This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Cricket, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcricket articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit theproject page, where you can join thediscussion.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket
There is a toolserver basedWikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available inone big list and inCSV format)
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofEngland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
2023 Ashes series is within the scope ofWikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage ofAustralia andAustralia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit theproject page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Differentiating Lords and The Oval is a fine idea, but this Australian who has followed Test Cricket for nearly 70 years has never heard of Kennington. (Nor, I now notice, has my spellchecker.) Maybe find a better way?HiLo48 (talk)04:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can we make a small mention in2023_Ashes_series#Second_Test? As the dismissal has generated significant media coverage in England and Australia, even the British PM commenting. Although it is covered in Alex Carey's article (where I got the original text from).LibStar (talk)02:55, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps something could go there, so long as it was VERY balanced (Not sure how you would achieve that), and also took into accountWP:RECENT. Cricket scores are forever, and WILL be looked at in 100 years times, if the past is any sort of a guide. A drama around one dismissal, not so much.HiLo48 (talk)04:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I need this article's TOC in order to reference and access a particular section, e.g., "Fifth Test". Why is there no TOC, and is there any other way I can reference a single section or subsesction? I notice that "#Matches" works for that main section, but the # won't work for "Fifth Test".Bjenks (talk)10:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
G'day @SKAG123. Like you, I'm generally reluctant to capinitialise a common noun, and I gave much thought to doing sohere, which you've reverted without clear reason. OK, now let's have your justification, please. My consistency edit was based on a simple Ctrl-F search of the article which showed Test=99 matches, Tests=22 matches, test=0 matches, tests=2 matches. So what will you do now? Will you change them all to lower-case (which, I'm sure, will bring on a more serious argument) or undo your hasty revert. Which is it to be? Regards,Bjenks (talk)08:32, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/The Nets/Style advice is clear:Always use capital T when referring to Test cricket and in any situation where the definite article is part of a title: e.g., in a Test match at The Oval, England won The Ashes. It should always be Test match, which shortens to Test. This is consistent with all other cricket articles.Joseph2302 (talk)08:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
