Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/Archive 19

message: I've been thinking a bit about the cricket categories. First, let me say that I think our categories are basically very good. Nevertheless, there are a few changes I would like to make. All of these have come up before, so won't be new to long-standing members of the project. But the discussion has usually petered out in typical Wikipedia fashion, so I wonder if this time we can reach some sort of consensus. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool.  Thanks.  Guettarda 13:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: *My understanding was that you couldn't do that unless the category had been empty for several days, to avoid someone emptying the category and immediately speedying it. But maybe I'm too much of a stickler for process. Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: * Yes, it probably should (certainly "one-day", I don't much care whether it includes "cricket" or not). There was another category with "One day" instead of "One-day" too: I think it was :Category:One day cricket. Also lots of "first class" (as well as some "first-class"). I just haven't got round to listing them all yet. Feel free to do it if you want to... Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cricket categories 

message: ... and similarly for all other countries, and ODIs as well as Tests. Generally, articles should not be in both a parent category and a child category. Although it's not completely clear-cut (see Wikipedia:Categorization/Categories_and_subcategories for guidelines), I think in this case we should follow the normal rule. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No-one should be in both [[:Category:English cricketers]] and [[:Category:English Test cricketers]] 

message: The categories such as :Category:English batsmen suffer from a fatal flaw: there is often no consensus which category a player belongs in. All bowlers are required to bat sometimes, and lots of batsmen also bowl a bit. There is therefore no clear division between batsmen and all-rounders, or between all-rounders and bowlers. The consequence is that many (most?) players don't use the "skill" categories at all. In addition, some all-rounders are listed as batsmen and bowlers too, and some just as all-rounders. I would do away with the whole lot.
The only question is whether wicket-keepers should stay. These don't suffer from the same problem, because it's much more certain whether a player is a wicket-keeper or not.
Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete categories by skill 

message: This is the most controversial, because it survived two votes for deletion in the first half of 2005 (see Category talk:Cricket subcategories and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket/archive2#Category:Cricket subcategories if you want to read all the arguments). But it's always annoyed me. It seems to me that its only purpose is for people who are too lazy to browse the category tree properly, and it messes up the Category: namespace. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool.  Thanks.  Guettarda 13:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete [[:Category:Cricket subcategories]] 

message: I found two categories which duplicate other categories, and I've put them up for deletion. They should be uncontroversial, but feel free to come along and support/object:
*One day international cricket
*Tasmanian cricketers
Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *My understanding was that you couldn't do that unless the category had been empty for several days, to avoid someone emptying the category and immediately speedying it. But maybe I'm too much of a stickler for process. Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate categories for deletion 

message: * The category :Category:One day international records seems a bit odd given the deletion suggestion above - should this be renamed :Category:One-day international cricket records, for consistency? Sam Vimes 16:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Yes, it probably should (certainly "one-day", I don't much care whether it includes "cricket" or not). There was another category with "One day" instead of "One-day" too: I think it was :Category:One day cricket. Also lots of "first class" (as well as some "first-class"). I just haven't got round to listing them all yet. Feel free to do it if you want to... Stephen Turner (Talk) 16:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming? 

message: I've got plenty of time on my hands at the moment, because I'm lying in bed with shingles. Which you're not meant to get when you're only 35. :-(
Anyway, I'm gradually working my way through little things that bother me... Today, I want to talk about links to the cricket portal from cricket articles. This was already on my list, but has become more pressing because Blnguyen has recently added quite a lot more.
It seems we have no consistency about how to do this. I count several different styles:
# Link at the top of the article, like a dab link. This is the most common style. The links can be:
## Italic and indented1
## Bold italic and indented2
## Bold italic and not indented3 (Blnguyen's style, and the most common, though I think it should be indented)
# Using that little jigsaw thingy:
## At the top of the article4
## Near the top of the article5
## In the References6
## In the External Links7
## In the See Also8
# As a text link in See Also:
## Piped9
## Unpiped10
# From the History of cricket template.11
Some articles have more than one of these.12
Is there a standard for this? Myself, I don't like the dab link. I may be influenced by the fact that I'm not a big fan of portals (yes, I'm probably in the minority on that), but it feels a bit spammy to me. Do we really need to trumpet the portal at the top of the article? I also don't like "overloading" the space used for dab links: it's confusing to use the space for different purposes, and it causes problems when we need a dab link as well.13,14. So that's my least favourite way.
Any other views? Or any citations of a standard?
I'll let Blnguyen know about this discussion.
Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I never realised how many methods there are to link to the portal! Like Stephen, I think the dab link is a bit distracting. Yet it won't serve as much purpose when it is very low down in the article, like in the See also section. I prefer the box in the top right corner where it catches the eye but doesn't make the reader offguard. Perhaps this issue should also be moved to Wikipedia_talk:Portal. Then a standard can be reached about linking towards all portals. GizzaChat © 11:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, maybe a more central place would be best. I'll move this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals, I think. Can we continue the discussion there? Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I asked Ianbrown about why some articles have this or not, and he said () that showcase articles on the portal should link to this portal - I was wondering whether I should spam articles with the portal links to two that I had created, (Portal:Eurovision and Portal:Swimming) because it could possibly considered bad form wrt vanispamcruftadvertising portals which I had created. So I proceeeded to advertise the portal on the showcase articles. I'm fine with whatever is decided - formatting, obtrusiveness, etc. ßlηguγɛη | Have your say!!! 01:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to cricket portal 

message: I've made the suggestion that the article Orange Free State cricket team be merged with Eagles cricket team. What do you guys reckon? QazPlm 23:47, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because they're two separate teams. Orange Free State still play as Free State in the second tier of the South African domestic circuit. Andrew nixon 10:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on the response, I've removed the merge notice. QazPlm 15:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I've noticed that Rahul Dravid and Gautam Gambhir are listed under this category. As far as I can tell, they were born in Madhya Pradesh and Delhi respectively, and are not based in Mumbai or Maharashtra for any cricketing purposes. So what is the basis for classifying them as such??ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 06:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea, remove them from the category. Both play for Karnataka cricket team and Delhi cricket team respectively. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 08:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nichalp says that Dravid is there on account of ancestry. Won't this create big problems, when people start "claiming" their favourite people as being of "their" ancestryand squabbling over classification. Would Kevin Pietersen by in :Category:Dutch people, or Michael Kasprowicz by :Category:Polish people?ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 08:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. Have you told Nichalp? We all know that there are no aborigines in the Australian cricket team, so does that mean that all of the players should be categorized based on what country their ancestors came from? We can't go back into ancestry or people will start categorizing other people as all sorts of different things. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 08:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replied on the Indian topics noticeboard, where I also posted it. Generally I think ethnicity is often only pointed out in the case of Indigenous people, of which Jason Gillespie is. Categorizing Monty Panesar and the like as :Category:British Asians is clearcut at the moment, but what happens in 400 years time when somebody in England is categorized as such because they are called "Singh" but may have ancestors from many different non-Indian groups?ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 08:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All in all, my view is that nationality should be based on where you were born or at most where their parents were born (or where the person in particular has spent their life in). Nothing more, nothing less. By the way, your username comes up all white for me at times, at other times it comes up as white with blue highlighting, is this intentional? Nobleeagle  (Talk) 08:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I hadn't noticed for so long, it is a blue rectangle with white writing in greek letters.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 05:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Maharastrian people]] 

message: Can someone who know the subject please confirm if  and  are correct. I have heard that Barnes could break both ways, but don't know if he was predominantly a leg break bowler. Tintin (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He bowled leg breaks, but he wasn't a leg spinner as the term is understood, in the Warne-Benaud-Hollies?-O'Reilly mould.  He bowled fast, with seam, swing, cut and spin at various times.  But it isn't accurate to put him with leg-spinners; he fits far better with fast-medium bowlers. Sam Korn (smoddy) 19:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a good description here at Cricinfo, which describes him as a "right-arm fast-medium bowler" who bowled a leg break as his stock delivery at a pace similar to Alec Bedser, who we call a fast bowler, although Barnes apparently described himself as a spin bowler. -- ALoan (Talk) 20:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sydney Barnes]] 

message: This is the only thing that the Indian cricket team article needs before we put it up for peer review. But I find the task a little intimidating. At least to begin with, if someone could lay the building blocks, take the first step, and add a couple of generalized paragraphs. It would be good. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 07:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[History of the Indian cricket team]] 

message: FYI, he who was User:Ianbrown now trades as User:I@n -- I@n ≡ talk 15:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My username

message: Guys,
The edit history for Ronnie Irani is very interesting. (We really should notice things like that!)
Stephen Turner (Talk) 12:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ronnie Irani 

message: People might like to put Mahendra Singh Dhoni on their watchlists. It's OK at the moment, but it's attracting a lot of ... enthusiasts. Stephen Turner (Talk) 20:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mahendra Singh Dhoni]] 

message: There's a discussion going on at WikiProject AFL about how to name season articles - should the year be at the start or end of the article title.  Has this issue previously been discussed here? -- I@n ≡ talk 05:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll vote start, such as 2003 Cricket World Cup. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 05:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Start as I said in the AFL discussion but there should be redirects for the end. GizzaChat © 05:46, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I have a feeling we have and it's in the archives somewhere, but I haven't got time to hunt for it now. Stephen Turner (Talk) 08:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found something. Here's the link. That discussion also talks about whether "-" or "/" should be used in season dates. GizzaChat © 12:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Season article titles

message: Finally I'm back! I'm sure some of you thought I had quit completing the list midway & gone, but here I am, back in business! I was on a wikibreak & could not even think about adding new articles. But now I probably will try & complete the ODI Bios list in the "near future" (ambiguity intended!). Any expansion/improvements to the created articles will be much appreciated.
Cheers & belated Happy Easter to all
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 18:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed ODI Bios of East Africa! 

message: I'm a bit confused by this.  Why shouldn't we sort these by last name? - brenneman{L}  08:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See long discussion here. But in short, the first name is the family name, and the second name is the person's given name. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category sorting 

message: Can someone check the problem in International_Cricket_Council. The image seems to be okay but it is not displayed properly. Tintin (talk) 03:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Something to do with the power failure last night/this morning. Wikimedia was down for a few hours and when it came back on, all the images were doing that. I'd imagine it'll fix itself soon. AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 03:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ICC logo 

message: Portal:Cricket has been proposed for demotion from featured portal status at WP:FPRC. Stephen Turner (Talk) 06:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with updating the news section, but I would like someone to put the box in its place first, because I don't want to make the layout go bad.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 06:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And that's part of the problem.  Unfortunately the cricket portal was one of the first portals built and done before Wikipedia:Portal#How_to_create_a_portal was setup.  New portals built with the portal skeleton are much easier to maintain (each box as a separate subpage with their own edit link). Rebuilding the prtal with the skeleton would be a nice project for a clever person :) . I'm not confident enough to add a box either.  -- I@n ≡ talk 09:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fetured portal removal candidate 

message: I added a couple of extra points:
* The first two words are hyphenated in first-class cricket, one-day cricket and One-day International; the "One" and "International" in One-day International are capitalised, the "day" is not. 
* Tournaments are named with the year first, so 2007 Cricket World Cup not Cricket World Cup 2007; cricket tours are named "[visiting team] in [host nation] in [cricket season]": for example, New Zealand cricket team in Zimbabwe in 2005-06 
I hope these are not controversial, but let me know if anyone objects. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I dislike "One-day International": I prefer "one-day international". But maybe I'm weird. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm - just noticed that the ICC seem to prefer "One-Day International".  I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other, but we should be consistent. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ALoan, I agree with the two new sections. Well done. -- I@n ≡ talk 14:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cricket article style guide

message: Just to inform the Project that Indian Cricket Team is a Good Article Candidate. If someone can prove they are impartial and they have not made significant contributions to the article then I guess you can review the article. It's been on the list for a couple of weeks now without any comments. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 00:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Indian cricket team]] [[WP:GAC|Good Article Candidate]]

message: I was just going through some NHL player bios & noticed that many of them have name pronounciations. I think this will be extremely useful for cricket articles (especially for bios for the subcontinental players like Laxman Sivaramakrishnan). I just spent my whole afternoon recording the names of the entire List of Indian Cricketers & I'm proud to say that I have recorded all 294 of them! I tried uploading them right now but the Wikipedia servers are busy so I'll try again in a couple of hours. I have uploaded audio for a few articles like Ajit Agarkar. Please review it & tell me what you think.
Thanks
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 15:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went through the first few. You are adding it faster than I can check ! A couple of comments : (a) I think Bharat Arun should be pronounced Bhaarath Arun (as in the name of the country, not the mythologocial character) (b) Apte could be 'Aapthay' rather than 'Aaptay'. Please get a second opinion on both. Tintin (talk) 16:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for taking the time to go through the articles. Yes the suggestions you have given can be correct. I added Bharat instead of Bhaarat as Bharat is a more common name than Bhaarat. As for Apte, which is a Marathi surname, I asked my mom who knows Marathi & she said that Aptay is more commonly used. Anyway due to there being umpteen ways of saying a person's name in India(I bet many people have had & will have trouble saying my name too!), only Bharat Arun & Arvind Apte will know how exactly to pronounce their name! I request anyone finding any mis-pronounciation in the names I have added to report it to me as Tintin has. Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 18:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work, but the person's name should be kept in bold, not wikified with the audio file. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I have followed the example of an NHL player Peter Forsberg. But what is the problem in wikifying the name (it remains bold, it's only wikified). Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 19:21, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a discussion on the  talk page about whether or not to wikilink the name. --Muchness 19:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: A big Thank you to Muchness for stopping me from creating a huge mess with the title of the cricket bios (although I have created a small mess!). Anyway now I'll follow the recommended style on the template talk page. But after that I've got to do some serious clean-up of the articles I've already added the pronunciations to. *Banging forehead on PC monitor* !  Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 19:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Uploaded new file. Let me know if anything else is wrong. Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 17:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better. Thanks. Tintin (talk) 02:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name pronounciation 

message: This category now has only has only 2 subcategories :Category:Cricket captains and :Category:Wicket-keepers.  Captains is not really a skill (but was probably the logical place to have it when we had all-rounders, batsmen, bowlers etc) and "skils" is a bit of a misnomer anyway.  Propose to move both of them as sub-cats of :Category:Cricketers and remove :Category:Cricketers by skill which will simplify the category tree a bit more. Thoughts? -- I@n ≡ talk 08:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine by me. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done -- I@n ≡ talk 10:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Cricketers by skill]]

message: Whew! That's all I can say! 294 bios in all finally recorded, uploaded & linked. I've got a sore throat & aching wrist (constant mouse clicking!) but atleast the joy of having completed the job I started (I'm notoriously bad at that!). Anyway I request all Indian members to please look these up & tell me if something's wrong (Thanks Tintin for already doing so).
Cheers
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉)''
:Ok. I went through some 100 odd files. (Others like Ghulam Ahmed or Ajit Pai don't need a review !).
:There is one error. The first name of  is Pochiah - the error happened because the title of the page was also incorrect. I also have a comment that it may have been better to use the initials where the player is known by them (CK Nayudu, ML Jaisimha, CD Gopinath etc). For most of the audio files, though, I am not qualified to give an opinion (like whether it is Veng-sarkaar or Veng-saarkar) Tintin (talk) 05:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now changed the sound file to . I hope that is better. As for using initials in pronunciation for players popularly known by them, I thought anyone can spell out the initials of a person but it would be a help if the the name, the initials stood for, would be spelt out. As for everyone else (like Vengsarkar) I too am not qualified, so we can change it if anyone who is absolutely sure says that the pronunciation is different. Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 23:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. That's fine. Tintin (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed Name pronunciations for Indian Cricket bios! 

message: Well sort of... In this article about Kallis the consistent batsman they link their article to ours concerning Standard Deviation. It was time our most valuable cricket source trusted us! GizzaChat © 12:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I thought they mentioned one of the cricket articles :-( Tintin (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they would mention any of the info on the cricket articles since half of it is thanks to them. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 04:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a post to the mailing list about Cricinfo using (and crediting :-)) Wikipedia info.--Commander Keane 16:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We got a mention from Cricinfo! 

message: The Inzamam-ul-Haq article has just been added with a section called "Humour". This section, although written & wikified relatively well, violates NPOV & is uncited. Certain statements though if cited probably can be added like the statement about his tiff with a spectator.
Thanks
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 00:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should be making fun of him on Wikipedia, an encyclopaedia. Perhaps it would be better to create a controversy section and then talk about the incident. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 04:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am removing the section. The first paragraph and most of the second has no place in an encyclopaedia. Tintin (talk) 04:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Someone has re-added the section. --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 23:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Give the anon that keeps re-adding it a day or two to try and make the section better, if it doesn't look better in a couple of days then remove it again. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 01:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inzy 

message: All of the Ranji Trophy teams now have articles. I kind of left my work half-done and today came and remembered, so I finished the rest. The best examples at the moment would be Mumbai cricket team and Baroda cricket team (which are still not that good). The Famous Players sections need a lot of filling in, because barely 20 players have so far got their names associated to their respective domestic circuit teams. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 01:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work. But isn't Kerala cricket team left? --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 09:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kerala and Jammu and Kashmir cricket team are the only two remaining. GizzaChat © 10:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, didn't notice them seeing they weren't on the To-Do list, I'll do them today. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 23:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 01:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Ranji Trophy]] teams

message: Charles Matthews writes in a post to WikiEn-l:
A quibble I have is that you find things like Viv Richards introduced as 'West Indian cricketer'.  Well, he is; but he is Antiguan by nationality. He played for the West Indies team; and I suppose if you go back to the time of the British West Indies then there is some further discussion to be had.
Is this something that we want to look at? Viv Richards's Antiguan nationality is implicit from the article (we have 'born St John's, Antigua on 7 March 1952') but not explicitly stated. -- Nick Boalch 09:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationalities of West Indian cricketers 

message: I noticed it because Loganberry fixed it in a page - Cricketarchive has changed the naming format of their scorecard pages. Previously the links for different classes were in different directories, now they seem to have been integrated. So links like http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/f/1/f1739.html have become dead and been changed to http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/2/2043.html . We'll have fix them as we find them. Tintin (talk) 05:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cricketarchive 

message: Finally I got the motivation back to complete this list once & for all! Most probably by tommorow I will complete the remaining bios of Pakistan & Zimbabwe.
Cheers
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 17:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed ODI Bios of Sri Lanka! 

message: http://www.abc.net.au/cricket/ashes/2005/about.htm
I@n ≡ talk 02:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another link to Wikipedia

message: Is it just me or do the recent anon additions to Ntini's article smell like some kind of copyvio text dump. We could use it I guess, if it was rephrased, with the magazine style NPOV-ed out.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 06:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, well spotted. It was from two places. I've reverted it. Stephen Turner (Talk) 07:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Makhaya Ntini]]