Talk:2008 Indian Premier League

Aiming for an FA (soliciting opinion on how to proceed)

We have a very good chance of getting this article to FA status. To that end, we need some prose, specifically with respect to how the season was received. With former cricketers' and analysts' opinions, we could turn to cricinfo.com; the other thing we need is an overview of viewership: the TRPs, and if possible, viwership numbers. I am sure TAM will be of help; if anyone is a member, I request your help. If TAM is not usable, this is a very good resource but unfortunately covers only the first ten or so matches.

We could also do with comentary on the season. But things like "mumbai started the season very badly, then picked up steam mid-season but burnt itself out before the crunch time" should better be left to the league progression table: anyone is free to interpret the facts in any way they want. And also a few pictures - of crucial moments such as the champions with the trophy or even the trophy itself would be good. If any of you have taken any such pictures yourself, please consider releasing it under {{GFDL}} or CC 2.0/3.0 so it becomes usable here. --soum ^talk 05:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest requesting a peer review at WP:Cricket. This can help in deciding the weak areas that have to be worked upon before aiming towards FA status. Also, I'd agree to the fact that the article is in dire need of prose, it might as well be named "Statistics of 2008 Indian Premier League" in its present condition. LeaveSleaves (talk) 08:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that what the article needs is prose. The positive is that (I think) the rest of the article looks very good. With regard to what prose to have, I think there should first of all be a section for the background of and leadup to the tournament. I realise that this might somewhat overlap with ideas relevant to the IPL as a whole (the Indian Premier League page could itself use a similar section), but I think that considering the 2008 IPL is the inaugural tournament some background is warrented. This would include a brief statement of why the IPL was created, some of the details about how the IPL (and in particular the 2008 season) came about, and some statements about expectations for the coming season (wrt how pundits thought particular teams would do as well as how successful the league itself would be).

I think the next section should be a season summary. I agree that we shouldn't just have sentences like Soum's Mumbai example, but we shouldn't neglect such trends entirely. The prose should be a richer description than what someone can deduce just from the tables, mentioning why the season went how it went (player performances throughout the tournament, off field incidents, teams losing key players to international duty (eg Chennai losing Hayden and Hussey) or gaining new players (eg Punjab gaining Shaun Marsh), key injuries etc), all interspersed with references to opinions of notable commentators. I think this should be written in a reasonably chronological way, as a description of how the season unfolded with references to relevant teams, players etc at appropriate times.

After this could come the section on how the tournament was received in India and around the world, crowds, TV viewage etc. I don't know how useful this collection of anecdotes is to the wikipedia page, but it at least is an attempt by cricinfo to assess the IPL's global impact. This section could finish by assessing how this IPL seems to have affected the future of the tournament (without getting too speculative of course).

These 3 sections seem to be what the page requires and I think it is natural for them to come in the order proposed. I know I haven't been particularly specific as to which particular details should be included and which omitted, but I think this should be the general structure. If there is general agreement with this, then we can discuss whether particular players, incidents etc should be mentioned and where. Juwe (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Start-class rating

The article fails point 6 in the WP:CRIC rating criteria above because it does not have "appropriate supporting materials": i.e., it fails WP:FLAG and it needs to be extensively edited to remove all duplication of these flag icons which are a waste of space and considerably impact download times. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 07:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:DLF IPL logo.png

The image File:DLF IPL logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:35, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Saw mansingh stadium.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Saw mansingh stadium.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Saw mansingh stadium.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2008 Indian Premier League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720113337/http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/playing-conditions.html to http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/playing-conditions.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080911035806/http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/icc_world_twenty20_playing_conditions_final.pdf to http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/icc_world_twenty20_playing_conditions_final.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080423230430/http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament to http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080623080141/http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/most_wickets_career.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament to http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/most_wickets_career.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090414162206/http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/best_career_economy_rate.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament to http://stats.cricinfo.com/ipl/engine/records/bowling/best_career_economy_rate.html?id=3519%3Btype%3Dtournament

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Correct The Rules And Regulations Points Table

Please Correct The table Kumar Raja 123 (talk) 15:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)