Talk:Cricinfo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cricket Portal Click here for information about how the WikiProject assesses notability Cricinfo is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Categories and templates: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is fully and correctly categorised and carries all appropriate templates. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

[edit] These edits

Someone should look over these edits to make sure they are good as they seem to have changed the POV significantly [1] Nil Einne

[edit] Intro section too long

The length of the introduction section is too long, both per general Wikipedia style and in proportion to the rest of the article. Only the first two paragraphs are really a general introduction anyway, with the remainder of the section dealing with the corporate history. Normally I would just add a section heading between the second and third paragraphs, but despite sitting here for several minutes I can't come up with a suitable title for it! Thryduulf 10:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio

This edit here is almost entirely copies from this site here. If this is to be replaced, then the information needs to be sourced correctly meeting Wikipedia's licencing requirements. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 07:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Obviously the edit was a copyvio, but would that site be appropriate, for the time being, as an external link? There's stuff in there that I for one found really interesting, assuming it's true. Damanmundine1 (Talk) 12:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. I found it fascinating as well. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 19:29, 14 October 2007 dec (UTC)

Given the source, it's as accurate as you'll get anywhere --FleetfootMike 11:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC) (ex-CI staff :) :) )