This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

He apparantly is also the Director for StumpVision —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rglofmi (talk • contribs) 07:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

"Kumble is the second highest wicket taker in test cricket"

No he isn't - Murali is I think

Kumble is the second highest wicket taker among leg spinners and that's what the article says. Gnanapiti 15:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

yes muralitharan is the highest wicket taker in test amtch cricket, he has surpassed wanrnie. kumble is the thord. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.163.216.217 (talk) 12:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

If someone owns a video clip of Kumble bowling with a broken jaw, please share it with everyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.76.89 (talk) 07:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

There are a lot of photos of Kumble bowling with a broken jaw, I don't know how to uplaod pictures to wikipedia but any one of these photos would make a fine addition for the article in my opinion: http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&um=1&sa=1&q=kumble+broken+jaw&btnG=Search+Images&aq=f&oq= 219.74.5.186 (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

his fondness for wildlife should be mentioned. quite uncommon and therefore notable, i believe. one more ref. --CarTick 03:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

An image used in this article, File:Kumble edited.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kumble edited.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Tables on this page are really messed up everyone comes and makes them according to their liking but there is a thing called MOS. We need to follow that only. I will certainly remove forced width from every table because right now they are going off the page any comments.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:07, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Going off the page? I don't think so.

I have changed it because an article about another player which is FA didn't had collapse. Collapse is less likely used in articles as we have to make it easy for the viewers to look. The article I m talking about is: Adam Gilchrist →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 14:25, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, I am also opposed to collapsible tables. The format for table you have put slightly goes outside the window. You can remove or change width for the table or fix it as you like. Using colors is also not good option. Initially tables had colors but I am not big fan of it. You are not having that problem because maybe you are using wider screen display or I don't know but there is a very slight portion going of the page. It is slight though.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

yeah this is good now. For the man of the series table looks perfect.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I was fixing another also but got busy, sorry for being late. I have done it over other place also. →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 14:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

No worries.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:44, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks perfectly fine now. One thing what we can do is widen the table. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 15:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Vensatry. It appears a bit odd with section headings in the left corner and the table centred. Don't know what the MoS says though.BPositive (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I have made it on left and it looks much better to me. Your views are also welcome. →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 16:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

The retirement section in the article talks about his retirement only in the last paragraph. The initial paragraphs talk about him being appreciated by some editors. Do these things go into the retirement section before mentioning that he retired? Please comment. BPositive (talk) 16:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 16:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Good move. But still, read the first para of that section. As a reader, I'm not able to link it with the last paragraph by any means. The first para is for the period January 2008 whereas he took retirement in November 2008! Somehow, the text before retirement is not building up towards his retirement. BPositive (talk) 17:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks good now :) BPositive (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

We are really in lack of images if we are considering a GA lately. Please can anyone upload at least 3 images about him while playing so that it can pass GA. There is a special check of it in a GA so with only 1 image (excluding infobox) we cannot get through. I m trying in this but require help? →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 16:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I think the no. of images are sufficient. Lack of images shouldn't be a problem. Read criteria #6 of WP:GA? —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 11:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Can anyone find refs for the last paragraph in that section as I m having trouble in finding them? →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 07:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Now have a look.--Vyom25 (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Superb! Thank you for that :) →TheSpecialUser^Talk_{Contributions}* 12:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Anil Kumble/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 13:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid this article is some way off GA status. It seems a lot of good work has been done, but I think much more is required. It may be worth looking at some other cricket GAs or FAs to understand what is required to reach GA status. But with so much work having been done, I think GA is a realistic goal in the near future.

I looked closely at the first sections, and found several prose and referencing issues. "He is currently…": Needs a date, as per WP:DATED; i.e. "As of 2012…"

• "He is also the first and the only cricketer in the history of Indian Test Cricket to have taken a 10-wicket haul.": Could be cut back to "He is the only Indian Test cricketer to have…"
• "Since his debut in international cricket on 25 April 1990, he has taken 619 Test wickets[3] and 337 ODI wickets": Present tense suggests that he is still playing; he is not going to add to his tally.
• Way too much emphasis on captaincy in the lead, and nothing on the rest of his playing career. The lead also needs more on his technique and successes. Also, his 10-wicket achievement is mentioned twice.
• "He is the second highest wicket taker among leg spinners in Test cricket, other being Shane Warne of Australia": Given that he is the 3rd overall highest, this seems unnecessarily specific. I think it should be cut.
• "His family, takes its name from the Kumbla village, located in the Kasaragod district of Kerala." No need for the comma, and this is lifted directly from the source. May be an issue regarding WP:COPYVIO or Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing.
• His wife's full name is not given in the stated ref.
• I can not find the name of his daughter in the given refs.
• "Kumble did his primary schooling at Holy Saint English School and his high schooling at National High School": Better as "Kumble's primary school was Holy Saint English School and he later attended National High School"
• Ref 21 gives me nothing.
• "went on to have scintillating but short-lived first class careers": POV

I did not read the rest as closely, but the main issue seems to be broad coverage.

• The remainder of the article does not seem to fully cover his career. Without reading too closely, I notice that there is a lot of missing information. Just a few examples:
  • Jumps from fc debut, to U19 debut, to ODI debut then Test debut in 4 sentences. It needs more on his early performances. How many wickets did he take? What were his best performances? Which ones earned him national selection. How did he do on his tours? What did critics and team-mates make of his performances. Was he expected to do well?
  • How did he perform in his early Tests. As I recall, he was not expected to be all that good, but after his South African success, his real breakthrough was when he massacred England in 92-93. How was he successful? (Mention that topspinner!) What about the '92 World Cup? (Did he play?) Again, what did critics make of his performances? (I seem to remember that Keith Fletcher, the England manager, dismissed him before the 92-93 series. What about other performances than his 6-12 against WI?
  • Nothing given between 93 and 96; what about his season in County Cricket in '95 when he was incredibly successful for Northamptonshire in not very helpful conditions?
  • Far more on the '96 World Cup than any other part of his career; he was not even one of the star performers, so why so much detail. Then, nothing on one of his few relative failures in England in '96.
  • The rest of his career is covered in six paragraphs! This is nothing close to enough, and there is more on his century than some of his best bowling performances. Also, too much on his records. What about his everyday performances. Some that stand out from memory: success in Australia in 2003-04 and 2007-08. Bowling against WI with a broken jaw. What about his record year by year (ie. how many wickets in each season, how this compared to other players)
  • Relative to the rest of his career, the IPL is not a huge part; yet it is given more coverage than any other aspect even though it only covered three years of a 20 year career.
  • More on his technique. Some of it is covered, but too much in comparison to other bowlers: it should describe him on his own merits. Pace, accuracy, that top-spinner and flipper. Then mention how he compared to other contemporary leg-spinners like Warne, Mushtaq Ahmed and even Paul Strang! And don't just rely on quotes, paraphrase and use more sources.

Consequently, I'm afraid I must fail this article. Here is the formal review:

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The prose needs a lot of work. I have listed several issue above but noticed several more in the remainder of the article. I recommend a thorough copy-edit by an uninvolved editor.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   A few issues with sources not supporting the text, and at least one issue with copyvio/close paraphrasing. This must be checked very carefully before and during a future nomination.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Too much IPL, not enough on the rest of his career. Concerns outlined above. This is my major issue, there is just not enough coverage of his career. Too much is either left out or covered in one sentence; but then, too much on single issues like 10 wicket game, IPL and Test century in comparison to his overall career. He was not a one-trick pony.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   One minor issue identified, but this needs checking more closely throughout the article. Nothing obvious on first glance.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   No problems

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I'm afraid there is some way to go, and too much to do in the timespan of a GA review.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed.--Sarastro1 (talk) 14:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

"Two of his college team-mates—M.P. Vivek and Rashid Mohsin—went on to have scintillating but short-lived first class careers." This is not written from a NPOV. Is this piece of information really required in the personal life section? Please comment.BPositive (talk) 18:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. They were just friends and not so relevant. It creates the problem of "focus" which was one of the major problems for this to not get listed. →TSU ^tp* 18:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done --BPositive (talk) 18:44, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anil Kumble. 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/20110216052950/http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/Ndtv-Show-Special-Story.aspx?ID=534&StoryID=SPOEN20100139276&ch=4242010125800AM to http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/Ndtv-Show-Special-Story.aspx?ID=534&StoryID=SPOEN20100139276&ch=4242010125800AM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 07:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)