PD before we can use it. Copyright is a damned minefield! Thanks for finding them, and let me know if you find any more useful ones. If you are still expanding South Africans, let me know if you are ever tackling Aubrey Faulkner as I have a few bits and pieces on him. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Chaps

Thanks! Damned automated spell-checker... --Sarastro1 (talk) 00:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Morris... er... Maurice... er Morriss....

Hadn't thought of checking that! Just had a look for myself, and I suspect some of the variant spellings may be due to poor transcription by either the census people or those working on the appropriate website. "Marcy" looks a fairly definite "Mercy" to me. But interesting that he is Maurice by 1911; there's also a record of the Bodyline tourists returning home, and he is Maurice there too. And if it was him who married in 1928, that is Maurice as well. I think you may be right; maybe they just weren't sure the best way to spell it and/or changed their minds. Or the registrar spelt it wrong (I've seen that before too!) at the registration... But it looks like he considered himself to be Maurice, despite the claims of our anonymous (and now silent) friend. What a shame it's all WP:OR! --Sarastro1 (talk) 18:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Murdered cricketers

Our page got a mention in Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/24/the-spin-cricket-bad-news?INTCMP=SRCH It is time, we moved road accidents to the main space. Tintin 14:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Verity

Thanks for your very kind words which are much appreciated, but I think you are doing yourself something of a disservice by them! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Bowes (cricketer)

The article John Bowes (cricketer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

probably not notable, 8 results for full name on google

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. B——C_ritical 23:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Iain Macleod.jpg

Just wanted to double check. Did you take the photograph yourself, or was it from another source? It is currently under consideration at an FA candidacy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Great, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Very weird Wisden request!

This one may be a little obscure! I'm slogging through the apparently interminable Jack Hobbs article and the end is sort-of in sight. I have two sources which quote Wisden 1930 on Hobbs, and the proportion of Surrey matches Hobbs had missed in the previous seasons. One gives missed 53 out of 136, the other gives 40 of 108. If you get a chance (I'm assuming you have 1930!), I'd appreciate if you could see what it really says. Thanks! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Much obliged. I'm afraid mine only go back unbroken to 1988, with clumps in the late 70s and late 40s. I also have 1918 which is an interesting little read for various reasons! I really should start extending backwards again... Sarastro1 (talk) 21:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The 53/136 is the count for 1926 to and including 1930, though when I add up I get only 52/136. Tintin 03:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

But where does this come from? Mason gives it in his Hobbs biography (apparently quoting the 1930 Wisden), but McKinstry and the 1930 Wisden give the 40/108 figure. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Wisden figures for Surrey's competition matches (ie County Championship) from the Surrey averages of the relevant Wisdens: 1926, 15 out of 26; 1927, 15 out of 26; 1928, 19 out of 28; 1929, 17 out of 28; 1930, 17 out of 28. I make that 83 out of 136 played, so 53 not played. It's 42 not 40, by the way.

Anyway, here's the solution: In Wisden 1931 there is the following quote: "Owing to the calls of representative games and at different times to injury from which he has been suffering, Surrey, in fifty-three championship matches out of 136 during the past five seasons, have had to take the field without their great batsman." Wisden 1931, Part II, Page 261, Chapter: Surrey Matches. Johnlp (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I used Scorecard oracle and Player oracle in Cricketarchive. A column in the results indicates whether they are County matches or others. Tintin 02:25, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Another one!

Any chance of another Wisden check? Gents v Players, Oval 1924: Gilligan was hit over the heart, which basically finished his career. Different sources give different bowlers: Pearson and Howell; the Times does not mention the incident except obliquely the next day, and no other sources name a bowler. Does Wisden mention who it was? Thanks! Sarastro1 (talk) 14:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but I think I'm OK on the seriousness of it. Typical how no-one gives a simple fact like that! Looks more likely to have been Pearson, which is odd as he was a slow bowler, but never mind. Sarastro1 (talk) 15:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

A Note

All of Blackjack's sites have been removed from the web rendering many of his 'links' and 'references' redundant. it makes the things he edited somewhat dubious — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdspsg (talk • contribs) 13:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Next question!

Sorry to be a pain, but it's just because I'm jealous of your Wisden collection! If you have the time or inclination, could you check if there is anything in the 1924 Wisden on George Dewhurst, the West Indian wicket-keeper on that tour? I just created an article on him; rather a strange chap it would seem. To be honest, the state of our early West Indian articles is pretty poor. There are a lot of missing articles, and many others that barely qualify as stubs. Grim. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

And another...

For what it's worth, I've got my hands on Wisden for 1922 to 1925 (Willows reprints, alas, but it's a start...), so these questions should begin to lessen. However... Percy Fender. When you get a moment, could you check Wisden 1921 for Fender (specifically any comment on his bowling style that year). There may be similar questions for a few later years too, I'm afraid. Thanks as ever, your help is greatly appreciated. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Right

So User:Jim Hardie and I are the same person? If you believe that, go to WP:SPI and prove it. I don't think the argument/discussion between Jim and myself in 2008 about online citations will help your case or prove WP:DUCK. The outcome of that was that I agreed he was right and I was wrong. Are you ever wrong?

Is your talk page a sanctuary for a vicious troll, subject to WP:BAN rather than the mere WP:BLOCK, who has driven more than one person, including Jim Hardie and User:AssociateAffiliate away from the site? Is your talk page so sacrosanct that it allows scum like Asquith to use it as a mouthpiece to insult bona fide editors who have a track record of improving the site? I don't claim to be a brilliant editor like Sarastro or TRM or Yellow Monkey who are way ahead of both you and I, but to my credit I have singlehandedly created WP's coverage of early cricket history and I singlehandledly (before you even joined the site) established the category structure of CRIC that is now so readily taken for granted (I am, after all, an IT analyst). Against that, what has your friend Asquith done apart from disrupt the CRIC project and subject all its members apart from you, his sole sympathiser and colluder (if that is the right word), to sustained disruption and harrassment (which is a criminal offence, in case you don't know)? Asquith's record on here includes harrassment of myself, AssociateAffiliate, TRM, Dweller, JH, Sarastro, Nev1, AndrewNixon and others. Indeed, I suppose he has even driven me away from the site too as, in the final analysis, my secondary reason for retiring is that I am sick of clearing up the mess created by vandals and Daft in particular before I can get on with positive editing.

If you want to retain Asquith's lies on your talk page then it's a matter for you and your conscience. I have had enough. I had had enough in January last year when you and a couple of others begged me to stay to help fight against the anti-CRIC element at AfD and wherever. I came back in September last year to help AA after he was attacked by Asquith. I stayed on to help TRM after he was attacked by Asquith. In the meantime, I tried to be positive and improve CRIC as I had done in the past. But, at the end of the day, you have the mighty Jimbo who says "anyone can edit" including Asquith and the likes of you who say that first Dweller and then I cannot remove Asquith's lies from your sacrosanct talk page.

Are you going to remove this post from your talk page or will you keep it there despite Asquith's inevitable screams to the contrary? After all, I am telling the truth. Asquith is a proven liar (see Jim Hardie's response to his "overtures") who has shown in numerous posts (e.g., How's your wife?) that he is quite sick (ask TRM about that) and some of his posts could be perceived as threats, depending on your perspective. Are you really happy that you are seen as a Daft sympathiser and that you have even colluded with him?

As for the so-called Dweller's Law, I think he should just agree with JH, who is undeniably the sagest member of CRIC.

And it's goodbye from him, without whom you would have no 18th or 19th century coverage and no category structure, not to mention histories of Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, etc.

The hypocrisy on this site stinks. So, go on, delete this post and keep Asquith's lies where anyone viewing your precious talk page can see them. I have better things to do. ----Jack | 23:46, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

See WP:ANI. ----Jack | 00:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Response

I neither know, nor care, whether User:BlackJack and User:Jim Hardie are one and the same person. Or not. What I do know is that I try to treat all contributors, IPs or named editors, with civility, and to respect other people’s views even when I do not agree with them. The contribution above and the one on the administrators’ noticeboard early today make allegations about me which I really cannot be bothered to refute or confirm. However, they seem in my view not to offer that basic courtesy of civility, and that is disappointing and disagreeable. Johnlp (talk) 21:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

When I saw BlackJack's post above I thought that it was deeply regrettable, as had been his deleting material from your talk page previously without consulting you. I said as much on BlackJack's talk page. I see that he has now called in the heavy artillery, and an administrator has deleted even more and permanently this time. Following the link given to Misplaced Pages's Deletion Policy, I can't see anything there that would justify it, and certainly not without consulting you first. The Deletion Policy seems to be aimed at articles, and doesn't really seem to have anything to say about talk pages. I am quite cross about this, but I don't really know anything about the admin side of Misplaced Pages (indeed I don't evehn know where I might find the administrators' noticeboard that you refer to) or how to get this overturned. Would you be willing to raise that matter on the cricket project's talk page, as I know that one or two project members are admins? Perhaps one of them could get something done about it? It seems to me that BlackJack has used the sort of tactics that he has - justifiably - complained about when they were used against himself. JH (talk page) 21:35, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

And now having followed the link to AN1 and seen BlackJack's allegations against you there, I see that he wasn't given any support by the two people who replied, and that the debate was subsequently closed, so I'm puzzled why an admin should have then gone ahead and deleted the disputed content anyway. The allegation against you that you consort with trolls is simply laughable. JH (talk page) 21:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I can only echo JH's comments. You have done nothing wrong, and yet been cast by BlackJack as a "bad person". I do disagree slightly with JH on the matter of getting the decision overturned; purely because I think we need to try and finally let this whole BlackJack/Daft thing be left behind us, and move on. Harrias 21:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The most unfortunate thing is that a lot of perfectly valid and non-controversial discussions on this page seem also to have been lost in the process. I'm now wondering if my own talk page - and those of many more of us - might be at risk of similar action. How on earth is one supposed to detect whether some contribution to ones talk page identified only by an IP address is from a banned user or not? I would delete a post if it was abusive or vandalism, but I'm reluctant to do it because of possibly erroneous speculation about who the poster might be. JH (talk page) 22:10, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Just had a quick look through the deleted revisions, and it doesn't look like any other conversations have been removed, so you don't need to worry about that. Harrias 07:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

That's reassuring. I had thought that everything chronologically after the first post by the banned user had been deleted, since that's what View History seemed to suggest, with items being greyed out and struck through. But those items are actually still there. I'll let the matter drop now, as that's what Johnlp wants, but I'm still unhappy (1) that neither BlackJack nor the admin ever asked Johnlp whether he was willing to remove the objected-to conversations and (2) that the conversations were deleted within a matter of hours of an official complaint being made and therefore when Johnlp might well still have been unaware of the complaint's existence. JH (talk page) 09:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Blackjack actually removed the postings. Johnip restored them. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with what they post, it is a simple fact that banned editors are not allowed to edit here, and that's the only issue here. Black Kite (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)