Talk:Adam Gilchrist

message: == FA - Blnguyen's oppose ==
I'm posting here a reformatted version of Blnguyen's oppose !vote, so the issues can be dealt with individually. Any mistakes in the reformatting are my fault - I'll ask Blnguyen to check. --Dweller 11:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, fair enough, I've toned down the 'slump' mention, and included the four consecutive lbw's.  As always, thanks for your comments. The Rambling Man 13:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I should thank you and Dweller for considering practically every one of my suggestions. I myself don't think that all of them are really valid. Tintin 13:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Gilchrist inside edge in the Harhajan hat-trick -> that wasn't a slog sweep IIRC, it was an attempted forcing shot through midwicket right; I think it was off the back foot, maybe on the crease. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 22:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your memory is too good!  How do you find our changes?  Fancy going support on the FA yet?  The Rambling Man 22:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a look. I am surprised that unabashed drivel like Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michael Jordan is passing, from all their NBA fan voting. Look at all the editorial comment and hyperbole!! ShockingBlnguyen  (bananabucket) 01:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, true. Now that I think about it, only two of the four seem to be slog sweeps. Tintin 22:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Expanded a bit, I'm going to leave thecitations for the time being... The Rambling Man 14:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Added a bit more, but have to be careful to find decent citable information which seems hard to come by in the early days of Gilly's career.The Rambling Man 15:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Removed for the time being, no doubt the two batsmen selected were more aggressive but no citations available right now so just stick to bare facts of the matter.  The Rambling Man 14:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Linked, thanks. The Rambling Man 14:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *More explanation now provided, hopefully sufficient. The Rambling Man 14:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Modified the lines you've specified, if anything else specifically annoys, please let me know! The Rambling Man 14:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Removed and rephrased - the point was that he was out one short of a century, so made it clearer. The Rambling Man 14:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, great work. Quadzilla99 15:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To make it clear, I supported even before these concerns were addressed. So great job all around and way to address concerns in detail. Quadzilla99 12:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC discussion 

message: I'm posting here a reformatted version of Blnguyen's oppose !vote, so the issues can be dealt with individually. Any mistakes in the reformatting are my fault - I'll ask Blnguyen to check. --Dweller 11:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, fair enough, I've toned down the 'slump' mention, and included the four consecutive lbw's.  As always, thanks for your comments. The Rambling Man 13:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I should thank you and Dweller for considering practically every one of my suggestions. I myself don't think that all of them are really valid. Tintin 13:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Gilchrist inside edge in the Harhajan hat-trick -> that wasn't a slog sweep IIRC, it was an attempted forcing shot through midwicket right; I think it was off the back foot, maybe on the crease. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 22:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your memory is too good!  How do you find our changes?  Fancy going support on the FA yet?  The Rambling Man 22:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a look. I am surprised that unabashed drivel like Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Michael Jordan is passing, from all their NBA fan voting. Look at all the editorial comment and hyperbole!! ShockingBlnguyen  (bananabucket) 01:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, true. Now that I think about it, only two of the four seem to be slog sweeps. Tintin 22:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA - Blnguyen's oppose 

message: *Support. It's good. Comments: 
#...successful World Cup campaign,[55]. - Seemingly unfinished sentence. 
#:Flowed sentences correctly now The Rambling Man 16:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further FA comments 

message: Great article, just a few issues I've got.
*At the start of the 1997–98 Australian season, Healy and captain Mark Taylor were omitted from the ODI squad as the Australian selectors opted for a more aggressive batting style, choosing Gilchrist and Michael di Venuto. Gilchrist's elevation was made possible by a change in policy by selectors, who announced that selection for ODI and Test teams would be separate, with Test and ODI specialists selected accordingly, while Healy remained the preferred Test wicket-keeper. That probably needs citing.
**You crafty sod, yes, this needs a citation.  I was half tempted to remove the whole thing because I couldn't find anything useful to add...  Can you help?  The Rambling Man 22:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A few issues

message: *Obviously this is a personal preference but I'd like the lead to be without citations, also it could stand to be expanded. 
:*Expanded a bit, I'm going to leave thecitations for the time being... The Rambling Man 14:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Added a bit more, but have to be careful to find decent citable information which seems hard to come by in the early days of Gilly's career.The Rambling Man 15:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Removed for the time being, no doubt the two batsmen selected were more aggressive but no citations available right now so just stick to bare facts of the matter.  The Rambling Man 14:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Linked, thanks. The Rambling Man 14:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *More explanation now provided, hopefully sufficient. The Rambling Man 14:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Modified the lines you've specified, if anything else specifically annoys, please let me know! The Rambling Man 14:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *Removed and rephrased - the point was that he was out one short of a century, so made it clearer. The Rambling Man 14:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, great work. Quadzilla99 15:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To make it clear, I supported even before these concerns were addressed. So great job all around and way to address concerns in detail. Quadzilla99 12:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More FA nom comments from [[User:Quadzilla99|Quadzilla99]] 

message: *Weak oppose -- 
# choppy prose. He is.. appears 3 times in 1 paragraph in the lead.
#:Hopefully rephrased to move a bit away from the repetitive choppy nonsense.  The Rambling Man 20:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments from [[User:Nichalp|Nichalp]] 

message: == POV statement ==
I think that this statement needs to be changed or removed:
"However, while perhaps not as elegant as some, he has successfully kept wicket for leg spinner Shane Warne over many years, managing many stumpings, missing few catching chances, and letting through few byes."
A statistic on stumpings could be found, but how do you judge "missing few catching chances and letting few byes?" Also, who judges his success against Warne? I personally agree that he's done a good job, but the only point of comparison is Healy, and either way, the statement is unsourced and will probably stay that way.
If nobody objects or changes over the next few days, I'll remove the statement. Damanmundine | Talk 10:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree it should go. The fact is he has had little critism of his keeping in recent years... its not been bad at all, perhaps not Healy or Knott good, but still good. In this case a lack of cites is almost proof in itself. The press are savage about poor keeping, just ask any England keeper of the last few years. Furthermore it shouldnt be hard to cite a respected source saying he's been pretty good. --LiamE 14:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you on most counts, so I think we should find a citation on his keeping ability to back up the statement. I'll try to do that over the next few days. I'm still not sure about the "missing few chances and letting through few byes" part, because it doesn't seem specific enough. Maybe a change to "he has successfully kept wicket to both fast bowlers and spinners alike, notably Shane Warne,(cite) managing 37 stumpings in Test matches." Damanmundine | Talk 00:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It's suffered from a huge bout of recentism.  I'll see if I can restore it to the FA standard. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is done.  I'll keep an eye on it, it looks likely that it'll be hacked to death by one or two determined editors.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That was quick!  Thanks. -- Mattinbgn\talk 09:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No bother.  And I've added a note at WP:CRICKET to ask for people to keep their eyes peeled for any changes that may compromise the FA status. The Rambling Man (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 09:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You reckon? At present the sentence about retirement is little better than just adding "OMG Gilly just retired!!!!" as the first line...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.113.165 (talk) 04:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you contributed to the FA status of this article, well done. But the intro is terrible. A complicated recital of the years of debut doesn't fit well early on - better for the article's body. The fact he holds a world record in his primary skill is the last sentence! Why on earth are reprimands included in this section? - this in no way defines him as a cricketer or his contribution to cricket. All in all it is a great article but a lousy lead. I'd suggest a intro like this: line with name, dob, nickname, retired cricket player. Former acting captain, usual VC. Line that details wicketkeeping achievements. Line for batting achievement. ROxBo (talk) 13:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Erick880 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Actually, most are raw scorecards and statistics. These aren't "investigative statistics" that might be deliberately misanalysed, because they just tell us what the official proceedings of the match were. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 05:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, it just looked so weird I cannot think of ever seeing that many of the same source.  But yeah they are mostly just stats.
Erick880 (talk) 13:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, the Cricinfo panel put him in their team I guess and a few other pundit polls probably. On raw glovework I don't think people would could consider him anything more than good/steady. YellowMonkey  (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Expanded. Might need more things overlooked, particuarly the legacy and change in playing style. Need some refs and cleanup YellowMonkey  (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I am surprised that it contains jargon. Ikhtiar H (talk) 09:25, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: These look like trivial issues.  When I get some time, I'll take a look.  No need for FAR. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  My main concern is prose. There's a lot of "In year, blah blah blah happened." which tends to happen when older articles are added onto. A lot of parts definitely need copy editing to flow better. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a problem. Dweller and I are both experts.  Just need to find the time.  No need to rush to FAR. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

text: I'll move the IPL and Middlesex sections to where they belong in the article as a starter and might even get round to some minor tidying up at some point. I agree that there's no great rush to do the hard lifting here. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done bits of this, but it'll need looking at properly and I don't use cite templates, so the refs I've added will need changing format. I'm not convinced of the order of stuff btw, but I'll leave it to you chaps to sort out. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:09, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other stuff 

message: I think that this statement needs to be changed or removed:
"However, while perhaps not as elegant as some, he has successfully kept wicket for leg spinner Shane Warne over many years, managing many stumpings, missing few catching chances, and letting through few byes."
A statistic on stumpings could be found, but how do you judge "missing few catching chances and letting few byes?" Also, who judges his success against Warne? I personally agree that he's done a good job, but the only point of comparison is Healy, and either way, the statement is unsourced and will probably stay that way.
If nobody objects or changes over the next few days, I'll remove the statement. Damanmundine | Talk 10:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree it should go. The fact is he has had little critism of his keeping in recent years... its not been bad at all, perhaps not Healy or Knott good, but still good. In this case a lack of cites is almost proof in itself. The press are savage about poor keeping, just ask any England keeper of the last few years. Furthermore it shouldnt be hard to cite a respected source saying he's been pretty good. --LiamE 14:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you on most counts, so I think we should find a citation on his keeping ability to back up the statement. I'll try to do that over the next few days. I'm still not sure about the "missing few chances and letting through few byes" part, because it doesn't seem specific enough. Maybe a change to "he has successfully kept wicket to both fast bowlers and spinners alike, notably Shane Warne,(cite) managing 37 stumpings in Test matches." Damanmundine | Talk 00:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV statement 

message: What has happened to the lead?  It has been chopped to pieces and is now unrecognisable from its Featured Article glory.   The current lead is full of one sentence paragraphs and does not meet FA guidelines. Please have a look at WP:LEAD and if you can recover the chopped out content and restore it to the lead. Thanks, Mattinbgn\talk 09:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's suffered from a huge bout of recentism.  I'll see if I can restore it to the FA standard. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is done.  I'll keep an eye on it, it looks likely that it'll be hacked to death by one or two determined editors.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That was quick!  Thanks. -- Mattinbgn\talk 09:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No bother.  And I've added a note at WP:CRICKET to ask for people to keep their eyes peeled for any changes that may compromise the FA status. The Rambling Man (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 09:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You reckon? At present the sentence about retirement is little better than just adding "OMG Gilly just retired!!!!" as the first line...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.113.165 (talk) 04:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you contributed to the FA status of this article, well done. But the intro is terrible. A complicated recital of the years of debut doesn't fit well early on - better for the article's body. The fact he holds a world record in his primary skill is the last sentence! Why on earth are reprimands included in this section? - this in no way defines him as a cricketer or his contribution to cricket. All in all it is a great article but a lousy lead. I'd suggest a intro like this: line with name, dob, nickname, retired cricket player. Former acting captain, usual VC. Line that details wicketkeeping achievements. Line for batting achievement. ROxBo (talk) 13:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Erick880 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The lead

message: Damn out for 14 today on his retirement  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.170.210 (talk) 06:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damn 

message: Does anybody but CricInfo write about Gilchrist?
To me it seems that this article may have no NPOV.  132 of 158 referances are cricinfo.  Most of these have a point of view.  I suggest we find different referances inorder to help maintain the quality of this article.
Please feel free to offer comments, and suggestions,
Erick880 (talk) 05:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, most are raw scorecards and statistics. These aren't "investigative statistics" that might be deliberately misanalysed, because they just tell us what the official proceedings of the match were. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 05:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, it just looked so weird I cannot think of ever seeing that many of the same source.  But yeah they are mostly just stats.
Erick880 (talk) 13:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  CricInfo 

message: Does this bit really need to be there? I know "some fans" think it was unethical, but "some fans" think a lot of things. Isn't it enough to say it caused controversy but was deemed legal by the ICC?  The "but some fans consider it unethical" sounds tacked on and redundant. It sounds like a "last word" for the ball controversy brigade in an argument that's already been settled70.180.211.21 (talk) 23:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Some fans believe the squash ball was unethical" 

message: The section "2008 Indian Premier League" has some spelling errors and isn't very clear.  I've never edited anything here before so I thought I'd better not touch it.  Most of the talk here seems to be quite old so I thought I'd post this and see what happens.
Jack Stoner (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 IPL 

message: Is Gilly regarded to be Australia's best WK (keeping skills as well as batting ability). His batting is certainly better than Marsh's or Helay's, although both of them were better behind the stumps.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.247.56 (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Cricinfo panel put him in their team I guess and a few other pundit polls probably. On raw glovework I don't think people would could consider him anything more than good/steady. YellowMonkey  (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: comparisons with ian healy, rod marsh

message: I intend/want to expand this. I don't think it is comprehensive YellowMonkey  (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Expanded. Might need more things overlooked, particuarly the legacy and change in playing style. Need some refs and cleanup YellowMonkey  (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comprehensiveness 

message: For info, Gilchrist is on commentary now for the Big Bash League game (Adelaide vs Perth) and he's stated it's NOT him on Twitter, but an imposter. He then went on to talk about the press using the fake Twitter account to print comments posted about Stuart Broad not walking in the 2013 Ashes series. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twitter 

message: His swashbuckling 149 off 104 balls against Sri Lanka in the 2007 World Cup final is rated one of the greatest World Cup innings of all time.
Swashbuckling? In a Featured Article? Hmm....  — Amakuru (talk) 21:50, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am surprised that it contains jargon. Ikhtiar H (talk) 09:25, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopedic tone.... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Adam Gilchrist. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://sport.independent.co.uk/cricket/article2081676.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Adam Gilchrist. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0%2C22049%2C20774424-5006011%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151016212319/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/india/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=1%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/india/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=1%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150927204001/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=2%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=2%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150922073742/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=3%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/australia/engine/records/individual/list_captains.html?class=3%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ecb.co.uk/england/six-ashes-battles%2C961%2CBP.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/272887.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://cricketworldcup.indya.com/event/teams/australia.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C23599%2C21671078-2%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140707031308/http://www.lords.org/fixtures/fixtures-and-tickets/mcc-v-rest-of-the-world-5-july/ to http://www.lords.org/fixtures/fixtures-and-tickets/mcc-v-rest-of-the-world-5-july/
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) 07:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Adam Gilchrist. 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/20170324180255/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/keeping/most_dismissals_career.html?id=12%3Btype%3Dtrophy to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/keeping/most_dismissals_career.html?id=12%3Btype%3Dtrophy
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) 20:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Adam Gilchrist. 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/20050122162912/http://www.cricket-online.com/player.php?player_id=2173 to http://www.cricket-online.com/player.php?player_id=2173
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) 12:42, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Adam Gilchrist. 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/20070206033750/http://www.adamgilchrist.com/Scholarship/GeneralOverview.aspx to http://www.adamgilchrist.com/Scholarship/GeneralOverview.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130304134110/http://www.adamgilchrist.net/biography.php to http://www.adamgilchrist.net/biography.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070305223806/http://cricketworldcup.indya.com/event/teams/australia.htm to http://cricketworldcup.indya.com/event/teams/australia.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.cricketcountry.com/cricket-articles/IPL-2012-Kings-XI-Punjab-captain-Adam-Gilchrist-hints-at-retirement/14804
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110730100524/http://www.titansofcricket.com/ to http://www.titansofcricket.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070316140021/http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TEST_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html to http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TEST_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040617142735/http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/ODIS/FIELDING/ODI_FIELD_MOST_DISMISS.html to http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/ODIS/FIELDING/ODI_FIELD_MOST_DISMISS.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091207165130/http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/breaches-and-penalties.php?year=2006 to http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/breaches-and-penalties.php?year=2006
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070128111834/http://www.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TRIVIA/BAT_MOST_SIXES_CAREER.html to http://www.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TRIVIA/BAT_MOST_SIXES_CAREER.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070424004421/http://www.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/ODIS/BATTING/ODI_BAT_FASTEST_100S.html to http://www.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/ODIS/BATTING/ODI_BAT_FASTEST_100S.html
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) 10:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Adam Gilchrist. 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/20070228131154/http://www.ecb.co.uk/england/six-ashes-battles%2C961%2CBP.html to http://www.ecb.co.uk/england/six-ashes-battles,961,BP.html
*Added  tag to http://www.worldvision.com.au/media/mediarelease.asp?id=310
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130424230933/http://australiaday.org.au/corporate/about-us/national-australia-day-council.aspx to http://www.australiaday.org.au/corporate/about-us/national-australia-day-council.aspx
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) 06:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've removed this claim - it's astonishing how long it's remained here. I've read the book, and this claim appears neither on the allegedly cited pages, nor anywhere else in it. Additionally, Gilchrist debunked this claim as a myth to a journalist as "someone taking the piss".https://twitter.com/workmanalice/status/702326574465417217FirefoxLSD (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax Claims regarding Karl Marx 

message: I have added a couple of tags. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:30, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  More citations needed 

message: I think that this article has many problems that compromise its status as a featured article.
Pinging  and , who are the two most active editors to this article who still contribute.
Notes as of this revision:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adam_Gilchrist&oldid=899933943
#Reference 1 (Hindustan Times) is incomplete.
#Reference 5 (Goodreads) is not needed; it just verifies that his own book exists and seems like a circular ref.
#"Early one-day season" needs a copy-edit, as several sentences in a row all begin with "Gilchrist".
#"Test Debut" and "2001 Ashes" have several one-sentence paragraphs that could stand to be combined.
# tag in "Indian Premier League" section.
#"Middlesex" section seems short and could use expansion/combination.
#"Achievements" section seems like WP:TRIVIA with all the bullet point lists, especially "World Cup Records" which seems like pure PR puffery.
If none of my concerns are addressed, I will send this to WP:FAR. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:04, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: These look like trivial issues.  When I get some time, I'll take a look.  No need for FAR. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  My main concern is prose. There's a lot of "In year, blah blah blah happened." which tends to happen when older articles are added onto. A lot of parts definitely need copy editing to flow better. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a problem. Dweller and I are both experts.  Just need to find the time.  No need to rush to FAR. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

text: I'll move the IPL and Middlesex sections to where they belong in the article as a starter and might even get round to some minor tidying up at some point. I agree that there's no great rush to do the hard lifting here. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done bits of this, but it'll need looking at properly and I don't use cite templates, so the refs I've added will need changing format. I'm not convinced of the order of stuff btw, but I'll leave it to you chaps to sort out. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:09, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article? 

message: The article uses a "Books" section after the "References" section and I haven't noticed running across this before. Is this an alternate for a "Further reading" section? If so is it used on many articles? --  Otr500 (talk) 12:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books section