Comments
- There are images available at Flickr. You could make a request to the author to release the file under a free license. Although not required now, it might be helpful in future
- I've already told you that I can't do this, in fact I don't understand how to make a request or upload images from other cites. I'll appeciate if you or anyone want to do this. Zia Khan 15:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Everytime I upload an image from other sources is deleted from the commons, so I think I can't do this. Zia Khan 22:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Means you've still not understood anything about our copyright policies —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly and don't want to repeat the same mistakes. Zia Khan 07:09, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The Sharjah Cricket Association Stadium image doesn't look like a panoramic view to me
- Described by the BBC
in 2003; year is really not needed unless it holds some significance
- ref #5 is not working. Remove the forward slash before ".html" in the URL
- "feat" in Foot notes repetitive
- When sorting the "score" column by descending order, 104 off 115 balls should sort before 104 off 128 balls. Likewise 103 (126) should sort before 103 (144)
-
-
- Not at all! 104* is better than 104 as you stated below (194* and 194). Zia Khan 22:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
-
- "Balls" and "S/R" column collectively are not required in Test centuries table
- Removed, personaly I think there should be no problem if one want to have these columns.
- None of the century lists created/nominated by others use both in the Test tables. Only lists created by you follow this pattern. —Vensatry (Ping me) 12:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- His Test centuries were scored against seven different opponents sounds better than his ODI centuries scored against six different countries.
- A mention of the tournament citing Anwar's 188* could be made as it was considered a tournament of high profile
- His 194 was a 13 year-old record breaking score that in turn lasted for almost 12 years. A mention of this should be made at least in the FNs.
- A note has been added. Zia Khan 15:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
—Vensatry (Ping me) 08:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Further comments
- "Wellington, in 1994" comma shouldn't be there since the text following the comma is dependent on the preceding part
- When I say "Wellington, in 1994" corrections should be made for similar sentences —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
-
- "Sharjah Cricket Association Stadium, in 1993" needs to be fixed —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:33, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I've fixed this according to your suggestion, although there was no problem with this sentence. Zia Khan 05:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ummm, you ought to understand the usage of commas, dashes and semi-colons —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand them sufficiently. Zia Khan 15:13, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Then you shouldn't commit the same mistakes repeatedly —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no mistake. I think Gaint2008 is dealing with grammar, he didn't mention that. Zia Khan 17:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are chances where reviewers might have missed a few glitches. That doesn't make everything right —Vensatry (Ping me) 03:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Little chance to miss that when 3 to 4 English-speakers are reviewing. Zia Khan 04:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Surprised that none of the English speakers pointed out sentences like "Anwar shared Man of the Match" and ""record for the most runs" —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't warrant that I'll catch every issue in an article or list while reviewing it, and I don't think any of the other FAC/FLC reviewers do either. We all do the best that we can, and collectively we usually do a pretty good job. However, I often find fresh issues after several editors have reviewed something, and people find issues with work that I've reviewed. This is normal and shows that we all look for different things. Oh, and I'm not FLC's official grammar guy; there are plenty of people better than myself at spotting issues. Let's focus on fixing the issues pointed out; it looks like at least the Man of the Match one has been taken care of already. Giants2008 (Talk) 17:54, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not complaining about anybody. I was just trying to explain Sahara4u, that reviewers (include myslef) miss a few issues —Vensatry (Ping me) 20:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Link Anwar in the image
- "Anwar shared Man of the Match" -> Anwar shared the Man of the Match
- "record for the most runs" -> record for
the most runs
- There is a formatting error in ref #2 (General ref)
- "The record was equalled by Charles Coventry" -> score was equalled by Charles Coventry, since 194* is statistically better
- Dates and publisher missing in Ref #19
- The publisher of the newspaper is "Pakistan Herald Publications Limited (PHPL)" —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- His score of 194 runs, the highest by a Pakistan batsman, was made against India at the M.A. Chidambaram Stadium, Chennai, in 1997.[17][18][19][N 3]. Refs cluttered. No need for three references conveying the same fact
- 10 cricket grounds -> Ten cricket grounds. Being a comparative figure this should be made consistent
—Vensatry (Ping me) 12:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional comment
- "He scored three consecutive centuries", "His score of 194 runs", "He scored all of his twenty ODI centuries" and "As of October 2012, he is the leading". There is too much usage of the pronoun he in all the above mentioned sentences that explain his ODI career. Consider re-writing them. —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:33, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "and shares sixth position with Chris Gayle overall among all-time ODI century-makers"; This needs a small c/e —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you want here? Zia Khan 15:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Copy-edit needed —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:03, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand c/e, what type of copy-edit you want from me? Zia Khan 17:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Then, what should that be? Zia Khan 04:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Dunno why you're not keen in adding the "Test" column in the table —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not necessary, I've already this in the references. Zia Khan 15:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I strongly feel that's necessary since this is considered to be the best of our work and similar lists have that. One cannot go and check the individual refs each time to know which test it is —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:03, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done! Don't know why are you strongly feel this because this is not very important. Zia Khan 22:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm emphasizing more on that since that column finds a place in every other list apart from the ones created by you —Vensatry (Ping me) 03:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- None of the reviewer felt so strongly about the column in those lists. See their comments there, also. Zia Khan 04:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- NapHit suggested that recently while I was working with the
Lillee Hayden list and since every other list uses this should also comply with them —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Just to note I didn't suggest adding the column as it was already there, but I do think it is useful. NapHit (talk) 14:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Usually we don't have this column in fifers' list. I know that you didn't and the only reason I've added this is because this is useful. I don't know what Vensatry wants? Zia Khan 15:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First of all this isn't a fifer list. We are dealing with centuries list. I can see that column in every list–Sachin, Dravid, Ganguly, Lara, Viv Richards, Strauss, Trescothick. Only lists created by Sahara4u doesn't include that column —Vensatry (Ping me) 20:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Things may be changed since those FLCs. Zia Khan 22:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "in a ODI innings" ->in an ODI innings —Vensatry (Ping me) 04:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This should be read as "a One Day International" since I've already explained this in the first para. If you have more concerns summarize them together, please. Zia Khan 04:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "a ODI" is grammatically wrong —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- We can use both "a ODI" and "an ODI". For your satisfaction I'm changing it. Cheers Zia Khan 15:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It depends on the way you pronounce it. One can say "a One day Intn'l" but I don't think "a ODI" is correct —Vensatry (Ping me) 20:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's exactly what I was tryinng to say. Zia Khan 22:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
|