Talk:Bob Woolmer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nvramsub (talk | contribs) at 10:34, 21 March 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:CWC Advert

WikiProject iconBiography: Sports and Games Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the sports and games work group.
WikiProject iconCricket Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Cricket To-do list:
Article assessment
Verifiability
Cleanup
Infoboxes
Cricket people
Cricket teams & countries
Images
On this day in cricket
Umpires
Women
Update
Other

Removed passage

I removed the following contribution because I felt it was unsourced and a bit non-NPOV:

Woolmer currently enjoys success with the Pakistan team as the team is very close to be placed 2nd on ICC's ranking.
Woolmer is appreciated by the Pakistani team especially for introducing new techniques.
Under is coaching, Pakistan team enjoys unity, confidence and ultimately better results.

However, it would be useful to acknowledge the success Pakistan have had recently in a factual way. For example, a comparison of Pakistan's results under Woolmer and in the immediately preceding years would be useful, if anyone can make one. But it has to be based on verifiable fact, not just opinions!

Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Death

umm--who updated his deth? i mean at was pretty fast--i found out on Saturday--3:00.--its sad he died. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.72.145.13 (talkcontribs) 19:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I found an obituary at BBC for reference: [1] Shenme 21:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I learned about Bob's passing from Wiki - well before it appeared on any news wires I think! PaddyBriggs 09:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Links

In the section " Early Career" there reads a passage "He was a Felatio man of the year in 1976," and the link goes to a site on the sexual activity of 'felatio' is that intended?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.59.110.226 (talkcontribs) 14:09, March 19, 2007 (UTC)

Page protection

This page has been protected with no explanation given in the discussion page. That's bad WP etiquette at best, and breach of protocol at worst. I'm not surprised it's been done - pages of recently deceased persons are often locked for a period while the initial 'frenzy' passes - but editors should leave a note/comment in the discussion page re: protection, rather than appear to arbitrarily swoop in and lock pages. - 82.153.142.82 22:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The note in the page history was:
22:22, 18 March 2007 Derek Ross (Talk | contribs) m (Protected Bob Woolmer: recently deceased person [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] (expires 22:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)))
I believe someone brought a mention of unsubstantiated assertions being added to the article one of the WP:AN pages... ah, here it is WP:AN#Bob_Woolmer. If it was done hurriedly, I think you can imagine why. Maybe you could make your concerns known there? Shenme 07:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There were several unsourced statements added that had the potential of seriously upsetting Bob's friends and family and bringing wikipedia into disrepute. Semiprotection is a reasonable step that will probably be removed once all the facts are out and there is no more room for speculation. --Spartaz Humbug! 10:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is little merit and a lot of demerit in reporting speculation - even if that speculation is in the public domain in some media. PaddyBriggs 14:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a blog. Statements in articles must be verifiable. Flyguy649talkcontribs 14:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of humour in this time

Sometimes you just have to laugh at the vandals Wikipedia:May the Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense Be With You#From Bob Woolmer Nil Einne 18:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manner of Death

I took out reference to the blood and vomit. I think its a bit tasteless and not encyclopedic - even if sourced. --Spartaz Humbug! 19:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is tastlessness really a determining factor in whether a fact is encyclopedic? The presence or absence of blood and vomit at eh scene of a so-far unexplained death can be newsworthy. They at least point to a medical issue (as opposed to, say, a violent assault).

Yes. IMO. The relevant facts are that he died, that he was ill and we still don't know what he died of but that once its reliably reported we will include it. I just think we should avoid sensationalising the death until/unless more detail is released. --Spartaz Humbug! 20:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, leave it out. Newsworthy ≠ Encyclopaedic. —Moondyne 01:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I personally still feel it is encyclopaedic and not sensationalising it. It's no different IMHO from reporting that he was diabetic or that his family thought it was a heart attack due to stress. But I'm not going to fight over it Nil Einne 12:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Jamaican police are treating the death as suspicious after the autopsy but the reported statement on the BBC doesn't mentio murder ot marks on the neck. The BBC news report swimply said that they are awaiting toxicology reports before announcing the cause. I'm inclined to keep the article at this until there is a formal announcement of the cause of death. Spartaz Humbug! 06:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to ball-tampering section

I have condensed the section on ball tampering. I have removed the quotes, which aren't really necessary or desired in an encyclopedic article, and tried to distill the meaning into a couple of phrases. Much of the first two paragraphs was repetative, and the long paragraph with quotes was mostly related to the then-upcoming 20twenty match. Here's the diff. Flyguy649talkcontribs 04:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support the changes. Good work. PaddyBriggs 08:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armbands etc

I added the thing on armbands etc based on the reference. But it appears that a minutes silence and black armbands are being worn in the NZ-Kenya game today as well. Don't have a reference unfortunately Nil Einne 14:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Informative article

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/19/sports/cricket.php —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.93.76.8 (talk) 07:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC). By his own addmission he is one of few to have seen Hanif Mohammed score 499 for Karachi and Brian Lara scores 501* to break Hanif's record.[reply]

Factual Error

In the last paragraph talking about the death, it is said:

On Wednesday 21 March 2007, following an inconclusive autopsy, the Jamaican Police

It should be 20 March, because, the news of suspicion came hours before Jamaica went into 21st March, but Asia was already in 21st March.