| Revision as of 12:54, 22 January 2016 editMalcolmxl5 (talk | contribs)Administrators149,177 edits Tidying up. Adding the header and providing link to previous AfD.← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:26, 22 January 2016 edit undoFeminist (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers157,857 edits Placing notification for listing at WP:DELSORT (delsort.js)Next edit → | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
| ] (]) 09:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC) | ] (]) 09:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ]] 14:26, 22 January 2016 (UTC)</small> | |||
Revision as of 14:26, 22 January 2016
Major cricket
AfDs for this article:- Major cricket (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article was previous deleted here, as there is no evidence that the term actually exists outside of Misplaced Pages, rather the claim is made that it is a term invented by editors for their personal convenience. It is undoubtedly OR. This was the clear consensus at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Major_cricket
Discussion here reveals that a significant proportion of editors are aware that the term is "it seems to solve the problem of there being no universal term by "inventing a term that has never really been used or reliably fixed in meaning" and are uncomfortable with it being referenced in cricket articles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Discussion_re_NCRIC_and_CRIN
Since then the supporting author has added several citations, which I will now discuss:
1 and 2 are internal citations only.
3 is not a link, and could say anything: I own a copy of Birley and could not find any use of the term "major cricket" in it at all.
4 does not load
5 loads, but a search of the page reveals no usage of the word "major".
6, 7, and 8 contain no links.
9 does not load
10 refers to "major teams" but not "major cricket". In this case, "major" is of course a perfectly normal adjective that is synonymous with significant, prominent, or important. It is not a stand alone term.
11. is the same as 10. again "major teams" is simply a everyday grammatical construction, not a stand-alone term
12. refers to "major matches" but not major cricket. Again "major" in this sense is synonymous with significant.
13. also refers to major matches
14. refers to major cricket events. Here the major describes the events, not the cricket.
15. refers to major cricket tournaments, Here the word major refers to the tournament, not the cricket.
In summary, none of the citations provide evidence that supports the claim that "major cricket" is a standalone term with a specific meaning. In the majority of cases, the word "cricket" is either not even present, or the common, everyday adjective "major" is describing something else entirely - eg a team, a match or a tournament.
A google of the phrase "major cricket" reveals 63,800 results. In comparison "important cricket" reveals "23,000, "best cricket" reveals 421,000 results and "top cricket" reveals 180,000.
Py0alb (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 14:26, 22 January 2016 (UTC)