Talk:List of Test cricket grounds

message: Suggestion: In the 'county' section for English and Welsh grounds (and for other countries as well - I'm afraid my knowledge of that is limited) might it not be more preferable, instead of having which county the ground was in, to have what county played there? 
Suggestion: How about another column "Capacity"? - Ian ≡ talk 03:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone suggested that on WP:FLC - come and vote!  Do you have figures?  Some may be hard to find (the Bombay Gymkhana, for example, has no permanent stands).  -- ALoan (Talk) 10:22, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: The names of some of South African grounds are currently prefixed with the names of the sponsors. I suggest that we call them just by the name of the ground - Kingsmead instead of Sahara Kingsmead. 
Currently Kingsmead is redirected to Sahara Kingsmead. It would be better if the redirection is in the other direction.
The Oval thankfully is still not Brit Oval ! Tintin 06:04, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sooner or later England will have something equivalent to football's Reebok Stadium, though, where there is no non-sponsored name to use. I hate the prospect, but I'm sure it's coming. Loganberry (Talk) 23:01, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

text: You mean like - Headingley Carnegie Stadium as a result of sponsorship from Leeds Metropolitan University. 86.29.42.83 13:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names of sponsors 

message: What about Queenstown, New Zealand?  I don't know the name of the ground, but NZ and WI just played an ODI there a few days ago.  Have tests ever been played there?  Even if not, it's still an international ground in a Test nation.  rvinall 24 February 2006
:You'll find there's quite a few of them (Testless ODI venues), Australia alone has 8 --Paul 06:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queenstown? 

message: How about extending the tables to include the ground capacities?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonyisalegend (talk • contribs) 13:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crowd capacity 

message: Where did Bourda disappear to? Instead of replacing it with Providence, shouldn't it be kept as it was and Providence added to the end of the Windies list with the ground's first Test just underway. Parthepan (talk) 09:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Georgetown, Guyana 

message: I am proposing to merge List of Test cricket grounds by date into this list. The only difference between the two lists is the order and I believe we can easily change the order with the sortable table; thus, the list of Test cricket grounds by date becomes unnecessary.--Crzycheetah 02:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The merge has taken place but it has lost significant detail so I have reverted it for the time being.  I'll work on it carefully so as to preserve as much of the information as possible.  The Rambling Man (talk) 12:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: "The grounds are listed by country, with the countries listed in the order in which they first hosted a Test match and the grounds in each country listed in the order in which they were first used as a venue for Test cricket."
If the grounds were listed "by country", all of the grounds for one country would appear consecutively.
If the countries were listed "in the order in which they first hosted a Test match", all the grounds of the first country to have hosted a test match  would appear first, followed by all the grounds of the country next to have hosted a test match, etc., and the grounds within each country listed "in the order in which they were first used as a venue for Test cricket".
Thus , the order described is *NOT* the order used in the list.  
It appears that the list shows the grounds in the order in which they were first used for a test cricket match, *regardless of country*, in which case the description could be amended to read:
:"The grounds are listed in the order in which they were first used as a venue for Test cricket."
since it is the first two clauses in the current description that (i) are not correct and (ii) introduce the contradiction between the description and the listing (as well as adding complexity without value).  
Either the list should be re-ordered to conform to the description, or the descriptions should be re-written to conform to the ordering used.  I suggest the latter - keep the list the same and amend the description as I have indicated.
(I have never looked up a Wikipedia entry on anything cricket-related before and was more than a little surprised that the entry for a sport so renowned for its statistics should contain such an obvious inconsistency, which presumably has stood or some time).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.13.218 (talk) 13:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, this being Wikipedia, you're welcome to make the changes yourself! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Come on cricket enthusiasts - train spotters put you to shame with their aptitude and affinity for detail and accuracy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.175.55 (talk) 20:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  --Redrose64 (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of listing is *NOT* as described 

message: Instead of simply putting West Indies in the Country column, we can better put the name of the country there with the appropriate flag and put West Indies in brackets.Anish Viswa   02:09, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that two grounds (Kensington Oval, Bridgetown, Barbados and Queen's Park Oval, Port of Spain, Trinidad) have been amended to show country flags. This creates an inconsistency: the other ten West Indies grounds continue to show the West Indies cricket team badge. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Test venues in the West Indies 

message: Is it making much sense linking to the National team article from the entries in the country column ? I feel it will be better to link to the cricket board article.Anish Viswa   08:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In that, I agree. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Call the column something different then. If you list the country, then link to the country, otherwise you have nonsense like Wales linking to England cricket team, or the various links to West Indies being labelled with the name of the constituent countries. Spike 'em (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear, I think the current situation (where a link is made to the national team) is wrong, if you are going to call the column country it should both display and link to something that mean the same thing. The worst ones are the West Indian nations labelled as, for example, Jamaic, but linking to WI national team. To me this is just plain wrong as it goes against MOS:LINKCLARITY / MOS:EGG Spike 'em (talk) 09:36, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country column linking 

message: I'm a bit confused as to what's going on in the external links section/collapsed. It appears to be copy-paste duplication. Can we remove it?  -- WikHead (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. If I'm wrong, just revert.. Rich Farmbrough, 02:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It;'s one-day cricket grounds.  IF an article does not already exist, and it makes sense it should be cut and pasted there, with GFDL link back to the appropriate revid of this page. Rich Farmbrough, 02:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Rich. That error has been reporting for days, and it's nice to finally see it addressed. Regards,  -- WikHead (talk) 02:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Restored by an IP. Rich Farmbrough, 18:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

text: Split to List of One Day International cricket grounds. Rich Farmbrough, 18:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  EL section 

message: How about colouring the rows with a grey background to indicate the old venues which are no longer used for test matches. Say, if the last test match was more than 10 years ago? This would indicate graphically how the spread of old/new venues has varied and would highlight the oldest venues which are still current.
Mr splosh (talk) 10:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grey-out the venues no longer used for test matches 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Test cricket grounds. 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/20111216081017/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/58009.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/58009.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of Test cricket grounds. 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/20111216105416/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/56338.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/56338.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111216121104/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/58319.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/58319.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111216124604/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/59112.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/ground/59112.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Daggregate
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A cricket ground that was last used for a test for a match that finished on 11th September cannot be said to have last been used on 7th September.  Thus the column header "Last used" is not accurate.  I appreciate that it is not realistic to back check which matches have lasted 5 days, and which 4, so rather than leave a header that would require such, I have twice changed the header to "Last match started", which renders the information true.  User:Ankurc.17 has twice undone this with no explanation, although I had on both occasions given a reason in the edit notes.
Is there any sensible reason for pretending in an encyclopaedia that a ground last used on 11 September has not been used since 7 September, or that those grounds that have hosted only one test are presented as having been the scene of test matches that only last one day?  Kevin McE (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No good reason for the status quo.  Most of our cricket lists which include dates of Test matches highlight the first day of the Test.  The way this is normally handled is a note to say "Date given is the first day of the Test match" and that could apply here.  Certainly no need for all this kerfuffle and edit warring.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Rambling Man Thank you for the support. All i have been doing deligently is updating the matches info as and when its been conducted. However, people are more interested in edit war then actually contributing. If they are so much concerned about casual viewers then sporting websites (cricinfo, cricbuzz) should refrain from using or providing such info. The said user only comes up once in a year type out from there hibernation and suddenly start acting as if they own everything. --Ankurc.17 (talk) 06:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm intrigued that you read that as support for your opinion: he said there was "No good reason" for the text that you edit-warred and reverted to. Kevin McE (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

text: I think "Last match started" or at a stretch "Last match" are more accurate. I prefer "First match" to "First used" too. Spike 'em (talk) 09:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So "First match started" and "Last match started" would be your proposal for the column headers?  Kevin McE (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

text:  So it should be "First match" and "Last Match". If its ok with everyone will make the necessary changes. Can someone also mention if the date is sufficient for last updated or do we mention Last Match No. as well. --Ankurc.17 (talk) 10:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't see any consensus for that. Kevin McE (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  And i don't see anyone opposing that... --Ankurc.17 (talk) 02:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

text: I'd read it as the date the Test started, per other cricket lists. This can be covered via a footnote, tooltip, or both. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Last used"