Template talk:National cricket teams

message: Note that this template will need changing after tomorrow, when either the Netherlands or the UAE will finish fifth in the ICC Trophy and therefore gain ODI status. Loganberry (Talk) 19:07, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Change now made. Loganberry (Talk) 00:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

message: Should we really have the West Indian teams (Barbados, Jamaica, Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago) in this template? As far as cricket is concerned, they are domestic teams, not national teams. —This unsigned comment is by Andrew nixon (talk • contribs) .
:It's not completely clear-cut, but I tend to agree. Anyone else have an opinion? Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should be aiming to include only teams listed at List of International Cricket Council members - perhaps we should make that clear in the name / title of the template? -- ALoan (Talk) 12:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So that would rule out Wales as well. Any others? Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the answer is to have a seperate template for "Other National Teams", including the now defunct teams like East Africa, East & Central Africa and West Africa, in addition to Wales, Northern Ireland (who competed in the 1998 Commonwealth Games), perhaps with the West Indian nations who competed in those games too, and also for those nations that have membership of regional bodies, but not of the ICC, such as New Caledonia (members of the East-Asia Pacific Cricket Council), Belarus, Estonia, Russia, etc... (all members of the ECC). Also any ICC prospective members such as Burma/Myanmar, who probably deserve an article anyway, as they have hosted first class cricket in the past. Andrew nixon 12:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about a separate template — is it useful when browsing Welsh cricket team to get a box of non-ICC members? Maybe the answer is to separate them out into a new row at the bottom of the existing box. Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe have 5 lists in the box, Full Members, ODI Status Teams, Associate Members, Affiliate Members, Non-MembersAndrew nixon 13:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds best to me. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've split it into ICC members and non-members as a first step. I'm dubious as to whether the distinction between Associate Members and Affiliate Members is really important enough to the general reader to be distinguished in the template, but we can do that later if we want. Stephen Turner (Talk) 17:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  West Indian teams 

message: I've just added four new affiliate members (see ) who are currently redlinks. Stephen Turner (Talk) 07:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not redlinks any more! Andrew nixon 12:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New affiliate members 

message: I was wondering if Norfolk Island should be included as an ICC Non-Member team in the template. At first I assumed that the national team for Norfolk Island was Australia, but having come across the Norfolk Island Cricket Association on the internet and seeing a few references to Norfolk Island aiming for affiliate membership it now seems as though Norfolk Island isn't associated with Cricket Australia and might thus be a non-member with regards to the ICC. Before attempting to add it to the template as a non-member or a footnote, I was wondering if anyone had any more information regarding Norfolk Island.72.27.88.43 (talk) 23:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: More information here--Kpaspery (talk) 12:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Norfolk Island 

message: Should this even be on the page?  It no longer exists and as a national cricket team it has been succeeded by Zimbabwe.
If it does not exist, it can't be considered a non-member. Is there any evidence that as Rhodesia it was a member of ICC (the page only mentions it playing in SA domestic cricket), meaning it could go in the former member section? Spike 'em (talk) 08:18, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: And to clarify some of my thoughts: Former members should include teams that no longer exist, but only if they were actually part of ICC. Non-members should just be current / stagnant countries that are not members of the ICC. Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, so to my mind is covered by Zimbabwe's entry. Spike 'em (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The template for national football teams has a "Defunct" section which if adopted for this template Rhodesia would belong in, along with others such as Federated Malay States cricket team and Straits Settlements cricket team. Perhaps the solution is to get rid of the former members section and have non-members and defunct. Non members being countries that do exist but aren't ICC members, irrespective of past ICC membership status and defunct being those that no longer exist as countries or groups of countries (eg. East Africa cricket team). Andrew nixon (talk) 09:04, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good solution.Spike 'em (talk) 09:43, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Rhodesia cricket team]]