User talk:Philipjelley

The Cricket Barnstar is awarded to Philipjelley for expanding Ashes articles on the period 1950-1971 YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

English cricket team in Australia in 1954–55‎: Hutton and Cowdrey

Given that you've mentioned that Hutton bet on Wilson scoring more runs than Cowdrey, it might be worth redressing the balance by mentioning that Hutton seems to have treated Cowdrey very well - indeed with much more consideration than senior players such as Bedser. I know that Cowdrey said in his autobiography that, as a young player on his first tour, he was very grateful at the way Hutton took him under his wing, especially when his father died during the course of the tour (or it might have been during the sea voyage out). I'd dig out a reference, but I have a heavy feverish cold today and don't feel like doing anything too taxing. JH (talk page) 18:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't recall reading anything that Hutton treated Cowdrey better than the other young players. Keith Miller wrote that Hutton compained that the young players didn't ask him for advice and that they disliked his grumpy moods. Graveney wrote Hutton would just look straight through you as if you weren't there and by all accounts he was pretty wound up during the tour. Cowdrey's father died on the voyage out and it is mentioned in MCC tour of Australia in 1954–55 if you want to add something there. It also has Douglas Jardine giving Cowdrey some farewell advice and Hutton telling the young players that they had little chance of playing in the Tests. Regards,Philipjelley (talk) 18:39, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I definitely remember seeing it in Cowdrey's autobiography, and also I think somewhere else. I'm aware that isn't much help. JH (talk page) 19:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I haven't read that and I am loathe to put it in without a direct ref as it was against Hutton's character as usually described. I'll look up Tyson when I get home tomorrow, as he mentions MCC receiving the news in Eye of the Typhoon.Philipjelley (talk) 19:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I've managed to find something in Hutton's Wisden obituary. The tributes to him at the end of the article included: Colin Cowdrey: "I was just so lucky to play my earlier matches in the England side under his captaincy. He took all the trouble in the world to help me on my way." JH (talk page) 19:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I've also found an article in The Hindu, the most prestigious Indian newspaper, which includes: Michael Colin Cowdrey was the baby of the English team when in the Melbourne Test in 1954-1955, the third of his Test career, he made a brave, match-winning century. The 22-year-old had received news of his father's death at the start of the tour, but soldiered on, thanks to the advice and encouragement from his young teammate Peter May and father figure and captain Len Hutton. It was uncharacteristic of Hutton, who because he was so shy found social interaction difficult. But he seems to have been moved by Cowdrey's plight. JH (talk page) 19:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks. JH (talk page) 19:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. That's very purple indeed. :) JH (talk page) 21:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Images

Unfortunately, images are a minefield. In general, they can only be used on this site if they meet PD-US, as wikipedia is hosted in America and so must meet American laws. This usually means they were published before 1923; it is necessary to be able to prove this (i.e. give a page ref for a book published before 1923). However, Australian images are slightly different, as you have seen. But for them to be used on wikipedia, they must also meet PD-US. Owing to a trade agreement in 1996, all Australian images which were out of copyright in 1996 are also PD-US; in effect, this means any Australian image published before 1946 is OK, but anything after that is not. So, unfortunately, anything post-1946 is not allowed. And I think it is even more complicated than that. Any images which do not meet this should be deleted, although there are many on the site which should not be (including the Hutton article: they will all have to go... Sigh). The only way around all this is to use the Fair Use law, but that is messy and I'm only just getting my head around it myself. Finally, on a FA such as Hammond, it is necessary to be much tighter than on all the other articles. Hope this clears it up, but there are many, many better people to ask about images. Jappalang is one of the best. Hope this helps. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The pre-war articles aren't up to much, so it would be great if you could do something. Even the article on the 1932—33 article is not up to much (as opposed to the Bodyline article which is FA). --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Your question to YM

Hello Philipjelley. About your question at User talk:YellowMonkey#Don Bradman Links. YM is inactive at this time. You will have more luck asking the question elsewhere. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I came here to say the same thing. However, don't be put off by the protection icon, the article is only semi-protected, so you should be able to make these edits yourself. If you've tried to edit and it wouldn't let you, let me know. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:48, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thnaks, I have made the changes as listed on the Don Bradman Discussion page linking him to the 1946-47 Ashes series. Philipjelley (talk) 16:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Umpiring in XXXX Ashes series articles

Hi Philipjelley, I have just found the Umpiring in the XXXX Ashes series articles. I must say that I don't like them, as in my opinion, they are questionable in POV, seem to reliable on possibly unreliable sources and are only borderline encyclopedic. I have raised the issue at WT:CRIC, to see how other cricket editors feel. Please reply there, to ensure that we only have one discussion on this, not fragmented in two places. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 14:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with the 1974-75 series as the only umpiring problem was the application of Law 46, which can be dealt with in the main text. I would stand by Umpiring in the 1946-57, 1958-59 and 1970-71 series as these were more varied and too long to place in the relevant Ashes article. Someone has suggested that the 1946-47 umpiring should be cut into several articles, but having an article on lbw decisions in a single Test series would be unsuitable in my opinion. Philipjelley (talk) 22:01, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

This debate is on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 73, but there appears to be only one objector. My suggestion that the 1974-75 Umpiring be deleted has met with no response. Philip Jelley (talk) 22:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

English team in Australia in 1958-9

"PS Do we really need to reduce all paragraphs to two sentances?" In general I'd say no, but the first half dozen or so sentences in the lead are mostly pretty long and contain a lot of information. JH (talk page) 21:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Some queries

Hi. ONE: Do you have a justification for capitalising Fourth Test here? My Google on <ashes "First Test"> showed lower case used every time. The Oxford editors' dictionary allows "Test match (one cap)", but I can't see any reason to capitalise any other initials. It also appears to be inconsistent usage within Wikipedia. TWO: Why did you decide to delete Bailey's photo here? Will you not be allowing any of the other players' photos to be included? If layout/spacing is the problem, why not move to a gallery solution? Bailey was one of the distinctive players in that team, as were Graveney, Edrich, Compton, Appleyard etc, whose pics surely ought to be there, too. THREE: I appreciate what you're trying to achieve here, but the source of the quote looked much better (at least on my screen) the way it was before. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Common usage capitalizes the number for Tests such as 'First Test' or '1st Test', see Ashley Brown, E.W. Swanton, etc... I deleted Bailey's photo as is did not correspond with the paragraph length, it is still in the related articles on the MCC tour and Ashes series. Someone had changed the quotation, I was returning it to how I wrote it. Philip Jelley (talk) 17:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I have added more photos, which pushes the text so that they match length, I have omitted the minor players, though these may be found on the MCC tour of Australia in 1954-55 page. I also changed all the Tests to capitals, so at least it is consistent.Philip Jelley (talk) 18:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Brown

You have left the article in a mess with cite errors all over the place. I suggest you read WP:CITE to try and learn how to use inline citations for online sources. Can you please rectify the errors you have created? ----Jack | ^{talk page} 03:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I've done it myself and I've reinstated the refimprove tag as numerous statements introduced by you are unreferenced. In addition to WP:CITE, you should also read WP:PEACOCK, WP:MOS, WP:QUOTEFARM, WP:LONGQUOTE, WP:PA and especially WP:OWN. We have standards on this site which all editors are bound by, including you, so you cannot just go and do your own thing re citations and verification, especially if it means leaving an article with cite error messages and indentation failures throughout. You need to understand and accept that other editors are allowed to review, criticise and edit articles you have worked on: in doing so they are not "hijacking the article", to quote you. I think anyone who reviews the article now compared with your version yesterday morning will agree that it has been considerably improved in all respects, especially in terms of weighting and objectivity. I can safely say that I was not "just vandalising it to you (sic) biased POV", to quote you again.

Your approach to the subject has been "oh, here's Freddie Brown, what a jolly good chap he was" and lets put loads of blockquotes (none of which said anything pertinent) into the article. It is clear that you object to Brown being criticised for his public school arrogance but the fact is that he was intensely disliked (and with good reason) by a number of major players (Brown being only an average player) and this is far more pertinent than the trivial fact that he wore a ridiculous hankie round his neck. You have been on the site long enough to know about standards and the rights of other editors, so I suggest that in future you respect those rights and standards. Above all, write articles objectively in compliance with the standards and abide by both site and CRIC consensus. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 04:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

My approach was to take all the information I have on Brown and write the article, the article reflected contemporary sources on his tours. I have not stated that he was a JGC and pointed out that he was combative, rude, outspoken, unsympathetic and imperious. It is equally mistaken to ignore evidence that he was liked by other players. I don't mind there being evidence that Brown was hated and I added the points about Bailey of you were unaware. I object to you removing evidence that he was liked by others, Bedser and Dexter also being major players. Doubtless someone else will come and correct the article as there is no point my doing it Philip Jelley (talk) 16:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You may edit the Freddie Brown (cricketer) page to your satisfaction and I shall wait for others to provide the consensus. Philip Jelley (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles about English tours of Australia – 1946–47 to 1974–75

Using 1946–47 as an example, though the same comments apply to all the tours in this period, please explain why you have created MCC tour of Australia in 1946–47, Australian cricket team in Australia in 1946–47 and Umpiring in the 1946–47 Ashes series in addition to the standard English cricket team in Australia in 1946–47 and the optional 1946–47 Ashes series. Umpiring cannot possibly require a standalone article and the relevant information should be provided by the standard article and the Ashes review. What is the difference between the standard article and the MCC tour article: surely they are the same thing and this is duplication? What is the point of an article about the home team when we already have the main tour and Ashes series articles? I fail to see any rationale for these extra three articles and I do not think any of them add value or achieve any worthwhile purpose. I'll wait for you to reply but I believe all these should go to AfD with a request for delete and merge. ----Jack | ^{talk page} 04:30, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I was advised to separate them when the article exceeded 96,000 as it would be too large. The Umpiring in the 1946–47 Ashes series article had a tag asking that it should be split up into several articles as it was too long by itself, but that was removed by another editor earlier this year. Philip Jelley (talk) 16:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The matter of separate Umpiring articles has already been discussed, or rather forgotten about (see above section). I trust you will also consider the amalgamating the many articles surrounding the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. With separate articles on the fielding of each Australian player it must be a worse offender in this regard. Philip Jelley (talk) 18:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

It would be better to use the English cricket team in Australia in 1954-55 as the template as that was the first that I wrote. It began as one article, but I was advised to split it up into several articles when it reached 154,162 bytes as articles should be <96,000 bytes. I thought it read better if it was all kept in one article, but I did what I was told and you may see it in the history. The other articles followed the template of 1954-55, so I did not try to write them up in just one article. I could merge them of course, but it would be better to discuss with the community as I don't want to have to separate them again when someone takes exception to the length of the main article. Philip Jelley (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

MCC 1954 tour photographs up for deletion from commons

Hi Philipjelley, just to let you know that three of the photographs you uploaded from the Official Souvenir Programme, Australian Tour of the M.C.C. Team, 1954-55 are up for deletion at commons. Afaics the grounds for deletion are that because commons is US hosted, the U.S. Uruguay Round Agreements Act terms should apply, which grant copyright in these photos until 2049. I'm not a practicing lawyer but the argument seems to make sense. Anyway, the relevant deletion discussions are: Deletion requests/File:P.H.B.May1954.png, Deletion requests/File:T.E.Bailey1954.png, Deletion requests/File:M.C.Cowdrey1954.png, and Deletion requests/File:A.V.Bedser1954.png. Hope this helps - Pointillist (talk) 08:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)