Template talk:Infobox cricketer/Archive 1

Archive 1

Clubs

To make it easier, under the club information you could implement {{{currentclub}}}, {{{clubnumber}}} as you do the city/country of birth, perhaps with {{{currentsince}}} e.g.(1993) (to display (1993-present) in the years column, then use the {{{years}}} {{{clubs}}} for the other clubs if needed.

That way for historic players, the currentclub etc can be dispensed with, without losing the header using the if command as at present.

Make sense? Any use? –MDCollins (talk) 23:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Loud and clear, I'll work on it Joe p15 23:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it really such a good idea to speak of "first class clubs". They may be clubs in some countries, but the template should be generic. JPD (talk) 20:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Would team be better? Would you be ok with amending the header to "(Main) First-class team information", or are you proposing changing the "club1", "club2" parameters to "team1", "team2"?

–MDCollins (talk) 20:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

How about just "First-class information"? Joe p15 20:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The parameter names are not important, as they do not appear. I would be easiest to replace "club" with "team", with the heading "First-class team information", but that possibly loses the distinction made by the word "club" between national teams and lower level teams. "First-class information" does this even more. There doesn't seem to be an obvious perfect solution. JPD (talk) 09:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

"Domestic information" then. Obviously for the non-internationals, we can implement First-class and List A/T20 debut information, List A/T20 not being First-class anyway. That better? –MDCollins (talk) 11:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Ahh... I take my comment about an easy solution back. "Domestic information", and "team" should work well. JPD (talk) 11:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Women

Another switch needs to be added so that the International link in the International information header goes to the women's team where appropriate. Andrew nixon 17:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorted this now, thanks Joe p15 20:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Blank space

We appear to have an extra blank line at the top of the articles, stemming from the infobox somewhere. Can anyone find it? –MDCollins (talk) 09:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I've noticed that, I couldn't find it, I'll revisit it later if its still unsolved! Joe p15 10:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Copied from his talk page:

Well, I know what it is, but not exactly why. There's an extra html break inserted at the end of the category listing when the template is there. This break is not inserted when the template is not there. It's coming from the career statistics portion of the template (the switch with the raw table HTML). I do know that the table preprocessor has some funky quirks and mixing HTML and non HTML table markup can cause problems like this. I'd suggest converting the entire template to raw HTML (user:David Kernow converted template:infobox country to exclusively use HTML table syntax a while ago, for this sort of reason). I think it's essentially a bug in the table preprocessor. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

There were some stray breaks in the switch box which I've removed, problem solved (probably!) Joe p15 10:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Born/Died

Hi,

Made a small change to the date of birth/place of birth//death description (column1) just to say 'Born' and 'Died' similar to some other boxes. I'm off for a week, so just revert it if you preferred the old way. –MDCollins (talk) 22:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit: Template now not displaying born if no birth date given

I've edited the template so that, if no birth date is supplied, it won't show the born and died columns (so that one doesn't get strange error messages) and that "domestic information" won't show if no club name is supplied.) Hope that's ok. Sam Vimes | Address me 21:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Players with only partial dates known?

I've filled in this infobox for Arthur W. Robinson, but have had to comment it out because it doesn't seem to like being fed only partial dates. Robinson's year of birth is known, but not the date; while his death is a complete mystery. If preview the article with the infobox uncommented, you'll see what I mean. Simply writing "unknown" in the Dateofbirth and Monthofbirth fields doesn't work because of the automatic date formatting. Help? Loganberry (Talk) 00:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a play - see what I can come up with. –MDCollins (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Leaving out his dates from the Infobox entirely would solve the problem, but I'm not particularly comfortable with that. I may end up using an older Infobox, as I think that would be better than not having one at all. Loganberry (Talk) 22:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorted - to a fashion. Just include the field 'partialdates = true'. It works at Arthur Robinson and doesn't seem to screw up everybody else!! Some stray line breaks for a minute, perhaps Joep15 will fix them as before...

That ok? –MDCollins (talk) 00:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Still get a line break for each 'unknown'. However, if no information is known, all birth/death fields can be omitted (c.f. Morshed Hossain.–MDCollins (talk) 11:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Umpires

Just some information that I've updated this infobox to match {{Infobox cricket umpire}}, so that this can encompass all of the umpires properly as well. The stats columns can be set to 0 now, which may be useful when full stats breakdowns are unknown as well.

(Deprecated umpire box now deleted–MDCollins (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC))

image size

Someone has to fix the image size on this. Look at Rahul Dravid, the picture's far too tiny for the box. Also Sachin Tendulkar, where someone's actually tried to increase the size manually. Relata refero (talk) 12:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry. I am a man of infinite resourcefulness. Relata refero (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I've reverted your changes for a moment - I've just added the box to Arthur Morris and the picture was absolutely huge. If necessary, the image size can be changed by adding .jpg|200px or whatever to the image line, not by adding an image_size field. In the case of Dravid - its the picture that's at fault, as it isn't a very good one (but free, I know).–MDCollins (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't quite work like that, surely? The image_size field itself isn't the problem, that works. I increased the default image size to 225 as well. That shouldn't by and large create huge pictures; the standard across most infoboxes seems to be 220. I'm reverting to my version, but with 190 px default for now. Will see how it looks in your test case. Relata refero (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Sid Barnes was massive too, so have changed to 154px (the same as the infobox I was replacing. Having to manually set the image size for every picture is a bit of a bind...–MDCollins (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Only played one match

Is it possible to have the template display "Only first-class match" (or List A, etc) in the event that a player has only played one such match? Andrew nixon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean in the domestic/international debut type section? Should be doable, yeah. –MDCollins (talk) 14:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Done it, just use "onetest = true", "oneodi = true",(for international)l "onetype1 = true", or "onetype2 = true" (for domestic).–MDCollins (talk) 10:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible Improvements

This looks like a very good template, well done!! Some possible improvements that could be done are:

Instead of writing 'true' or 'false', it could use 'yes' or 'no'. If possible, if some of the fields haven't been filled in, it would be nice if they could disappear.

Also, I've seen that there's some red text on the template page.

These are just suggestions, and it's still great as it at the moment.

Thanks, Drum guy (talk) 16:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comments. We chose 'true' and 'false' as it seemed a standard across other templates. I think that one is a bit hard to change without changing all of the transclusions. You are free to delete fields that aren't in use, I don't think templates can be set to automatically remove them. As far as I know, if the field isn't set (i.e. left as "placeofbirth = ") nothing should display when viewing the 'box. If there is a specific example, let me know.

Also the red 'expression error' is being shown as it is trying to calculate ages without any figures, only the "{{{dateofbirth}}}" expressions, and the formula doesn't like the {}'s. Don't think there is any way around this, in any case it works fine with real records.

–MDCollins (talk) 10:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Club limit

Great template. However when updating Waqar Younis's article with this infobox I hit a problem with the club limit being too small. Currently a maximum of 8 domestic teams are possible, however Waqar, and possibly other players too, has played for more than 8 teams (11 to be precise [1]). Perhaps the limit should be increased to around 15? Muzher (talk • contribs) 03:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, that can be easily done. However, if some of the clubs are not 'major', be wary of making the 'box go on for ever. In Waqar's case he has played for some more than once, so the dates can be entered as '1999/00–2000/01, 2004' for example. –MDCollins (talk) 10:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Increased to 15.–MDCollins (talk) 10:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment- actually you can't put more than one date alongside each other as I suggested, as it wraps funnily. Forget that for now! –MDCollins (talk) 11:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I shall add the clubs now. Muzher (talk • contribs) 04:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the flag a bit large?

50 pixels seems a bit large, it dominates the infobox in articles without a photo (came across one with random page, thought I'd mention it). —Random832 20:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

International Information section

I removed the small typeset from the International Information section because I saw it as being redundant, given that text using the normal size seems to fit over one line. I recall that when this infobox was first introduced that many more of the sections used small font as well, but these have all but gone since then. If anybody notices debut and last match information running over more than one line, post a message here so we can attempt to resolve the issue. Thanks all, mdmanser (talk) 11:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The example (Darren Gough) in the Template Doc has broken! The 'Test Debut (cap xyz) now wraps, causing problems... Feel free to keep playing with it. –MDCollins (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah sorry about that. It looks a lot better, I think, with the rest of the line being full size at least. I had a look over your revision and I thought you may have missed one of the cap number lines out, so I had a go finishing it off. It may be wrong, so feel free to revert that if I made a mistake. Cheers, mdmanser (talk) 10:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Link to national team

I've noticed the name of the country they are from links to the national team for the country - even when the player isn't an international player. Is this by design or an oversight? -- Chuq (talk) 10:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I think this was by design (certainly taken from all the superceding templates). It should link to the country of birth in the personal info section, and at the moment links to x national cricket team under the flag doesn't it - that at least give a link to cricket in that country. If this warrants further discussion, I suggest it gets brought up at the wikiproject. –MDCollins (talk) 23:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Image caption

I'd do it myself, but I'm not confident enough to do it without screwing up the template syntax, but could someone add an optional caption for any image used.Andrew nixon (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Zeros instead of dashes

I edited the "How to use" use section and changed it, advising on using zeros instead of dashes. In the case of 10 wicket hauls in ODIs/List A matches, despite the feat not having been accomplished so far, to state "n/a" implies that it is impossible. If a bowler were to accomplish it some day, we'd have to change the dashes to zeros anyway, so it may as well be done now.

As far as stumpings is concerned, my reasoning is that there are some players who have kept wicket (albeit briefly) despite it not being mentioned as their role. It would be difficult to find out if the player ever kept wicket at any time, to decide if a zero or dash is appropriate.

For 50s/100s, while I can see the logic in having a dash for players whose total runs are less than 50/100, I still think it is better to use zeros to make it easier to see. People may look someone up, glance only at the 50/100 entry and see a dash and not noticing the total run count is less. Unlikely, but I also feel it's best to be consistent.

Other than this minor issue, hats off for making a very useful and informative template! – Muzher (talk • contribs) 04:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough mate, I brought up the issue of the n/a thinking that it was a bit stupid when we made the box. Most stats pages use 4wi and 5wi, but that was too complicated for the row headings. I agree about the stumpings, it is open to a bit of debate I suppose. –MDCollins (talk) 01:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Inclusion of familial relationships

Hi all,

I have been wondering whether it would be useful to find a little space to link to anybody's famous cricketing relatives that happen to have WP articles? It always seems nice on cricketarchive, and is something that often gets overlooked in prose. What do you think? Is it worth it/not worth it? Is there enough here already?

–MDCollins (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

20 20 statistics

i noticed that almost none of the cricketers have 20 20 statistics included in the infobox...how do we include this?ajoy (talk) 19:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

If there's a column free, the template documentation should explain how to add it. We did agree though that the priority should be Tests, then ODIs, then First-class and then List A before we start adding Twenty20 stats. Andrew nixon (talk) 19:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Link to caps

On the Ian Bell article (and I assue all English Test cricketers), the link to the English Test cricket caps in his infobox is a redirect (from List of England Test cricketers to List of English Test cricketers). Can this be fixed? Lugnuts (talk) 08:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, not very easily - the link is generated by the 'country of birth'/'country they play for' field: "List of {{{country}}} test caps". If it is big problem or we end up with double redirects, I'll have a look at another way of doing it.

–MDCollins (talk) 13:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

There really isn't anything wrong with links to redirects. Of course, links to dab pages need correcting, but you shouldn't worry about links to redirects in my opinion. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies. Lugnuts (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Partial dates again

Edward Stanley Roberts has no date of death known, but all the other fields are known. I've used "partialdates=true" as suggested above, but there's now a huge blank space at the top of the article. Can I avoid that? Loganberry (Talk) 16:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, strange one. There must be an error in the code somewhere. User:Joe p15 corrected a similar issue in the development of the box (see above) - maybe he could sort this one out too. –MDCollins (talk) 00:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Strike Rates and Economy

Hello, please create any way to add Batting and bowling strike rates as well as economies for bowlers. Also someone try to add T20 Domestic as well in this template. Because, now modern trend of cricket really favours the mentioning for the batting and bowling strike rates. Please create rows for batting and bowling strike rates in this "infobox cricketer biography'. Thanks --Ahsaniqbal 93 (talk) 14:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Domestic T20 can be added in order to use all four columns. A four column limit was imposed when creating the box, for use in the order Test, ODI, FC, List A, then adding either IT20, DomT20, U-19 if appropriate to make up the numbers.

If you wish to add strike rates and economy rates, I suggest you bring it up at WT:CRIC to get wider consensus on the matter. There may be a case for simply using a database site (cricketarchive/cricinfo) as Strike Rate/Economy are only used in the shorter forms of the game.–MDCollins (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

However, I warn you that consensus was against it last time it came up. Of course consensus can change, but... Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

International section - IT20

While preparing some data for Sambot, I found there are a handful of players who have only played IT20 matches. For these, I have implemented, and allowed debut/last IT20 matches to fall into the "International Information" section (else international=true just brings up the header. I propose that these fields are only used when IT20 is their only international matches, at a push to fill the gap vacated by either Test/ODI information, so that at all times the maximum "international information" contains two forms of the game.

Any objections? See Nadif Chowdhury as an example–MDCollins (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Players to play for more than one team

I was about to write a new article for Clayton Lambert when I came across a problem. If I put his nationality as United States (the country he ended his international career with) I end up with a link to List of American Test cricketers, and I'm unable to list his cap number for both the West Indies and the USA in ODI cricket. This problem could also arise for Gavin Hamilton and Dougie Brown, and many early Test cricketers, amongst others, so my question is: Is it possible to modify the infobox to account for players to have played for more than one international team so I can include cap information for both teams and to indicate that the first and last Tests/ODIs may be for different teams? Possibly done by a switch, eg. If twocountries=true then different international information section? Andrew nixon (talk) 11:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Should be possible. I had thought of that before, with the two flags if necessary at the top too. Kepler Wessels also springs to mind when we get round to him. I'm moving house at the weekend and may be without internet for a couple of weeks. I can have a look after that if you or anybody else hasn't had a go.–MDCollins (talk) 22:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Any chance of having a look at this sometime in the near future? Andrew nixon (talk) 11:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

See below and at WT:CRIC - I'm on it. Have allowed two-nationalities in the introduction (country and country2).

Tried to fix the international info section last night, but got tired and broke it. Will have a go shortly. BTW - the flags have gone. Not sure how to sort the cap numbers yet as there is a lack of space.Mdcollins1984 12:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Done it. Check out User:Mdcollins1984/Sandbox4 (Kepler Wessels example) - the code is at Sandbox3. It does extend the length a little, maybe the two countries should follow each other on one line instead of the break, but that was confusing me in the code. Check it out, give so feedback and have a play.—MDCollins 12:10, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Update: I've gone live with this. If it breaks stuff let me know (and revert the change if it's really bad!)—MDCollins 02:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Removing flags as per WT:CRIC discussion

Hi,

I'm currently removing the flag from the infobox as per the discussion at WT:CRIC and WP:MOSFLAG. If anyone seriously disagrees, please discuss it at WT:CRIC, or let me know and I'll try and deal with it. The current version with flags (but with the South African flag already removed) is at Template:Infobox cricketer biography/sandbox.

–MDCollins (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The current way of linking to a players national side is a little strange looking to me. Perhaps it should be something like "Player name (Country name)"? Andrew nixon (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

How about a separate row for "National side:"? It would make it more obvious from just nationality (which may be different)... And it would make it more explicit, removing the need for 'cricket team' after it, and it would only need to display if they are an international. What do you think? And how near the top should it go? Underneath full name? Or down in the international section?—MDCollins 18:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Like this example of national side row? Currently one country only at the moment for test.—MDCollins 18:38, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Would probably make more sense going in the international section, then it removes the risk of the international information header having nothing under it for players such as Arul Suppiah. Andrew nixon (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Partial dates for living subjects

Many cricketers are notable in their sport but relatively unknown outside it. Due to identity theft concern for living individuals, WP:LIVE guidance may force many of birth dates listed for living cricketers to be converted into partial dates. In many other biography articles, this has already been the case. I note that this template makes special provision for partial dates due to the inflexibility of the old {{birth date and age}} and {{death date and age}}.

Actually, the newer {{birth-date and age}} and {{death-date and age}} templates do not have this problem. I have constructed a replacement based on the work done by Mdcollins1984 and AllynJ. It is at User:J JMesserly/Infobox cricketer biography. Note that it is possible to delete birthmonth and birthday and still get a birth year and approximate age without use of the partial dates parameter.

For example, say Mark Waugh fit the WP:LIVE restrictions. If you look at that link, you will see my sandbox version of the article on him has the day and month of birth removed, and it birth-date and age still works just fine.

Partial dates may still be necessary for cases like Arthur W. Robinson where even the death year is unknown.

Also, it is unnecessary to force contributors to convert dates to numeric format. They can simply copy paste the date from the article into the infobox. EG: see use of birthdate parameter in User:J JMesserly/demo3.

Note, whether you like the new template or not, my sandbox example demonstrates how your template page can be made to display without the error messages. I see you are doing this stuff in other places, but anyway perhaps you can make use of that. -J JMesserly (talk) 09:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

This might go better in the more general discussion forum at WT:CRIC, but for what it's worth, I think cricketers may be in a different category from some, in that one very large and famous website (Cricinfo) and another less well-known generally but heavily used as a statistical reference (CricketArchive) include full dates of birth wherever known, for both living and dead people. In other words, unlike with some subjects, a person looking for full dates of a relatively minor cricketer is just about never going to be dependent on WP for easy access to same. Loganberry (Talk) 14:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Major publications such as Wisden and Playfair print full DOBs as well.—MDCollins (talk) 22:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Inline citations for height

If I find a citation for a player's height in a reliable source, but not the source used for the main infobox data, is there a way to add an inline citation? For Kadeer Ali, for example, I can do (and have done) this for the "Nickname" field, but if I try to do it for the Height fields all hell breaks loose. Since Ali's height is not mentioned in CricketArchive's data, I would like to make it obvious that I got his height from Cricinfo. Can it be done? Loganberry (Talk) 20:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I would hazard a guess that 'no it can't'. Unfortunately the field takes the entire entry for the conversion calculation and anything else will mess with it. My best suggestion is to make sure it is in the prose and reference it there. Otherwise, don't worry about it! I can't think of another way around it.—MDCollins (talk) 23:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - and apologies for the late reply! I agree with your suggestion: as long as the height is in a listed reference, then that's probably good enough. Loganberry (Talk) 00:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

References should not generally be used in the infobox anyway. Infoboxes are just meant to be at-a-glance summaries of article content; if a player's height is verifiable then it should be given (and referenced) in the article body. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Format

Any chance of having 5 columns so it is:Test ODI FC OD T20

also wouldn't it be much easier if club one was actually the first club so you don't keep on swapping them round when the join a new club —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parklands cobbler (talk • contribs) 23:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Re point 1 - this was debated a lot when we created this template, but it was felt that (at the time) T20 was deemed not as important as the other 4, and that more than 4 columns makes either the box too wide, or the information too small. If you want to see if consensus has changed, feel free to post at WT:CRIC.

Point 2 - the club order - it was always the way to have the most current club at the top (it was copied over from the myriad of previous infoboxes we were using). I take your point that it is clumsy if somebody changes clubs, but the majority of our players have retired and so it won't affect them. Without a major change to every player, I can't see an easy solution or different markup to use instead. I usually find the easiest way to solve the problem, rather than cut and pasting the information is to change the club number and run down the list (changing club1/date1 to club2/date2 - using down arrow and delete key) and then to add a fresh 'club1' to the top. You soon get quite quick at wizzing down the list!

Hope this helps,

—MDCollins (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Records held by the cricketer

I think it is an important section and should be added to the template. Hamza ^{[ talk ]} 08:06, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

We need to leave something to go in the prose section of the article! dramatic (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Last to Latest

I'd imagine that this would be better as the casual reader may see this as the sign of retirement, rather than the date of the players latest test match.Lando09 (talk) 10:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

First-class umpire stats

Just wondering if there should be a field to record stats for the number of First-class matches umpired. It might not be appropriate for elite test officials but for umpires who have not umpired test cricket it could be useful.Hack (talk) 07:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Seems reasonable if only used when appropriate. Particularly for those with a short playing career and extensive (mostly non-international) career I've added the facility (fcumpired), (listaumpired) and the corresponding fields. Haven't really tested it so let me know if it doesn't work.—MDCollins (talk) 23:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's working. The Umpiring Information header shows but there is no detail unless the test, odi or t20 fields are filled in - even then only the test, odi and t20 info, no fc or lista detail...Hack (talk) 14:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, should be fixed now.—MDCollins (talk) 15:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

That seems to work now. The only issue is that the years umpired is not showing for List A matches (see Paul Wilson (cricketer) or Richard Illingworth).Hack (talk) 03:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

That was easily solved. There was a mistake in the sample template doc so that the field was labled "umplistdebutyr" instead of "umplistadebutyr". I've fixed your two examples, so just check any others you've made. I've corrected the template doc so any copy and pasting should work.—MDCollins (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

international=false

Setting international=false produces the same results as international=true - it inserts an International teams section. What's the point in having a true/false parameter if it is ignored? dramatic (talk) 23:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Just leave it blank if it is not true. This goes for all the other fields in the 'box - if you don't need it, leave it empty or delete it.—MDCollins (talk) 10:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I've had a look at sorting it, but it's beaten me at the moment.—MDCollins (talk) 11:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Alt text

This infobox should have a parameter for alt text in order to make it more accessible to visually impaired users who require screen readers or for browsers that cannot display images. I would make this change myself but haven't the faintest idea how to use template syntax. Cheers, -- BigDom 21:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

It does; just put "| alt = Text about the image." Harrias ^talk 21:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. I redirected the proposed title here. Ucucha 17:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

---

Template:Infobox cricketer → Template:Infobox cricket biography — As I mentioned in the recent TfD for the various cricket infoboxes, I believe that {{Infobox cricket biography}} would be the best name for this template. Although it is primarily for players of the game, the box is also applicable to umpires, who may not necessarily have ever played the game; therefore, {{Infobox cricketer}} may be confusing for some editors. Using the title {{Infobox cricket biography}} would remove the possibility of confusion and would also remain entirely accurate. – PeeJay 23:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. "cricketer" is a perfectly adequate umbrella term for all subjects of this infobox; the shorter name is clearer and easier to type. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

An umpire is not a cricketer. It is possible that an umpire may have been a cricketer at one point, but that is not always the case. I should also point out that the biography infoboxes for association football and both rugby codes have the word "biography" in their titles as those infoboxes are not just for players. The same is applicable to the cricket infobox. – PeeJay 23:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

WO:OTHERSTUFFEXISTSis not a good argument. Can you substantiate your claim that the current title "may be confusing for some editors"? Or at least tell us how many umpires who are not cricketers we have articles about? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Of the Elite Panel of ICC Umpires; Billy Bowden, Steve Davis (umpire), Billy Doctrove, Daryl Harper, Tony Hill (umpire), Rudi Koertzen, Simon Taufel. That's seven of the eleven. Harrias ^talk 09:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

That seems like a significant number. Thanks Harrias. By the way, Pigsonthewing, I am aware that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not considered a valid argument, but in the interests of consistency, I felt it was appropriate to bring up the issue. – PeeJay 10:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Seven is a trivial number and does not justify renaming the template. Of those you list:

• Bowden "was a player until he began to suffer from rheumatoid arthritis and took up umpiring", according to the first para of his article
• Doctrove "played club cricket in Dominica", according to the external link in the article
• Harper "played as a right-handed batsman", according to his article
• Koertzen "played league cricket while working for South African Railways."
• Taufel "played for Cammeray Cricket Club in the Northern Suburbs Cricket Association as a fast-medium bowler"

So we're down to two. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

But none of those played at any level that Wikipedia would consider notable, so we're back up to seven. – PeeJay 10:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi all, I would think that this is fine where it is. For those wishing to write about umpires (including those non-FC playing types), it shouldn't be hard to find which template they are using. Either looking at WP:CRIC, or by heading to an example page such as Taufel/Harper etc. i.e. the Elite panel are good examples, all of which are watched and edited by WP:CRIC members. Just because it isn't in the title shouldn't really matter. They are a very small proportion of articles. 7 of 11 elite panel, yes, but not much of a proportion of the total transclusions. As Andy said, it's much snappier to write, and the original template title was rather clumsy. This is a lot easier.—MDCollins (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussions and examples of Infobox Mk II

Hi,

WP:CRIC is currently developing a MK II version of this infobox, adding T20 stats support and collapsible columns. Join the discussion at WT:CRIC#Infobox Mark II - mockup.

—User:MDCollins (talk) 12:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

proposal: batting_graph and bowling_graph properties

Many, if not most, cricketer articles include graphs of the player's batting and bowling statistics, or both. I propose adding these to the cricketer infobox for consistency, e.g. for the Ian Botham article:

 batting_graph = Ian_Botham_graph.png
 bowling_graph = IBothamBowling.png

"batting_graph" and "bowling_graph" may not be the best names -- they are just suggestions. There may also be other graphs which could be added here. But I do think it is a good idea to move these to the infobox to encourage a uniform display of player statistics. Suggestions welcome. Tim Pierce (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi -sorry for the slow reply. I would suspect that for the majority of players, the narrow width of the infobox would force the graphs to be so small that they would become unreadable without clicking through to enlarge them. I have made a note of your suggestion on the WP:CRIC talk page for a wider audience.

Yeah, 300px is really the minimum for it to work if the guy has 30-40 innings. For a modern player with 10 Tests per year, it would just fatten the infobox and leave a lot of sparse area in the infobox YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 23:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest that in fact, few if not a minute minority of cricketer's articles include batting or bowling graphs. Although definitely a useful tool, I agree with MDCollins that they would be too small in the infobox, and also would increase an infobox which I personally feel is already too large and overflowing with information.Harrias ^talk 23:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Centralisation

IE8 seems to be central aligning some of the text. I've had a quick look through but can't work out a simple way of remedying it. Can anyone else come up with something (I'm looking at you User:MDCollins!) Harrias ^talk 19:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

T20I

The stats for T20I need to be added. ashwinikalantri ^talk 08:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, we've been over this several times. Twenty20 stats can be added, but for reasons of length and width, consensus has always been to priorities Test, ODI, FC and List A stats. When a player hasn't played one of those formats (for example a non-Test player), a column of T20I/T20 stats can be used.

User:Harrias was working on a different format for the stats, but we couldn't agree on a format at the time. It may get revisited if time allows.

—User:MDCollins (talk) 08:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Standardisation of the parameters

There is an effort to standardise the basic parameters for all infoboxes about persons. Shortly this infobox will be updated to support "birth_date", "death_date", "birth_place", "death_place" and it's in my intention to update the documentation to show these parameters instead of dayofbirth, monthofbirth, yearofbirth, placeofbirth, countryofbirth, dayofdeath, monthofdeath, yearofdeath, placeofdeath, countryofdeath.

You can see the current status of the standardisation in User:WOSlinker/Infoboxes. The discussion is on Template talk:Infobox person/birth death params. I remind you that PERSONDATA and Infobox person use the above 4 parameters instead of the 10 used by this template. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Can you tell me what happens to the age calculators if only partial dates are used? at the moment, we have the "partialdates=true" parameter, in order to create a switch to turn of the calculator, to avoid displaying an error message. Will you be able to work around this? Obviously if an error is not displayed, there would be no problem. Also, as part of the standardisation will you be able to run a bot to change the hundreds of transclusions to save us having to do it?—User:MDCollins (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there will be a bot to perform any conversions. I believe the plan is to add the alternative syntax first, then have a bot perform conversions. If all the data is there, then "dayofbirth,monthofbirth,yearofbirth" gets mapped into {{birth date|yearofbirth|monthofbirth|dayofbirth}} or into {{birth date and age|yearofbirth|monthofbirth|dayofbirth}} if the cricketer is still alive. Similarly, the "dayofdeath,monthofdeath,yearofdeath" gets mapped into {{death date and age|yearofdeath|monthofdeath|dayofdeath|yearofbirth|monthofbirth|dayofbirth}} if all the data is there. For individuals with only a yearofdeath, then there is {{death year and age|yearofdeath|yearofbirth}}. If I recall, someone made a template once that would allow for fields to be missing in the {{death date and age}} type template, and do the correct thing, but I can't recall the name of that template at the moment. So, in the short term, it's just the addition of alternate syntax, and then a bot converting the ones that it can convert. Once the initial conversion is performed, the remaining corner cases can be investigated by a human editor. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I changed the Infobox cricketer tour yesterday. everything is set too perform the same changes in this template. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

questions

1. why is there no innings, and notout statistic between {{{matches}}} and {{{runs}}}
2. why is there no stats for the number of times wicket keepers take 5 dismissals in an innings?

Basically, because the infobox is probably too long already, so adding additional statistics is just going to make it even more unwieldy. Five dismissals in an innings isn't a commonly recorded statistic anyway, so referencing that would be more difficult as well. Harrias ^talk 13:26, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

1. It does not seem possible to show domestice debuts etc when the international switch is set. This is very limiting, particularly for cricketers who play only one test. Or am I missing something? Motmit (talk) 18:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Women's cricket team link to be corrected

While using the fields mentioned below of the Template Infobox Cricketer, for a women cricketer -

      'country = , 'testdebutagainst = ', 'lasttestagainst = ', 'odidebutagainst = ' and 'lastodiagainst = ' 

the wiki link for that particular cricket team is shown as '!@# Cricket Team' and not '!@# Women's Cricket Team'. Also, if we add female = true then the International information-National side gets hide. Refer Caroline Atkins on which I am working and had come across this problem. The Cricket team is shown as 'England cricket team' instead of 'England women's cricket team'. Please suggest how to overcome this issue ? Ninney (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Issue resolved by adding women in front of the team. For Example, England women instead of simply the teams name England which use to redirect to England Cricket Team. Thank you Harrias for speedy correction. - Like -- Ninney (talk) 10:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

"if we add female = true then the International information-National side gets hide" - why is this? Hack (talk) 16:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Height

Metres? Really? This needs to be fixed.[2][3][4]--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Metres are more usual in measuring height than centimetres. – PeeJay 23:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Is that right? You must be speaking locally, as anything other than centimetres is unheard of in Asia and Oceania (where cricket is actually played).--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

We don't use centimetres in cricket infoboxes. Our main sources for basic player information are ESPNcricinfo and CricketArchive, neither of which use centimetres. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 20:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd say they're well and truly crushed under the weight of general usage, wouldn't you? ESPN is hardly an authority on cricket and cricketarchive.com appears to be fan-generated. I'll take Cricket Australia, NHS and the Official London 2012 website over them any day. Not to mention the minor detail that in places where the metric system is actually used to express height, centimetres are the norm. ESPN is American and for them using the metric system is a novelty, not general use. Just because they've gone their own way on this (probably simply through the IT setup on their web content) doesn't mean Wikipedia should.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Goes to show how very little you know about CricketArchive. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 16:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow. I guess you showed me, huh? Metres it is!--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It has hardly been a compelling defence of metres. I've been keeping track of this discussion (if it can be called that) and I'm a little unsure. Initially, like PeeJay and Howzat?, I was in full support of metres. Metres are, as stated used by ESPNcricinfo, which is the primary online authority on cricket. The fact that it is owned by ESPN shouldn't detract from that. CricketArchive is a well respected website which is, despite its appearance, considered an even more reliable authority on cricket statistics. Both sources are second only to Wisden itself really. However, like you say, with these sites aside, almost everywhere uses centimetres. I could not find one team or governing body of cricket which uses the metric system and doesn't use centimetres. That said, common usage throughout Wikipedia is to use metres. As I say, all in all I'm a little stumped on this one, but I definitely think it is worth a more constructive debate. Harrias ^talk 17:03, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why we're having the debate at all. If on Wikipedia the standard metric unit for height is the metre, why would we use centimetres? Any heights given in sources in centimetres can easily be converted to metres; it's not like the conversion is complicated or contentious. – PeeJay 16:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I have my doubts about it being standard practice on Wikipedia to use metres over centimetres when expressing height metrically, for the same reason that it is not standard practice to use pounds over stones when expressing weight empirically. It changes to suit common usage. I'm assuming most editors on the English Wikipedia are North American or British, so they are sensitive to how odd it looks to see pounds rather than stones (or vice versa) used in infoboxes, but are not sensitive to how odd it looks seeing height expressed in metres rather than centimetres. As I'm used to the metric system, I would never presume to tell anyone else whether stones or pounds should be used to express weight empirically. Similarly, those who are used to the empirical system should not presume to tell anyone else whether metres or centimetres should be used to express height metrically.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 03:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Luckily for me, I'm used to both the metric system and the Imperial system, so I'm not really sensitive either way. Also, your analogy between metres/centimetres and stones/pounds is flawed, since that is a geographical variation. The stone is a very uncommon unit of measurement in North America, hence their consistent use of pounds. My suggestion, in this case, would be to dispense with the various height parameters in the infobox, to be replaced by a single "height" parameter, in which can be placed a {{convert}} template using whatever unit of height is given in the source. – PeeJay 13:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

That's all I was after. Cheers.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 03:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Signature

I noticed we had a signature at File:Cricket, WG Grace, 1891 - WG Grace signature.png — I assume there are a few others. Give that {{infobox person}} has signature fields, should we? Moondyne (talk) 04:16, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Really required? Making an exception to WC Grace, very few would even have a signature, or rather they are not needed so. 117.227.126.192 (talk) 04:37, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Magioladitis' edit...

...left a trailing "-->" in the first line of every article using this template. I couldn't find anything obviously wrong using my very basic knowledge of template coding, so I'll leave that to someone else to fix up. IgnorantArmies – 09:03, Tuesday December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I noticed too. I asked another editor for help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

should be fixed now. Frietjes (talk) 15:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Post-Nominal Letters

There are cricketers who have been honoured in the New Year/Queen's Birthday Honour Lists however their post-nominal letters are not shown in their infobox.

Three examples are

1. Sir Richard Hadlee Kt. MBE
2. Sir Issac 'Viv' Richards KNH OBE
3. Sir Ian Botham Kt. OBE

I propose adding a new parameter named "honorific_suffix" to accommodate post-nominal letters. This is the same parameter used by Infobox Officeholder What is your opinion?

---

Karl Stephens (talk) 10:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

You can generally get by with "Cricketer's Name
Suffix". Also, I don't think "Kt." is generally used as a suffix? style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">IgnorantArmies – 09:03, Tuesday December 4, 2012 (UTC)

---

The point you made about post-nominal letters for a Knight Bachelor is correct and does apply to the 3 examples I provided however this doesn't address the point of post-nominal letters for sportsmen and women.

The workaround to include the post-nominal letters with the full name limits any future use of the template when you mix the name with the post-nominal letters (and if the sportsperson ascends to higher office you'd need to include their pre-nominal style).

I acknowlege (that now after further reading) the examples should be expressed as:

1. Sir Richard Hadlee MBE
2. Sir Issac 'Viv' Richards OBE
3. Sir Ian Botham OBE

When rationalising a group of data into 3rd normal form there are decisions to make on how to represent your data. In the case of post-nominal letters (which are posscessed by anyone with a technical certificate, university degree or an honour) we need to acknowledge that a vast majority (where vast majority is more than 99%) will not have an honour but still accommodate this event when it occurs accepting that sportspeople can progress in life to higher honour or office than a world title or championship.

What is your opinion if honorific-prefix and honorific-suffix are adapted into the template for cricketer? (I accept and understand pre/post-nominal letters is in a majority of situations only an issue with sports persons from a commonwealth realm).

---

Karl Stephens (talk) 07:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

new version using infobox

I have created a new version of this template which uses {{infobox}} (see the sandbox). the code is about half the size due to moving most of the html generation to {{infobox}}, and into two new subtemplates which reduce the amount of repeated code. I created some testcases, which demonstrate the formatting when there are different numbers of columns in the statistics section. the new version decouples the first column in the statistics section, which reduces label wrapping problems. let me know if you see any problems, or if you have any suggestions for testcases (e.g., examples using |female=y or other less frequently used parameters). or, just add the testcases yourself :). thank you. Frietjes (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I totally support the new version. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:48, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Harrias ^talk 21:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

now updated, please let me know if there are any problems. Frietjes (talk) 17:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

International details not showing

The international details are not showing at Salim Durani. Just wondering if I'm missing something. Hack (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. The international information tags had been duplicated with different information at the bottom. Harrias ^talk 14:40, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Women cricketers team

As it stands there is no way (that I know of) for the country parameter to point to a women's cricket team eg Australia national women's cricket team in the case of Belinda Clark-wikilinking it didn't work. Any suggestions?--DadaNeem (talk) 20:09, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

You need to add "| female = true" as a parameter, which generates the correct link. IgnorantArmies 12:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

"cricketer" heading / gender sign

I have reverted two significant changes, both of which should be discussed here. There first is having "Cricketer" has a heading, which I disagree with this mildly. The second one I disagree with much more strongly, and that is having a gender sign at the top of the box. StAnselm (talk) 11:22, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

You don't say why you disagree with either of these parameters. Without the |role= parameter, his infobox doesn't actually tell readers that the subject is known for being a cricketer, nor link to the article Cricket. With out the discrete gender indicator (it's a single character) the infobox, again, doesn't state that key aspect of the subject's being; despite this being one of only a few biographical infoboxes which already have a gender parameter. Both parameters are also machine readable, and so tell computers which spider or parse our pages what the subject is known for, and whether they are male or female. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Show the consensus that said this change was OK in the first place. Oh, there wasn't one. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

There's certainly no need to seek a "mandate" before editing any page, and up until you (Andy) reverted StAnselm's reversion this would've been a textbook example of the BRD cycle. I'm sure you've been on Wikipedia long enough to know the "burden" is on the person proposing changes to "prove their merit", so to speak, when the changes are reverted. Oh, and two editors on the talkpage of a WikiProject do not a discussion make. IgnorantArmies 14:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I really don't see the point in this change. You can tell that the subject is a cricketer from the first sentence of the lead section, which should also indicate whether they are male or female if pronouns are used correctly. There's no need to put that info in the infobox too. – PeeJay 15:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The two key purposes of an infobox are to repeat in readily accessible form, the key points from elsewhere in the article, including the lede (e.g. name, DoB) and to make them machine-readable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:08, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

To focus on the second of those purposes, is machine readability dependent on having parameters visible to the reader? If it's that essential, there should be a way to have gender included in the infobox, but not displayed. IgnorantArmies 15:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

[Late reply reply, sorry] Having machine-readable data which is not visible to humans means that it is less likely to be updated when the human-readable prose is changed. This is a common problem with persondata, for example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Machine readability is hardly a primary responsibility of the infobox, IMO. Our first responsibility is to the readers – human, not machine – and I doubt that they would check the infobox for this info before the first sentence of the article. – PeeJay 15:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

[Late reply reply, sorry] The operators of those machine tools are human; as are the people who access our content through the services that they provide. None of this is for the benefit of the machines themselves; They are simply our servants. Consider the colons which I use to nest this reply under yours. They are machine readable markup; but you and I benefit from them. Even so, there is still utility in making facts such as gender and role visible to the human readers of our articles. There is academic research which shows that infoboxes are read first by some people. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Height

any particular reason why the height parameters were removed? Frietjes (talk) 15:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

the edit summary cited Template_talk:Infobox_cricketer/Archive_1#Height, which makes no mention of removing all height parameters, just adding a generic |height=, so I have restored the parameters, and added |height=. Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Any particular reason why this template is only allowing height in metres when cm is the more common anthropometric unit?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Any particular reason why you can't let this drop? – PeeJay 23:40, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there is. As I said, the centimetre is the most commonly used anthropometric unit, and this is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Is that still somehow unclear, or was your question never actually intended to be constructive?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I am yet to see any concrete evidence that centimetres are preferable to metres, particularly in a cricket context. – PeeJay 07:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

That must take some serious effort on your part then, because I happen to know it's been presented to you already. It's you who can't let go of metres, which is largely wikipedia's fault because it's so prevalent here due to carelessly set-up templates like these, giving the false impression of normality. Anyway, you already know all this. It's the pro-metres side which is lacking in evidence, and I'm afraid comments like "Any particular reason why you can't let this drop?" make that abundantly clear. Any serious editors out there want to help move this thing forward?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

although it is undocumented, you can use |height={{convert|180|cm|ftin|abbr=on}}. Frietjes (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I suspected it had already been changed to allow the use of cm, but no one looking at the template page (or indeed cutting & pasting from it) could possibly know that.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Country?

What exactly is the |country= parameter supposed to indicate? The country that the team they currently play for represents is my guess, but this should be documented.

I'm noticing, too, that the lede sentence of a lot of players' articles is sloppy with regard to the player's nationality.

One example is "Joe is a Dutch cricketer", when the Infobox shows that Joe was born in Australia. It should instead say "Joe is an Australian cricketer, currently playing for the Netherlands national cricket team."

Another example is "Ahmed is a Pakistani-born Dutch cricketer" (with the links as shown). I believe this should say "Ahmed is a Pakistani cricketer, currently playing for the Netherlands cricket team". The former usage suggests dual citizenship. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Website

Although "Website =" appears as a parameter in the template, I have been trying to make it work as per a Semi-protected edit request at Talk:Rahul Dravid. It does not work as "Website =" so I have tried it as "website =" as used at Template:Infobox tennis biography, but that does not work either - why is the parameter included if it does not work? or rather, what can be done to make it work? - Arjayay (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

see here. Frietjes (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Appearance

I think most editors (and readers) were quite used to the former blue background colour, and having only black and white text (for me) makes the information harder to distinguish, given how much we pack into our infobox. I've consequently reverted the last edit as unnecessary. IgnorantArmies (talk) 14:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

The parent template. {{Infobox}}, is designed to be easy to read. There should be no need to change from its default colours, width or font sizes. In particular the current black-on-mid-blue is hard to read. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

you removed three distinct style statements, (1) bodystyle, (2) headerstyle, and (3) titlestyle. we should really debate each one separately since the main objection above is to the removal of the headerstyle statement. I would support changing the headerstyle from

| headerstyle = {{#ifeq:{{{child|}}}|yes|{{{headerstyle|background-color: #b0c4de}}}|background-color: #b0c4de}}

to

| headerstyle = {{#ifeq:{{{child|}}}|yes|background-color: #efefef|background-color: #b0c4de}}

or

| headerstyle = background-color: #efefef

or ...

the reason for the if child logic is to allow the headerstyle in a child box to be matched with the headerstyle in the parent box. a better option, in my opinion, would be to just use a more neutral colour when the infobox is a child box, or just always use a more neutral colour. using efefef instead of b0c4de may be a good idea overall since it provides better contrast, while still providing visual separation of the sections. Frietjes (talk) 15:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Why not propose adding those colours (#efefef; #b0c4de) to {{Infobox}}? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Suppressing the name

In about a dozen articles, like Rowland Prothero, 1st Baron Ernle, this template is not the primary infobox. Currently, the method for suppressing the name in the box title is somewhat opaque (either with blank nowiki tags or by omitting the name parameter completely). Should we add the a more explicit method for suppressing the title in these cases? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

looks like there are currently about 7 in Category:Pages using infobox cricketer with no name parameter. I agree that it would be good to have a better method for invoking the feature. Frietjes (talk) 00:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Country 1 Country 2

My Doubt: if a player played for more than one country, should the years (for example 20**-20##) be written?
aGastya  ✉ let's talk about it :) 10:24, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Education? Alma mater?

Is there a parameter for 'Education' or 'Alma mater'? I looked through other pages and saw that 'alma_mater' was used for those pages to define the person's educational info. But trying them here didn't work. Could you tell if there is a parameter for it? And if there isn't can you create one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecnad Si Efil (talk • contribs)

Is such a parameter actually needed? What difference does it make to a player's career what school/university they went to? Mention it in the article body, by all means, assuming it's adequately sourced, but it's not needed in the infobox, IMO. – PeeJay 15:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Domestic Debuts

Is it not possible to include debuts in 3 formats for domestic teams (FC, LA, T20)? International section includes Tests, ODIs and T20Is, but it seems that domestic will only show 2 formats max.Bs1jac (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

National teams in domestic cricket

What do we feel about including a player's national team under the domestic team section, for those who have appeared for the country in other countries' domestic competitions (e.g. for Scotland / Ireland / Netherlands in county cricket, Namibia in South African competitions etc.)? It's separate information to their appearances in actual international cricket, and in some cases the players concerned are not nationals of the country in question. Jellyman (talk) 09:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Officeholder

Most of the cricketers hold various positions post retirement. However, there seems to be no option for mentioning that. Can such parameters be added from infobox officeholder? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 09:35, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Edit: I added the params as I was not aware about embed earlier. Can someone please remove these params as the template is edit protected now? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 03:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Need help with images

Can anyone help with the image situation at Thomas Ferrier Hamilton? At that article, this infobox is being used as a secondary infobox to the "officeholder" infobox. However, the image in the main infobox is being automatically carried through, so that it appears twice (which just looks silly). I think there are other articles in which this infobox is the not the main one, so it's possible the problem is occurring elsewhere. IgnorantArmies (talk) 04:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Fixed that article. At some point I'll take a look at whether this is an issue elsewhere. Harrias ^talk 15:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I probably should've thought of that. I looked at the first few entries in Category:Pages using infobox cricketer with no name parameter (which was mentioned a few sections above), and the problem does seem to be occurring elsewhere. If there's a way to fix all the articles at once that would be great, but otherwise I'd be happy to go through and help "manually" fix them. IgnorantArmies (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Similar problem is there in Navjot Singh Siddhu where two images are appearing in infobox. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 03:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

West Indies

On the "International information" box on the template, there seems to be a problem with the West Indies and whenever it is entered for a male player, either under "National side", "debut" or "last match" (in all formats), it always directs to the West Indies women's cricket team. As a fairly novice Wikipedia editor I have no idea how to change this but surely there is somebody out there who would know? Joalhe1997 (talk) 21:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Strike rate field?

Strike rate is a measure of the value of a batsman especially in T20 & List A / ODI cricket but there doesn't seem to be a way to put that into the template. Could that be remedied? Of course runs1/deliveries1 x100 for each type would give SR. It would of course be optional to include it and would mainly apply to modern era cricketers. DadaNeem (talk) 05:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

There are already too many stats in this infobox, so I'm against this. – PeeJay 08:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

lastT20Iagainst/World XI

Hi. For the recent edits on Hasan Ali (cricketer), the last T20I fixture he played against was the World XI team in the 2017 Independence Cup. However, when "World XI" is entered into the infobox on his article, it links to the 2005 ICC Super Series. Where is the code/data that populates this field and how can it be changed? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: I've changed it to link to World XI (cricket) at the moment; is there anywhere you think would be more appropriate? We don't seem to have an article that covers the World XI cricket team and it's multiple iterations in much depth. Harrias ^talk 18:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Harrias. I don't think there's a better target article TBH. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Lint errors

This template is generating numerous lint errors, including missing end tags for <th>, <tr>, and <td>, and also one stripped </th>, for each of the first 10 articles listed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox_cricketer, and probably all or almost all articles that use this template. —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Is there an in-depth guide somewhere on how to edit infoboxes to fix stuff like this? Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:25, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

@Harrias, Frietjes, Zyxw, Ianblair23, Samsara, and Shootmaster 44: I want you to know about this. —Anomalocaris (talk) 07:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank Anomalocaris, I'll take a look at this later. Harrias ^talk 08:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris, Harrias, and Blue Square Thing: I believe I fixed it, or at least mostly fixed it (expanding the infobox from Brian Lara shows all the tags are matched). my adjustments were made to Template:Infobox cricketer/career, which had loads of unclosed tags. please let me know if you are still seeing errors from any after purging the pages. Frietjes (talk) 16:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Frietjes, Harrias, and Blue Square Thing: The first 20 pages that use this template are lint-free, so, I believe it is fixed. Thank you, Freitjes! —Anomalocaris (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Embedding into Infobox person?

Would it be possible to embed this template (per WikiProject Infoboxes/embed) along with other Infobox person templates, or are there technical restrictions that prevent this? Is there an appetite for such a change? There are quite a few historical bios for people that played both cricket and football and IMO it would be nice to be able to incorporate both sports within the same infobox. I'd be interested to know what other people think (both in terms of the idea and the technicalities). Nzd (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Since posting this, I have discovered that I can embed this into {{Infobox football biography}} (i.e. using that as the master). I'm not sure why I had problems embedding into Infobox person, but this fine. Nzd (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Propose new parameter

Could |honorific_suffix= be added to this infobox please? There are a fair few British cricketers with post-noms that are being fudged into |name=. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 01:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

@Gaia Octavia Agrippa:  Done. I did not implement |honorific_prefix=, but it's obvious in the code how to add it if it is necessary. I've implemented the new parameter at Richie Benaud to demonstrate it in-action. Note: if |child=y, then the entire name block is suppressed, including the suffix. It's presumed that the "parent" infobox above this one will present this information.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  06:59, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

...and I misread the request and have added |honorific_prefix=. Sigh. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:04, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Harmless. Just not sure it'll get used much if at all; few sports figures actually get a Sir or Dame title. I suppose there might be some who are actually peers (Baron Whatever, etc.).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  08:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the additions. Coincidently, I was looking at Richie Benaud's article when I realised we needed this parameter! Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 14:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Team lists

Is there any appetite to expand the number of domestic teams allowed? I've recently edited Chris Gayle to fit all his T20 teams into the infobox by merging teams he played 1 season for in the same year onto 1 line. He's up to 21 teams now: the maximum is 17. This may affect other globetrotting players such as Dwayne Bravo and Kieron Pollard, but I've not checked them yet. Spike 'em (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I think people on WT:CRICKET were really discussing removing many of these teams from the infobox, which seems sensible.. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Cricketers from Associate nations

How should the template be used for cricketers from Associate countries? The player will be an International as he has represented the national side, but the matches may be only First class or List A.
Anish Viswa 18:16, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Mark the "internationalspan" parameter as "true" to indicate the years the player has played for their national team between. You can ignore the first / last appearances for Test, ODI etc. Unfortunately, you are then unable to display debuts in first class, List A etc. as you can do for non-international players. Jellyman (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit request 13 October 2018

This template links to [[Batting average#cricket|Batting average]], which following a page split should instead link to [[Batting average (cricket)|Batting average]]. Spike 'em (talk) 20:15, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

and this was the relevant discussion, in case it makes it any clearer. Spike 'em (talk) 10:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done Primefac (talk) 14:26, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

4 column limit

I think the 4 column limit needs to be revisited. As far as I can determine, it was agreed on more than 10 years ago, in 2007 or 2008; but since then T20 has become more important, and also computer screens have gotten wider. It's fairly common these days for an international cricketer to have 6 sets of important stats (Test, ODI, T20I, First Class, List A, T20). Adpete (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Although computer screens have generally gotten wider, not everyone either reads using a computer screen. Try reading an article using a phone or tablet or not having a browser set to full-screen width. For the relatively few biographies that we have which have six sets of stats, I'm really not sure it's worth the hassle.

I wonder if a more productive approach might be to use a table of international stats in the body of the article instead or in place of those in the infobox? Or to strongly suggest that T20 stats are summarised somehow in articles (I appreciate that's unlikely as the easy majority of edits to cricket articles seem to update the infobox)? Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

As per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE : keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored), so the figures should be in the article already (but they almost never are). The cricketer infobox has too much information in it and should be cut-down, not increased. I'd support having a career summary section in the player articles with a brief synopsis of career figures and a table with 6 lines of career stats, and if we really do need stats in the infobox, then cut this down to about 5 lines per column (games played, runs scored, batting average, wickets taken, bowling average, and maybe catches / stumpings for keepers). It is standard for footballers to have a club season by season list of games played / goals scored, I'd not go that far, as Chris Gayle would have a 50 row table. Spike 'em (talk) 09:35, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Were you thinking about the sorts of tables we already have on some articles? (Sam Billings for example?). I'd agree with cutting stats down. I know we've previously discussed cutting the number of teams as well - perhaps one way to do this might be to simply agree to cut it to First-class only teams? Mind you, getting people to understand that would be a task and a half. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:23, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

If 4 columns are too wide, then perhaps we should have two rows of stats if a player has 5 or 6 relevant types of cricket. It is also easy to remove some lines: just don't print them! As for what to remove, I would ask, "What infobox information is less important than including their most important stats for all 6 forms of cricket?". My personal answer would include: ODI shirt number; dates and opponents of 1st and last test/ODI/T20 (years only would be sufficient); number of balls bowled; number 10 wickets/match. In fact, almost anything! There's not much more important information for the infobox, than a player's key stats in all forms of cricket. Adpete (talk) 08:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't necessarily agree with that as it happens. The key biographical information is clearly the most important and I'd be very happy to see teams played for included still (with the caveat that in franchise cricket that's getting silly and needs a way of limiting it). Beyond that, I think I'd like to see the number of matches played - particularly in Test matches - but I'd be happy to cut it to just that on reflection. Anything important should be in the article anyway, as @Spike 'em: says above. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:29, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

I'd add totals and average to what is in the Billings article (so have it show career totals as well as bests). Spike 'em (talk) 15:28, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I was thinking that it would need a little more detail to it. We don't always know the bests though (not without trawling through every scorecard or if it's handily sourced somewhere), so perhaps it needs a different approach again? Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Link to ODI

I've only just noticed this, but look at the example on the template's instructions for Brett Lee (or any cricketer who has played in three international formats), and there's a link to ODI on the ODI debut parameter, but Test and T20I are not linked. Should the other two be linked, or ODI unlinked? Personally, I'd go for the latter, as they are normally linked again in the career statistics bit of the infobox. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

That would be a good idea, yes. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:32, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit request 13 February 2019

Based on the discussion directly above, I'd like to request that the term "ODI" is unlinked in the field "ODI debut", so all three formats are consistant. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Done. Harrias ^talk 14:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:13, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 28 February 2019

I want to add Boundaries information to the Career stats . Since now a days these are major record breaking stats and interesting for an audience to read . Lesenwriter (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

These infoboxes are supposed to be for cricketers of all eras and all formats. Boundaries aren't really that big a deal in first-class cricket, nor were they ever that big a deal even in one-day cricket when the format first started. The stats currently in the infobox cover all the important bases and should be sufficient. – PeeJay 15:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, adding these would just bloat the infobox unnecessarily. Spike 'em (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 1 March 2019

In {{Infobox cricketer/career}}, change 5 wickets in [[innings]] to [[Five-wicket haul|5 wickets in innings]], as this seems the most appropriate and specific link to use for these lines of stats (there are 4 occurrences setting up the differing numbers of columns). Spike 'em (talk) 10:28, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done --Bsherr (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Tracking categories

Hi. Please can a category for unknown parameters be added to the tracking categories? Compare with this category on film infoboxes which I find quite useful. I've seen lots of non-stand fields added to biographies and it would be good to flush them out. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done See Category:Pages using infobox cricketer with unknown parameters (0). The category typically takes a few days to a few weeks to fill up as the job queue null-edits all of the pages that transclude this infobox. Please ping me from this page if anyone notices anything amiss; the code that inserts the parameter check is quite good, but it is not always 100% correct.

You can also use the "monthly error report" linked from the TemplateData section in the documentation to find errant parameter usage, as long as the TemplateData has been coded correctly.

Some pages that appear in the unknown parameter category may indicate that a change to the template, rather than a change in the article, is needed. According to the monthly error report, for example, nearly 7,000 pages use |deliveries=, which does not appear to be a valid parameter. That may indicate that a bot is needed, or it may indicate that |deliveries= should be supported by the template. That would be something to decide on this talk page or at another appropriate venue. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Jonesey95! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:07, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

(I see the point was made already) Most of them have |deliveries=balls which was functionality removed in 2009, so they are obsolete parameters. I'm trying to AWB the changes, but how easy is it to get that scripted? Spike 'em (talk) 11:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

If you can figure out the specific changes you want, you can post them at Wikipedia:Bot requests. It helps to be able to point to a list of pages that you want to have changed, possibly a page linked from the monthly error report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I've figured out a regexp to use in AWB, I'll have a look at the bot requests, thanks. Spike 'em (talk) 12:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Is it possible to create a separate list of those that use the (incorrect) parameter columns5 in? That would allow us to go through and remove all those where someone's added an additional column or more. Sorry, I don't know more than the first thing about whether that's easy to do or how to do it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Go to the TemplateData monthly error report, then scroll down to "column5" on the left side, then click "page links" next to "column5". It may take a minute or two to generate the list for you.

One caveat: the error report is generated once a month. The tracking category, once it is done being populated, shows "live" errors, and the articles are sorted by the name of the invalid parameter. That means that all of the articles using a value in |column5= should be sorted under "C". If an article has more than one invalid parameter, the module picks one of them for sorting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:23, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - I noticed the issue with the other link picking one thing to sorting purposes, but I think this will all help tremendously. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I've cleared off the 160 odd players with 5 or 6 columns. Spike 'em (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Great, we're getting there! On the alphabetical list I think we're left with F, S and T and then the 7,000 odd Ds - some of which will probably have other errors in them as well. Any luck on getting that Bot sorted? I really wouldn't know where to start with that. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I've just made the bot request, let's see how that goes. Spike 'em (talk) 15:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I think I've cleared off all the entries with unnamed parameters (pipe with no following =), so should be able to move on to AWB the common named ones. Spike 'em (talk) 18:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

One of the problems is going to be club18+ - I fixed a few earlier but ran into those still causing problems. I know we've talked about this before but, with T20 franchises, it might be worthwhile putting in place a formal solution to the issue - either by increasing the number (I'd say club30 would be appropriate just now - Gayle is on about 23 if we ignore some minor ones) or by coming up with a formal solution (played less than two seasons with a team and we've run out of space perhaps?). Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I've just put a note on the 4-5 other players over 17. I did look at copying other sports templates to allow the list to be built up without numbered parameters but never got around to finishing it.(things like lists of olympic medals) I'll think about it some more, as it would need a way to transpose all the existing data. Spike 'em (talk) 19:00, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Mind you, having just worked through a few more, that's the least of our worries as there are clearly people who simply haven't bothered to read any of the documentation at all and are just inventing parameters. I don't suppose there's way of restricting editing of infobox data is there!! :-) Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I've just discovered that the cricketers using |deliveries=overs do actually have the number of overs listed in their infobox, so the 100 pages listed at on the error report here will need to be checked by hand. Will mention this at WT:CRIC in case anyone else fancies helping out. Spike 'em (talk) 16:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

From the alphabetical list I think we now have pretty much everything other than the Ds done. Most of those will feature deliveries = balls. I'm sure there will be some other issues as well, but if we can get that bot going it would help identify those.

I've worked on parts of the documentation as well. I'm wondering if we want to move the nickname parameter into an "optional parameters" section at the bottom? It seems to cause all sorts of twittage. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

There are now 99 players left on the invalid categories list. All of them are in the Ds, and it looks as if deliveries = balls+space is the problem for some of them - although I'm sure there will be a few random issues to deal with as well. Bit of a shame that the bot didn't pick that up as well, but it's the sort of thing you don't necessarily program for. Thanks for organising the bot Spike - that's saved a job that would have taken months otherwise Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Great work from everyone involved in clearing up the infoboxes. Glad a bot could do most of it! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Cleared. For now. I estimate 5-10 pop up each week as people add random stuff to an infobox (or, more occasionally, make a typo and don't spot it). Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:18, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Well done! On the bot missing some: if it just did a specific search and replace then I guess it would have missed things with extra white-spaces, but I'm pretty certain the RegExp I gave them would have found it (and the initial AWBing I did was able to deal with it). Spike 'em (talk) 11:52, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

There were all sorts of deliveries oddities in the last lot. =no; =yes; =6 as well as some which claimed to be using overs. I was fairly harsh with some of them... Can you make sure the bot operator has been thanked! It saved so much work. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Documentation

I've just made some changes to the template documentation and have one more in mind. To summarise:

• changed max club number from 21 to 17 for internationals - this was inconsistent and I don't know why
• added T20I debuts etc... to the international section as it wasn't there
• added family and hidedeliveries to all versions
• removed 6s/4s from all versions - no idea why it was there as it causes an error
• removed the square brackets from the link in the example - they don't seem to be needed

I don't think I've screwed anything up, but if someone can check then that might help...

I'm inclined to change the example to have the stats data grouped by number rather than grouped by type - so have the Test stats first, followed by the ODI stats etc... I find this is the easiest way to have the stats when editing them and it's the way the actual template stuff is laid out above, so it's odd to have it presented differently in the example. Anyone object to that or is there a good reason not to do it like that? Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:35, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

No objections from me. Just one extra bit - I know you in particular do excellent work on removing future clubs from the infobox, esp. in the wake of players dropping out of the IPL left, right and centre! Can the documentation be tightened here to state this? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:02, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I noticed some other issues with parts of the documentation at the bottom of the page earlier as well - we only have the capability to use type2 - type3 or 4 with debut dates, both of which are in the documentation, won't display because they aren't actually parameters. I'll work through a few things now, but feel free to tell me I've been a twit and made things worse.

And - I don't know if you saw above, but I'm minded to move the nickname field out of all of the documentation and stick it at the bottom as an "optional" field as it causes so much silliness... Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Sort of done, although I may come back to it with fresh eyes tomorrow. I also removed reference to chinaman whilst I was at it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I've strengthened the guidance on the use of nicknames - could people check it's OK please and adjust if necessary. The insertion of "user known" nicknames tipped me over the edge... Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:12, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

You've added this needs to be a very widely used nickname to |nickname=. At MOS:NICKCRUFT the wording is Nicknames [...] included must be frequently used by reliable sources in reference to the subject - I'd say that is better particularly because it requires reliable sources. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 20:05, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense I think - thank you. I'll have to work on it tomorrow now though. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:18, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Done - that should help. @Lugnuts: - thoughts? Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that looks good - thanks for your work on this. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:56, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 August 2019

Change the definitions of label2, label4 and label7 in the National side child infobox to allow better handling of {{{testcap}}},{{{odicap}}},{{{t20icap}}}. This has been tested in Template:Infobox cricketer/sandbox / Template:Infobox cricketer/testcases, and is effectively the same code 3 times, but using different sets of parameters. Change to: | label2 = {{#if:{{{onetest|}}} |Only Test |Test debut }}{{#if:{{{testcap|}}}{{{testcap2|}}} |{{sp}}(cap {{#if:{{{testcap|}}}|[[List of {{{country}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women Test|Test}} cricketers|{{{testcap}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{testcap2|}}}|{{#if:{{{testcap|}}} |/}}[[List of {{{country2}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women Test|Test}} cricketers|{{{testcap2}}}]]}}) }}

| label4 = {{#if:{{{oneodi|}}} |Only ODI |ODI debut }}{{#if:{{{odicap|}}}{{{odicap2|}}} |{{sp}}(cap {{#if:{{{odicap|}}}|[[List of {{{country}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women ODI|ODI}} cricketers|{{{odicap}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{odicap2|}}}|{{#if:{{{odicap|}}} |/}}[[List of {{{country2}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women ODI|ODI}} cricketers|{{{odicap2}}}]]}}) }}

| label7 = {{#if:{{{oneT20I|}}} |Only T20I |T20I debut }}{{#if:{{{T20Icap|}}}{{{T20Icap2|}}} |{{sp}}(cap {{#if:{{{T20Icap|}}}|[[List of {{{country}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women Twenty20|Twenty20}} International cricketers|{{{T20Icap}}}]]}}{{#if:{{{T20Icap2|}}}|{{#if:{{{T20Icap|}}} |/}}[[List of {{{country2}}} {{#if:{{{female|}}}|women Twenty20|Twenty20}} International cricketers|{{{T20Icap2}}}]]}}) }} Spike 'em (talk) 13:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Incidentally, this is in response to this discussion Spike 'em (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Updated, nice work. Harrias ^talk 15:03, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Signature

Hi, can anyone add signature in cricket Infobox template. There have three players signature I found W. G. Grace, Sachin Tendulkar and Mashrafe Mortaza, and there have many more. Others category Infobox template have signature but not in cricket template. Please someone create so that I can add signature in there Infobox. Voulik (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't see the value in asking such a trivial piece odd content to this infobox, particularly odd the are few cases where we're have such an image. WP:BLPSIGN suggests that they should only be added to a living person on a case by case basis anyway. Spike 'em (talk) 21:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Spike 'em: Mashrafe and Sachin is a living person can you tell me how to add signature in there Infobox. All others infobox have signature unfortunately there haven’t any in cricket template. Or can you add signature in those 2 infobox template specifically, not all Infobox. Voulik (talk) 21:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm not encouraging it, but I assume that you could use something like | module = {{infobox person |embed=yes |signature=Signature of Sachin Tendulkar.svg}}. As such, there is no need to add this functionality into this template.Harrias ^talk 22:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Harrias: I tried but it shows only one module can use. Later I saw that there have a "signature" field in the office holder template. And they are members of perliament so I think don't need to create new field for Infobox cricket. I will add those signature in the office holder template. What do you say??Voulik (talk) 22:18, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Batting Strike Rate in infobox

I think it would be really valuable to include a batsman's strike rate in the infoboxes. In Limited Over cricket it is as important a measure of a batsman's ability as his average (probably more so in T20 cricket). Most of the websites (e.g. ESPN Cricinfo) which are used to source infobox data already include strike rate, so it would not be difficult to source it (at least for modern players). Is there any reason why it shouldn't be included? 2.25.186.162 (talk) 00:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The general consensus seems to be that we have too much information in the infobox rather than not enough. I don't think adding something as specialised as strike rate is a particularly good idea, particularly as it usually has very little relevance to Test or first-class cricket and so for a number of infobox columns it could be essentially irrelevant. Sorry, but I don't think this is a good idea, despite your well-argued proposal. You might wish to go to the cricket project with this to see if you can get a wider audience to contribute perhaps? Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree. It's only relevant to white-ball cricket and there's already too much info in the infobox as it is. – PeeJay 10:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind adding it since it is such an integral part of limited overs batting. IW. (talk) 12:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

But it isn't important to first-class cricket, so why would we add something that is only particularly relevant to the limited form of the game? – PeeJay 13:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

If anything we have far too many numbers in the infobox as it is. We need to be discussing what can be removed rather than what can be added. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

In that case, can we get rid of Top score, Balls bowled, 10 wickets in match and Best bowling? Harrias ^talk 15:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Why get rid of top score and best bowling? – PeeJay 16:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

There's a case for being radical. I did play about with one that only had matches, runs and wickets in. That might be two two few - I sort of think five key stats would probably work effectively - it's not as if there's not going to be a link to cricinfo underneath in almost every case. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Best bowling only really works for Test cricket. What is better in a T20, 3 for 100, or 0 for 2 from 4 overs? Top score I can go either way, but ultimately again, it is only indicative of one single performance. Harrias ^talk 21:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Career Statistics links

In the Career Statistics section of the template, there are some fields which don't have links that perhaps should:

• 'Runs scored' could link to Run (cricket)
• '100s' could link to Century (cricket)
• 'Best bowling' could link to Bowling analysis
• 'Catches' could link to Caught

Also, 'Wickets' would be better linking to Dismissal (cricket) or to Wicket#Dismissal_of_a_batsman. Would it be possible to change any of these? Thanks. Mmitchell10 (talk) 13:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Asterisk

Given the usual way of indicating a not out score is an asterisk, could we have the following text somewhere at the bottom of the infobox? * [[not out]]

The asterisk is very often linked, although I agree that it's very subtle and isn't really satisfactory. A partial problem is that if a player has no not outs, the note is unnecessary and potentially confusing. I'm really not sure what the best approach is here. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:36, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

It should be possible to detect the presence of an asterisk in the relevant fields (it will only be necessary if it appears in one of the 4 best scores fields); I'll try having a go when I'm bored sometime! I find the use of [[not out|*]] to be barely noticeable and personally would not use it. Spike 'em (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

If that can be done then that's a better idea I think. Nice one. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

at a very simple level, we can test all of the top scores for an asterisk using something like:

| data31 = {{#ifeq:{{#invoke:String|find|{{{top score1|}}}{{{top score2|}}}{{{top score3|}}}{{{top score4|}}}|*}}|0||{{asterisk}} : [[Not out]]}}

This is probably best put in the career stats infobox, but do people have any views on formatting / exactly where the note should appear? The code could be improved on: at present it could lead to the note being shown if there is a * in any of the top score fields, even for one not being shown (by use of |columns=). I've added the above to the sandbox version, can see the results at Template:infobox cricketer/testcases .Spike 'em (talk) 13:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I would've thought centred below the statistics and above the source would be best. Hack (talk) 15:03, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Something similar to the football infoboxes might work best (so, maybe: * signifies the batsman was not out)?? In a grey or similar? Just * not out looks a bit stark perhaps. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks really good to me, thanks! Mmitchell10 (talk) 07:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Test shirt number

Hi all, given that teams participating in the Test Championship now use shirt numbers to distinguish players, is it possible to add an option in the infobox for a Test shirt number, as currently exists for ODI and T20I cricket? Thanks Aussiespinnersfanpage (talk) 04:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Coaching information

Would it be possible to add parameters for where a cricketer has been a head coach? Similar to how we have a section umpiring information, it would be nice to have a coaching section, as many cricketers have become head coaches of international and domestic teams. In particular, there are many women's cricket head coaches who have just played a few cricket matches, but are mostly notable as coaches, but the infoboxes don't adequately reflect that. My thought would be to add parameters <no wiki>|manageryears1 = |managerclubs1 = or |coachyears1 = |coachclubs1 = </nowiki>, but no idea how to do it. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:44, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Add coaching information - request

Please can you add the following code to this template, to allow coaching information to be added. There was no objections when this was discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 89#Add coaches to Template:Infobox cricketer?, and I have added it to Template:Infobox cricketer/sandbox, and tested it for some cases at User:Joseph2302/sandbox. The code is similar to how umpiring information is currently displayed.

| header26 = {{#if:{{{coachclub1|}}}
  | Head coaching information
<tr style="line-height: 9pt">
<th scope="col">Years</th><th scope="col">Team</th></tr> {{infobox|child=yes
  | labelstyle = font-weight:normal; padding-right:3em
  
  | label1 = {{#if:{{{coachyear1|}}}|{{{coachyear1}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data1  = {{#if:{{{coachclub1|}}|{{{coachclub1}}}}}

  | label2 = {{#if:{{{coachyear2|}}}|{{{coachyear2}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data2  = {{#if:{{{coachclub2|}}}|{{{coachclub2}}}}}

  | label3 = {{#if:{{{coachyear3|}}}|{{{coachyear3}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data3  = {{#if:{{{coachclub3|}}}|{{{coachclub3}}}}}

  | label4 = {{#if:{{{coachyear4|}}}|{{{coachyear4}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data4  = {{#if:{{{coachclub4|}}}|{{{coachclub4}}}}}

  | label5 = {{#if:{{{coachyear5|}}}|{{{coachyear5}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data5  = {{#if:{{{coachclub5|}}}|{{{coachclub5}}}}}

  | label6 = {{#if:{{{coachyear6|}}}|{{{coachyear6}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data6  = {{#if:{{{coachclub6|}}}|{{{coachclub6}}}}}

  | label7 = {{#if:{{{coachyear7|}}}|{{{coachyear7}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data7  = {{#if:{{{coachclub7|}}}|{{{coachclub7}}}}}

  | label8 = {{#if:{{{coachyear8|}}}|{{{coachyear8}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data8  = {{#if:{{{coachclub8|}}}|{{{coachclub8}}}}}

  | label9 = {{#if:{{{coachyear9|}}}|{{{coachyear9}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data9  = {{#if:{{{coachclub9|}}}|{{{coachclub9}}}}}

  | label10 = {{#if:{{{coachyear10|}}}|{{{coachyear10}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data10  = {{#if:{{{coachclub10|}}}|{{{coachclub10}}}}}

  | label11 = {{#if:{{{coachyear11|}}}|{{{coachyear11}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data11  = {{#if:{{{coachclub11|}}}|{{{coachclub11}}}}}

  | label12 = {{#if:{{{coachyear12|}}}|{{{coachyear12}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data12  = {{#if:{{{coachclub12|}}}|{{{coachclub12}}}}}

  | label13 = {{#if:{{{coachyear13|}}}|{{{coachyear13}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data13  = {{#if:{{{coachclub13|}}}|{{{coachclub13}}}}}

  | label14 = {{#if:{{{coachyear14|}}}|{{{coachyear14}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data14  = {{#if:{{{coachclub14|}}}|{{{coachclub14}}}}}

  | label15= {{#if:{{{coachyear15|}}}|{{{coachyear15}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data15 = {{#if:{{{coachclub15|}}}|{{{coachclub15}}}}}

  | label16= {{#if:{{{coachyear16|}}}|{{{coachyear16}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data16 = {{#if:{{{coachclub16|}}}|{{{coachclub16}}}}}

  | label17= {{#if:{{{coachyear17}}}|{{{coachcoachyear17}}}|<nowiki />}}
  | data17 = {{#if:{{{coachclub17|}}}|{{{coachclub17}}}}} }}
}}

And in the invoke:Check for unknown parameters, we would need to add:

| coachclub1 | coachclub10 | coachclub11 | coachclub12 | coachclub13 | coachclub14 | coachclub15 | coachclub16 | coachclub17 | coachclub2 | coachclub3 | coachclub4 | coachclub5 | coachclub6 | coachclub7 | coachclub8 | coachclub9 | coachyear1 | coachyear10 | coachyear11 | coachyear12 | coachyear13 | coachyear14 | coachyear15 | coachyear16 | coachyear17 | coachyear2 | coachyear3 | coachyear4 | coachyear5 | coachyear6 | coachyear7 | coachyear8 | coachyear9 |

I can update the template documentation once this change has been made, but please let me know if there are any further questions or info required on this. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Are we talking head coaching jobs, or can we expect throw down specialists to be added left, right and centre? If we are only asking for head coaching or international head coaching jobs, then the section heading needs to make that clear. I suspect that we'll need to ask for specific citations for each job as well fwiw - these jobs aren't generally listed in CricInfo profiles. Good luck with managing the impacts of this btw. I suspect it's going to cause "issues" Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I would say just definitely just head coach- we don't want wicket keeping, spin bowling, or fielding coaches listed. Was planning on making that clear in the documentation. Should the header be changed to Head coach information then? Joseph2302 (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

People don't read the documentation. If it says "coach" we'll get throw down specialists; if it says head coach we'll not get as many. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I have updated the request to say Head coach. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments: (1) could you make the change to the sandbox too please? (2) Do you really want 17 fields for this added? Won't that make the infobox too long (which is only supposed to be a summary of the most important info). — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:17, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. I also agree that 17 coaches is a bit much; unless there's demonstrable need (for example, {{infobox rugby biography}} recently was expanded from 15 to 20 coach slots due to need) start at a smaller number such as 10. Primefac (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I have added it to the template sandbox in Special:Diff/978522552 to Special:Diff/1013825808. And checked the sandbox template for a couple of infoboxes at User:Joseph2302/sandbox. Is there anything else I need to do to demonstrate this? And I'm fine with it being just 7 or 8- I know some coaches who have been head coach of 5 teams so having a couple more would be good. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:01, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

All of the requested information has been done in sandbox. Please let me know if anything else needs doing. I have unmarked this as answered, as I do not believe the answer was correct, as I had already implemented this in the sandbox. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:38, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@MSGJ and Primefac: Please can you re-review this request? The changes had been made in sandbox, so I don't see why this was closed? The second sentence of this request says " I have added it to Template:Infobox cricketer/sandbox", and I've even provided the diff numbers above. As par as I can see, I have satisfied all the conditions of WP:TESTCASES, and so this request should be done. Or if I'm missing something, I would need some actual helpful advice rather than telling be to do something I've already done. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@MSGJ and Primefac: Are any of you planning to do this? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:49, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Haven't had a chance to look at it recently. If it looks okay, go for it. Primefac (talk) 15:16, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

This request should undoubtedly have been done weeks ago, and it's unfortunate that no one (including myself) got around to doing it until now. Nevertheless,  Done (and I went with the suggestion of having 10 coaches rather than 17) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Pppery: but is there any chance you can edit the header to Head coaching information per the request and discussion above. There are probably really good reasons why we don't want every coaching job added to pages (partly as we'll need way more than those 17 otherwise!) Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed Sorry for not noticing that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Test Shirt No.

With the advent of the World Test Championship, players now have a number on the back of their shirt. Can we add a parameter for this to reflect the fact that players now have a shirt number when playing test matches, just like ODIs and T20s? DiamondIIIXX (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Do players ever have different shirt numbers for different formats? Rather than have 3 separate lines, all showing the same number, I'd prefer to have a single, all-formats number at the bottom of the section. Spike 'em (talk) 19:04, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Aussiespinnersfanpage and DiamondIIIXX: who have both raised this, in case this page is no longer on your watchlist (its been a while). Spike 'em (talk) 19:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I've tried this on the test cases page, section (three) shows what happens if more than 1 field is filled in. Spike 'em (talk) 19:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

If we wanted to be really picky, I suppose that there was a time when people only wore a number for ODIs and not for Tests...

A more radical approach: shirt numbers are in almost all cases uninteresting and irrelevant; get rid of them all from the infobox. Honestly, I can think of one or two cases when they're really of interest. Root mainly. We regularly say we have too much stuff in the ib. This might be something we could actually remove (it might also get rid of the classic "17 (previously 5, previously 3 and before that it was 34)" thing you sometimes see). Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

First part: yes, I realise that, but it would never be inaccurate (as long as numbers were constant) to just list the number in one place, as it is not making a claim that the number was used in all formats, just that it was used in some format at some time!

Radical approach : this has some merit, and I'd definitely like to do that for the club section. Spike 'em (talk) 17:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Medal

This template doesn't support a medals list within as most other sports infoboxes. I went to merge in the list at Mashrafe Mortaza as I normally do when I find these, but can't here. MB 16:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I think this is probably because medals are so rarely awarded in cricket. People usually handle things like this by using some kind of child infobox I think. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

If there is no support in the IB, medals usually follow it as in the above example. But the two boxes are different widths. It looks cleaner if they are combined. Is there any objection to making this an option here to be consistent with the other sports infoboxes? MB 17:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

What would need to be done to allow this? There are 1000s of pages using this ib, so changing the width of it would be quite radical. I see that on the page above that the cricketer ib is invoked as a sub-module within infobox person, so would it be possible to add the medal box to that instead of the cricket section? Alternately, as BST alludes to, medals really aren't a thing in cricket, so not sure how much meaningful information would be lost by just removing it! Spike 'em (talk) 17:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

It would have no impact on the width of the infobox. The medals would just integrated into it (as an available option). There would be no affects on the 1000s of pages that currently use the infobox. MB 17:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm having a look at how it is done for football, will see if I can add something similar to the sandbox for this one. Spike 'em (talk) 17:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I've put something in, and testing it in Template:Infobox cricketer/testcases#(two), I guess we'd need to decide if this is appropriate and if so quite where to put it (I've put it just below the international section). Spike 'em (talk) 17:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hmmm - I mean, it's not as bad as I thought it might be. Not a fan of the flag, but I rarely am. Presumably the "Team" bit is redundant for cricket? It looks a bit odd as a table within the infobox and seems to relegate the source - which is a little bit of an issue given how frequently the source is ignored by editors. But I'd be unlikely to be positive about adding anything very much anyway, so I'm not a reliable judge here.

Looking at the implementation code I worry about the number of errors it'll create, although at least they're easy to revert. It almost seems that it should be easier to implement this as its own infobox which can then be used as a child module - has that ever been done or are we really creating little tables in lots of different inboxes? Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of the flags either, but it looks about the same as currently at Mashrafe Mortaza, but cleaner. I suggested this because that is the way other sports infoboxes work. The same think could probably be accomplished with a child infobox, but that would make cricket different from all the rest. I personally edit all kinds of infoboxes and it already drives me crazy trying to deal with all the variations there are to do the same thing (e.g. Image=, image=, photo=, etc). I prefer consistency. If medals aren't a big thing in cricket, then this would be entirely invisible except in the few cases that used the functionality. MB 21:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)