Talk:Spin bowling

message: According to the Magnus Effect article: "Contrary to what some think, the Magnus effect is not responsible for the movement of a cricket ball seen in swing bowling."
Does that mean this article is incorrect?  192.203.136.254 13:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's correct. The Magnus effect does not cause swing, but it does cause a spinning cricket ball to drift as explained in this article on spin bowling. Spin, drift, and swing are all very different motions of a cricket ball, with different causes. -dmmaus 22:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Magnus Effect?

message: I came to find something of the history of spin bowling and found ... nothing. If anyone knows anything about this subject, I believe this would be the place to share. 80.171.114.122 (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: History of spin bowling

message: Two Zimbabwean bowlers are included in the list, but no one from a notable test country, Bangladesh is included in the list. 
Ray Price from Zimbabwe is included in the list of spinners, but two spinners, with more wickets and better averages from Bangladesh is not on the list. 
Mohammad Rafique 
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/55973.html
Shakib Al Hasan
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/56143.html
Another notable spinner from India is not included in this list. 
Harbhajan Singh
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/29264.html
these spinners should be included in this list for this list to be plausible.
64.53.191.107 (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: CTJF83 pride 19:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 64.53.191.107, 4 June 2010 

message: This article is one of a  number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue   are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes"  would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:07, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Pending changes

message: Roughly how many revolutions per second does a good wrist spinner impart? and a good finger spinnner? 86.53.69.150 (talk) 23:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Spin rate

message: I'm going to revert the revert of the previous change. It's clearly not OR as it simply compiles information already on this page and the pages on wrist spin and finger spin into a table. 188.221.246.173 (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not introduce information which has no verifiable source until this matter is discussed further. For now it falls into the WP:OR. Andrei S (talk) 20:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Do NOT delete anything that is being discussed here or you are violating a Wikipedia rule as can be seen here: WP:TALKO. Your concerns are going to be dealt with as long as you keep a decent vocabulary and be patient. Thank you for your cooperation. Andrei S (talk) 23:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverts

message: This entire page is very poorly written, and seems largely to be a unnecessarily long list of spin bowling practitioners. As a qualified coach, I will happily bring it up to a good standard, because frankly its a intresting topic that deserves a well written page and its embarassing as it is and gives a poor impression of cricket. However it would be useful if certain self-important individuals would not hit revert every improvement simply to show how all powerful they are. 188.221.246.173 (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Poor quality of page

message: As pointed out by more than one contributor, the table might improve the quality of this article. Is it relevant or is it considered WP:OR? Andrei S (talk) 00:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I did. I do apologise for my mistake. I will reintroduce your comments right back into the discussion page. Please keep your vocabulary decent. I have added this page on a discussion board so your contributions can be evaluated appropriately. I do apologise again for my mistake. Andrei S (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I think its clearly relevant, as it clears up a lot of confusion between terms that people may not otherwise realise were referring to the same concept.  
- 188.221.246.173 (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the table in Equivalencies relevant? 

message: This page is being slowly turned into a list of people's favourite bowlers. Most of the bowlers mentioned could hardly be described as particularly notable. Tony Greig? Are you having a laugh? 
Could we perhaps try to reduce the competitive jingoism and just limit it to a sentence or two about each genuinely notable bowler: those rare world class bowlers who actually broke records or were innovative or unusual enough to take the art of spin bowling forwards? 213.70.98.66 (talk) 15:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the list of bowlers should be split into List of spin bowlers; the list of names on this article certainly seems excessive and adds little to its encyclopaedic value. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:10, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

text: The user who declined the change should have indicated why in an edit summary, but you selectively removed a large number of names without explaining your reasoning; could you explain why you chose to remove these names here? Personally I think it's likely to be more productive to simply move the list to its own page and add it to see also in this article, so that we can maintain a list which more specifically indicates its criteria for listing; at the moment it's a list with no description, nothing written to indicate why each entry is worth mention, and no references. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 11:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of notable bowlers 

message: A month ago I added an equivalency table to this page, which simply pulled together some of the information from finger spin and wrist spin. Cricket can be a confusing sport and often uses several different words to describe the same thing, and I thought a simple table would simplify understanding. I notice now that in making the table, I missed out the word "real" from one column, forgot to add "wrong'un" as another name for a doosra (a wrong'un literally means "one that turned the wrong way"), and I added a link to teesra after some good work by another editor. It seems bizarre that every different mention of the same word should require a separate reference.
It frustrates me that it should be such hard work to make a few simple changes to a page I am trying desperately to improve. How long will it take if I want to write a whole new section? I can see now why wikipedia has gone backwards over the last few years. I think that there is a culture of superiority by some editors who simply reject every change they come across.  188.221.246.173 (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to equivalancy table 

message: This edit adds a couple of terms to the table of equivalencies. The edit doesn't cite any sources, but then again, neither does anything else in the table. I know nothing about cricket; can you guys, who hopefully know more about the game than I do, try to figure out whether these edits are correct or not? In any case, we really ought to find a reliable source that talks about these terms. --Tanner Swett (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of equivalencies 

message: Without proper sourcing the list of notable spin bowlers cannot stay. We need to clarify who is a notable bowler and from a reliable source, not just editor opinions. Any inclusion of details about a living person must be sourced GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done)  14:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Spin Bowlers 

message: There are two 'videos' which show types of spin bowling. The second one has a description of "A leg spin delivery by (left arm over the wicket)", but clearly it is not over the wicket if the bowler is left handed and the delivery is coming from the left side of the pitch. I don't know how to modify the text though! Can someone fix this please? FillsHerTease (talk) 07:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The second 'video'