Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2024 Men's T20 World Cup squads/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC) [1].[reply]

2024 Men's T20 World Cup squads

[edit]

2024 Men's T20 World Cup squads (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Vestrian24Bio 04:10, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My previous FLC has been promoted, so here's the next one from a different topic this time. Vestrian24Bio 04:10, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042

[edit]
  • Please make date formatting consistent in the references.
  • All references need archive links.
  • "Teams that play either First-class cricket or in the Shpageeza Cricket League." doesn't need a period.
  • Coaches need sources, they aren't in the references for the players.
  • "Withdrawn / dropped players" -> "Withdrawn/dropped players"
  • Does the greyed out area in the tables mean that the player doesn't bowl/bat or that it is unknown?
  • Ping when done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The {{ESPNcricinfo 2}} templates use the #dateformat parser function, which re-formats the date based on the viewer's user preferences; but it appears fine when viewing signed out.
  • Already ran iabot twice, that's all it archived.
  • Four types players in a cricket squad: Batter, Bowler, Wicket-keeper and All-rounder. All four bat, but bowlers and all-rounders always bowl, wicket-keepers sometime bowl and batters don't bowl. That's what the greyed out cells are for.
Will add sources for coaches, all else done. Vestrian24Bio 09:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@History6042: all done. Vestrian24Bio 09:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If IABot didn't archive some you have to do it manually. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@History6042: the {{ESPNcricinfo 2}} templates don't support archive urls because, the cricinfo sources are pretty much unlikely to be subject to link rot. Vestrian24Bio 16:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, support. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:41, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Vestrian24Bio 02:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OlifanofmrTennant

[edit]
  • for "No." in the table use Template:Abbr
  • In the refs link "Cricket Canada"
  • In the refs link "Cricket Australia"
  • In the refs link "Cricket South Africa"
  • Ref one has an MOS:DASH violation
  • Why aren't the Canadian teams linked?
That's what I got ping me when done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure if MOS:DASH applies to ref titles because, that's how it's on the website.
  • Canadian teams don't have articles on Wikipedia.
@OlifanofmrTennant: all else done. Vestrian24Bio 09:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From MOS:DASH "Sources use dashes in varying ways. For consistency and clarity, Wikipedia adopts the following principles." Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 13:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: done. Vestrian24Bio 02:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:46, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Vestrian24Bio 02:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • The second paragraph of the lead uses "announce[d] their squad" 12 times in (on my screen) five lines of text. Is there any way to vary this language a bit?
  • "Withdrawn / dropped players are stroked" - the more usual was to express this in English would be "Withdrawn / dropped players are struck through"
  • Withdrawn and standby players are initially listed at the bottom of each table but there's no way to sort them back to the bottom
  • I'm unsure if italicising players to denote their status is permitted under accessibility guidelines but hopefully an accessibility expert can advise on that (I am not one )
  • "Teams that play either First-class cricket or in the Inter-Provincial Trophy." - this isn't a sentence so it should not have a full stop
  • "Teams that play both First-class cricket and in the T20 Blast." - same
  • "Teams that play either First-class cricket or in the Shpageeza Cricket League." - same
  • That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you mean by sort them back to the bottom?
  • If you re-sort the table based on any other column, and then try and sort the first column back to how it originally was, the withdrawn and standby players don't go back to the bottom -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pressing the sorted col header again once or twice would return it to the original order and I just tried it and it works. Vestrian24Bio 10:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've replaced the italics with daggers but, I'm not sure if the dagger should come before the {{Efn}} tag or after it or if we even need the {{Efn}} tags (for standby players) anymore.
Will rework the second paragraph of the lead, all else done. Vestrian24Bio 09:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude: done now. Vestrian24Bio 09:59, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Why full-member teams like India, Pakistan, Australia etc have First class team mentioned? Squads are not selecting from first class tournaments. Secondly, associate teams do not have any league mentioned, which is inconsistent with full member teams. So, what purpose are the mentions of FC or T20 league teams serving here?
I think this is the only concern I can see, otherwise the lead is good, article is comprehensive and well sourced, stable one, meets WP:SAL and WP:MOS after review done by ChrisTheDude and OlifanofmrTennant. Drat8sub (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Drat8sub:
  • Players are selected based on their performance at FC competitions and T20 leagues.
  • Associate teams don't have any leagues; at least none covered by any sources or recognized by the ICC.
Vestrian24Bio 09:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Drat8sub (talk) 08:14, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
:::From your comments, I am in doubt. It seems like you really lacking in cricket knowledge, or don't follow that much the game, atleast about selection and tournaments. So, my suggestion would be, kindly refrain from replying just for the sake of replying. People here have knowledge about the topics on which they are raising concerns and you must consider this. FYI putting some points to refuting your claims:
  • No full-member country players for ICC tournaments like WC, T20WC, Champions Trophy are selected based on domestic competetions, I can vouch for t20 leagues only, but that too will be controversial.
  • Players are selected from domestic competetions for national caps but not for an ICC tournaments. For ICC tournaments player's past performance in international including ODI and T20 leagues are assessed. There are many players who did not play well in T20 leagues but international performances were very good and vice-versa, are selected. Also-
  • A player can play in multiple IPL teams / PSL teams / BBL teams etc in 2 & half year time period and 2 seasons between two T20 worldcup.
  • Except Indian players, players of any other country can play in different leagues in a single year, performances are valued from all leagues.
  • Every other full member countries' players except Pakistan's, play in IPL which is most competitive and players got selected for their respective national sides based on their performance there.
  • English players does not have their own T20 league and their performance in IPL and BBL are assessed for selection.
So, putting just one team name against a player does not seem to fit here.
  • International players (full member country) often remain busy with international duties and now a days international schedule is tight and players hardly play domestic competition. For example players like Virat kohli did not play domestic competition for a decade, and there are many who did not play or that much in domestic tournament between 2022 and 2024 T20 WC.
  • Domestic competitions are not registered/need not to register with ICC, example Ranji Trophy(Ind), Quaid-e-Azam Trophy(Pak), Sheffield Shield(Aus), County Championship(Eng) etc are not registered with ICC. So, saying associate country leagues are not registered with ICC, that argument does not seem to fit here, or by that logic you must also remove all the domestic leagues along with the other reasons mentioned above.
  • Just a quick search shows me Nepal has T20 league, Netherlands have domestic league, Scotland has the same, you just replied just for the sake of replying, and did not even care to search.
  • Talking about domestic competition, your first point of "selected based on their performance at FC competitions" only fits for associate country or country who does not have a t20 league. Again you have to keep in mind the players from these countries also play in other countries's league.
Thus, from the above points, it can be concuded that, mentioning Domestic competition team or T20 league, does not serve any purpose other than wrong information about the topic, and fails WP:NOT/ WP:SOAPBOX/ WP:OR/ WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SPECULATION etc, thus must be removed. As I said everything else seems in place, otherwise this concern seems to Fail the article. Drat8sub (talk) 10:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, I did some research beforehand:
Vestrian24Bio 11:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Scotland, Netherlands or any other teams not listed here does not have List A or First-class status. Vestrian24Bio 11:06, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The domestic competition argument is yours, I just refuted your points, now you are refuting your own point, though taking it in good faith. And are we talking about selection of National team?...no. There are 20-30 different national squads in a year for Test, ODI and T20, we are talking about T20 WorldCup specifically, so kindly go through the comments mentioned above (second point), there is no rush to reply. No, India national squad for WorldCup or T20 WorldCup are not selected from Ranji Trophy or Irani trophy, and kindly dont cherry pick sources or links and also not RS in this particular matter. I don't see these domestic and t20 league columns belong there per point 1 and 2 of my above reply, I cannot support this for a wrong info. Drat8sub (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, what would you suggest now... removing the domestic competitions and t20 leagues from all or anything else... Vestrian24Bio 12:14, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Domestic Competition have to be removed, but keep T20 leagues for now, it can be kept.. there can be a justifiable argument. But give me little time, I will check with all available ICC data base and National Association data base so that league for most of the team can be added if not all. Drat8sub (talk) 12:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, ping when you leave a message. Vestrian24Bio 12:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Vestrian24Bio: I will add sources at article talk page if I find any of the missing leagues, I'll ping there. You can now remove the domestic competition for full members from their respective tables. Drat8sub (talk) 13:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Vestrian24Bio 13:25, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked the associate member's data, have not find any league data for Oman, Uganda, P&G, Nepal but there exist for Scotland and Netherlands, Netherlands has one of the oldest t20 league started in 2007, but team data is unavailable. So, I think the argument will be that the teams mentioned are the recent league team that the player belonged to before the T20 world cup (the argument of the selection will not be valid, and may be raised by other reviewers too) and league for full members are kept and since data is not available for associate members, are not mentioned. And the info about why the full members' league teams are added and why not associate member, should be included in a line with third paragraph where you have mentioned about "†" or in a note, so that it does not create any confusion for readers. Drat8sub (talk) 07:55, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? Vestrian24Bio 08:01, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine for me. I think everything seems to be in place, well sourced, well written, accessible and comprehensive following all guidelines. I would love to see your review of my nomination article . All the best.

Source review

[edit]
  • linking is consistent
  • Dates are for the most part consistent but a few stray dash dates (I would just run a script on the page)
  • All of the ESPNcricinfo sources are missing the date
  • Ref 5 is dead
  • Archive all sources
  • unrelated to the source review but I’m pretty sure West Indies should be listed as “THE West Indies”
  • Spotchecks turned up nothing
Ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 18:35, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. --PresN 21:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/2024_Men%27s_T20_World_Cup_squads/archive1&oldid=1288180241"