Talk:2005 Ashes series

message: All of the basic foundations for match summaries for the last three Tests have been completed. Simply plug in data and you're all set and ready to go...hope you don't mind.
:Referee appointments have been added for the Third, Fourth and Final Tests straight off the ICC website. It is accurate as of 7:04 AM Mountain Daylight Time, Sunday, August 7, 2005.
::Cheers, anonymous IP address. ;) Sam Vimes 16:17, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Upcoming match layout

message: I have noticed that match summaries are duplicated on this article and at a specific test match artcile (eg England v Australia 21-25 July 2005).  Which one will be deleted eventually? --Commander Keane 14:53, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
:Probably the England v Australia 21-25 July 2005 one. That's the plan, anyway. Sam Vimes 14:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate match summaries 

message: Erm, the article states baldly that the ball which dismissed Geraint Jones "kept low". No doubt this is his POV, however we should give some consideration to the possibility that he just misread the length and it was too quick for him. Perhaps it would be better to say "decisively bowled when he played a rapid Tait delivery as if it had kept low". --DominicSayers 14:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and edit it, then :) Sam Vimes 14:44, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fifth Test POV 

message: I have removed the main section header for "Matches", since there are no longer two major sections to the page...it is just for a bit of a touchup to this page. --J L C Leung 22:08, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main headers 

message: OK, there are a lot of name issues being discussed. Sticking to main question, I'd like to take a straw poll so I can figure out which name will have the most support for Wikipedia:requested moves. Please vote for your favorite option below. Doops |  talk 00:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote?

message: Shouldn't most of the references to 'English' and 'Australian' actually be to 'England' and 'Australia'? You would say "the England cricket team", not "the English cricket team" and "the England coach" not "the English coach", and the "the England bowlers" not "the English bowlers". There are many examples of this throughout the article. I would change them, but there are a lot of changes to make, so I thought I'd check here first. Carcharoth 02:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Decisively yes.  "The English coach" could, in fact, refer to any coach who hailed from England.  Please edit away!  smoddy 22:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed the text of this page, and the text for the First Test. Not had time to do the other four Tests. Can someone else do this, please? Carcharoth 23:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  England/English and Australia/Australian 

message: Please see the "name, revisited" § above for discussion on the new name. Doops |  talk 17:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Page moved per request. Ryan Norton T | @ | C 12:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discision

message: I could take some screencaps from the Ashes DVD. I don't entirely understand the fair-use rules, but I believe this would be OK? HornetMike 16:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't think it would. Screencaps are only permitted to illustrate "the work in question", and I think that could be rigidly interpreted as the actual Ashes DVD, not the Ashes series itself. Strict rules, but understandable, since people want to protect their copyright. Sam Vimes 09:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos

message: Not wishing to create any Anglo-Australian tension here but I think the assertation that Billy Bowden's decision to give Kasprowicz out was 'incorrect' is a little misleading. It's harsh on Bowden - it looked out to me and I'm sure it did to everyone watching - and TV replays have been inconclusive. Ericatom 00:45, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rephrased it a bit - it's a fact that BBC reported is as "the dismissal should not have been given", though, so I think it's best to mention that even though it wasn't exactly what was on everyone's mind. Sam Vimes 09:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last wicket at Edgbaston 

message: This is the first time I have ever heard anyone refer to this series as "Gilo's Ashes".  I think the statement referring to this series as such should be removed. If anything, the series will be remembered as "Freddie's Ashes".Robruss24 10:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Gilos Ashes'? 

message: Just as a matter of interest, if Australia win the Ashes in 2006/2007 (and we will) should our team also receive MBEs and OBEs as the English team did (She's our Queen, too)? Are they going to make a practice of it? And were they only given to the English team anyway as an overreaction to an undoubtably excited England? Apterygial 05:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the Australian cricket team should receive MBEs and OBEs though, you were favourites to beat us! I'm sorry, but the England team didn't get MBEs and OBEs because of an 'overreaction to an undoubtably excited England'. They got them because they beat all odds, and worked incredibly hard, to beat an incredibly good Australia. This last Ashes series, Australia breezed through an underperforming England. Of course, if you do get them, you'll have to wait until the end of the year. So I agree with the handing out of MBEs and OBEs. That doesn't explain why she didn't give MBEs and OBEs to every Liverpool F.C. player after they (against all odds and 3-0 behind at half-time), won the UEFA Champions League
On a topic related to the main article, can anyone change the thing that says Michael Clarke (cricketer), to just Michael Clarke? Cream147 Shout at me for doing wrong 08:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MBEs and OBEs 

message: Unfortunately, this article is not ready for GA status at this time. Referencing is a major problem. Entire sections lack references, and many quotations (including those from world leaders such as Tony Blair) lack sources. Aside from the referencing, a few other problems come to mind:
#It is full of jargon. A few examples: "16-ball duck", "four-hour unbeaten knock", "went into the tea break on 72", "Marcus Trescothick and Andrew Strauss made hay".
#Some of the writing is point of view: "leaving Australia perilously placed at 175 for 9", "the third, which dismissed Damien Martyn lbw, was a poor decision", "(Ironically, Jones learned most of his cricket Down Under!)", "Strauss was freakishly dismissed for 35".
#Reference 29 doesn't work.
#References are not formatted consistently.
#Copyediting is needed. Some writing errors (eg. ending sentences without punctuation) should have been caught before the nomination.
This article needs quite a bit of work before it is ready, so I am going to fail it. I believe that it needs copyediting and thorough referencing before it is renominated. Having someone from outside of the cricket wikiproject look over it would also be a good idea, as I don't believe that this article is accessible to many readers without a thorough knowledge of the sport. The League of Copyeditors might be your best bet. I also see that the last peer review was in 2005, so a new one might help identify some issues that should be addressed. Please get in touch if you have any questions about this review. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Fail

message: I've removed the note that suggests that Michael Kasprowicz was not out since it hit his hand for two reasons. First, because there is contrary evidence from other sources which interpret the wicket was justified. Second, because if you set this precedent then we can go through all dismissals - all of which are vital, when considered carefully - and interrogate their plausability, using different interpretations as evidence. Here, it sounds like the editor was unhappy with the result, a condition which the umpire is more or less immune to. Third, such ambiguity did not represent the spirit of the game, nor its commentary - it was felt a fair decision, as I remember --81.155.117.79 (talk) 19:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion of "evidence" to suggest Michael Kasprowicz was not out on the final day

message: There are a number of references in this article to comments (mostly opinions, not facts) made by Cricinfo commentators. Why are their opinions considered relevant? If they are, then shouldn't we also be referencing comments made by TV commentators on Sky? Or the BBC.com commentators? I can only understand referencing cricinfo for statistical data.
Examples of comments in the main body are:
Harmison, coming back for a second spell, was wicketless in his first two overs but after drinks he took 2.2–0–7–4 as Australia were all out for 190. He finished with five for 43, and was commended for his control of length by Cricinfo journalists S Rajesh and Arun Gopalakrishnan.
They started positively, riding their luck and good favour with the umpires; Aleem Dar turned down four leg before wicket (LBW) appeals off Shane Warne, though the Cricinfo commentator only claimed that one of them should have been given.
Australia had to field Michael Kasprowicz as replacement, and Cricinfo correspondent Will Luke claimed that "Australia ha[d] missed him" after the first day's play.
The quick scoring and the first Test result led commentators such as Cricinfo's UK editor Andrew Miller to believe that England's total "might have been 550 and more with a bit of top-order application".
UnwedUnfed (talk) 19:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. You might as well quote the opinion of some guy in the crowd.  BlackJack | talk page 06:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cricinfo references 

message: I added Flintoff's comment (as recounted by Lee) and it got reverted. This is well-sourced as part of the "story" of the end of the Edgbaston test, and Wikipedia really should include this amusing detail. Thoughts? Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 05:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If Flintoff said it, it was clearly not in the spirit that the recent edit to this article made it out to be. Whoever made the addition made it sound like Flintoff was being vindictive, but that was not the impression given by his body language nor by Lee's reaction. If we are to mention this alleged quote, at least mention it in the same spirit in which it was made. – PeeJay 22:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I made that edit, but I don't know if Flintoff was being "vindictive"; in fact we don't know anything about the tone used (one might guess: self-aware friendly joshing). However, this is something that's been reliably reported so the article needs to include it. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 02:42, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "One-one, you Aussie bastard" 

message: () --Dweller (talk) 20:41, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent source material 

message: Smashing stuff about the second Test here:  --Dweller (talk) 12:30, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source material 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 2005 Ashes series. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20150606084913/http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4431.asp to http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4431.asp
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 13:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2005 Ashes series. 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.foxsports.com.au/story/0%2C8659%2C25581096-5009880%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051217073958/http://live.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005/AUS_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/AUS_ENG_T3_11-15AUG2005.html to http://live.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005/AUS_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/AUS_ENG_T3_11-15AUG2005.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) 12:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified