Talk:List of cricketers who were knighted

message: I've removed two names who clearly weren't knighted for services to cricket (C. Aubrey Smith and Learie Constantine).  To be fair, Constantine probably only became prominent enough to do the work for which he was knighted due to his cricketing fame.  I think some other entries are questionable on these grounds.--Brownlee 14:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that "Vizianagram, The Maharajkumar of (Sir Gajapatiraj Vijaya Ananda)" and Conrad Hunte may be among the dubious ones. JH 16:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Good question.  He never played cricket at any serious level (though he was a professional school coach), but clearly his knighthood was for cricket-related activities.--Brownlee 13:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the sentence that introduces the article should be amended from "A list of cricketers to have been knighted for their contribution to the sport of cricket" to "A list of those who have been knighted for their contribution to the sport of cricket". That would also make Frederick Toone fit better. I don't suppose that anything can be done about the article's title, though. JH 18:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: That may have been a factor. He seems to have been knighted by the Barbados government for his cricket development work in his native Barbados and in South Africa, rather than for his playing career. JH (talk page) 14:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I hadn't seen the above before I asked a related question here.  I'd welcome any comments (there).  --  JackofOz (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasons for knighthood

message: I’ve added Edward Chandos Leigh, whose name I discovered in the Cricketing knights category.  He did various other things, and it’s a fair bet his knighthood citation mentioned some extra-cricket activities, and very possibly no mention of cricket at all.  He got a KCB, considered a rather high honour, where most cricketers get Knight bachelor.  The only exceptions I’ve found are all West Indians (Viv Richards KNH, Walcott KA, Weekes KCMG).  It may be that he comes out of both the list and the category when we find some more info about his knighthood, but he’s there for now.  --  JackofOz (talk) 05:37, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Having just read his article and one or two of its references, it looks unlikely to me that he received his knighthood for services to cricket. The entry in Barclay's World of Cricket for Francis Lacey says that his knighthood in 1926 was the first awrded for services to cricket. (There's no entry for Leigh). I'm therefore takking the liberty of removing his entry (but by all means add a footnote about him if you want to). JH (talk page) 10:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine.  I've also removed him from :Category:Cricketing knights.  We can reinstate him to both places if we find evidence of a cricket-related knighthood.  --  JackofOz (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Edward Chandos Leigh

message: We're currently showing each subject's years of birth and death.   Is there any value in that, given that a click on their link provides the precise dates and lots more detailed information about each person?
What I'd prefer to see on this page instead is the year of their knighthood.  That's much more relevant information for this page.  Comments?  --  Jack of Oz  ... speak! ...  09:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. JH (talk page) 17:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Year of knighthood, not vital dates

message: I think elements of both articles should be kept in the page, with perhaps two separate lists with those who were knighted for services to cricket (including non-Test players, administrators, coaches, etc.) and another section for those who were knighted for reasons other than for their esrvices to the game (eg. C. Aubrey Smith). I apologise for changing the page without any warning, and the page name probably does suit more, but I think elements of both lists can be kept in. Bozzio (talk) 10:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. I'd be happy with your suggestion of two lists within this article. Some of those knighted other than for services to cricket are already mentioned in footnotes to the main list, so that would provide a start for a separate section. By the way, if I'm right in guessing that you might be new to Wikipedia, then welcome. Perhaps you'd be interested in joining the Wikipedia cricket project, which is attempting to expand and improve the coverage of cricket. See WP:CRIC. JH (talk page) 19:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: Knight Bachelors have NO postnominal.  But if it's considered appropriate in some context to show exactly what sort of knighthood they had, the usual convention is to use "Kt".  Not "KT", because that means Knight of the Order of the Thistle.  And certainly not "KB", which seems to have been just made up.  It's too easily confused with KBE or KCB.  It must go; what, if anything, should replace it is a matter for discussion.
Also, what's with 65% of the article being bolded?  It's over the top, unnecessary, and ugly.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the style of the list of cricketers who were knighted; I took the style of the page List of current members of the Order of the Garter. I think it is visually better now. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 10:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: KB for Knight Bachelor

message: Just thought it is worth noting that both, Richie Richardson and Andy Roberts were knighted alongside Curtly Ambrose and that it should be mentioned here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.14.198 (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It is mentioned. JH (talk page) 16:37, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:   Richie Richardson and Andy Roberts