Talk:Keith Miller

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Featured topic candidate
Promoted
June 30, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
January 24, 2024Featured topic removal candidateDemoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 28, 2019.
Current status: Delisted good article

Comments

When asked about pressure leading up to a cricket test match he was known to have replied

"Pressure is a Messerschmitt up your ass"


I would add it in, but i do not have a source for it. Great Quotation none the less.

___________________________________

Peter Cox's book Sixty Summers, about English postwar cricket, has the Indian rioter saying to Compton, "You very good man Mr Compton but you must go," in reference to the Indian desire for the British to leave. This would make better sense as the comment that Miller repeated to Compton. - AG, Stockport.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Keith Miller. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@

Early life of Keith Miller into Keith Miller. I do not think there are enough sources independently discussing the early life of this person to justify its own article, and thus I think the early life article should merge into this one. Z1720 (talk) 02:41, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

The main article is 14252 words. Thus, I cannot support adding any content to it. Unlike some editors, I think "early life" articles don't need to be deleted as long as they meet GNG, which seems to be the case here. (t · c) buidhe 14:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think my concern with meeting GNG is that the sources in Early life do not specifically talk about the early life of Keith Miller, but rather his whole biography. I am not sure what is specifically notable about Miller's early life that it warrants its own article. For the concern about length, my opinion is that the early life does not need as much focus as the Early life article gives it and it should be reduced and summarised. Z1720 (talk) 14:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that there's no evidence the early life of Miller is a noteworthy topic in and of itself, which leaves the question of whether or not it should exist an article size issue; 20KB on the unremarkable early life of an otherwise-notable individual seems padded, and at first blush I would definitely say the parent article isn't adequately summarizing content. (This was a perennial issue with excessively detailed cricket articles back in the day, and the problem remains—see the fact that there are already subpages for just this individual in single years of his career.) It should absolutely be merged back here, and this article made less breathless. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I would not object to a BLAR or highly selective merge, provided this article isn't made even longer. (t · c) buidhe 04:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support very selective merge or anything else that removes the Early life article from mainspace. The parent article is in desperate need of trimming as well. Most of the details belong in a fandom wiki, not a general encyclopedia. JoelleJay (talk) 18:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't merge it, delete it This is an absurdity that never should have been created. I'd have AfD'd this long ago had I known of its existence. The Australian cricket obsession has gone way too far. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another one:
    Keith Miller in the 1946–47 Australian cricket season Wracking 💬 06:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment

Keith Miller

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Strong consensus to delist. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the honourable tradition of early-Wikipedia articles on mid-century Australian cricketers, this 2009 listing is detailed to the point of insanity, with exhaustive statistics on pretty much every international match Miller ever played.

This leads to a total word count of 14000+ (not counting quotes, image captions, or tables) and a pretty certain failing of

GA criterion 3b
("it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail").

Relevant non-GA guidelines include

WP:TOOBIG. Shouldn't be that hard for a cricket expert to trim down to a better length. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Noting here that there is a merge proposal on the article's talk page, which involves a featured article. This can quickly get messy, so I suggest that the merge proposal be dealt with first, then this GAR can be discussed. Z1720 (talk) 17:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 17:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the issues with the article are regardless any change from merge. (t · c) buidhe 02:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my god, the Australian cricket obsession went deeper than I thought.
Early life of Keith Miller, really? Regardless, the issues with this article are palpable and I don't think we should put this on hold while waiting for that merge to happen. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I agree with buidhe and TaOT, there's no way this article is going to get better following a merge so the GA reassessment will be needed regardless. Might as well address it now. JoelleJay (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
+1, pinging @Dweller and Z1720: for thoughts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that there is a possibility that the article could get better after a merge, so I would rather evaluate the article for GAR after the merge vote is closed. If editors want to proceed with the GAR now, I'm not too bothered. Z1720 (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This has been open for a month now, and buidhe actioned the proposed merge on June 20th. Has anyone's opinion changed? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't changed mine. Pinging @Dweller, Z1720, Buidhe, and JoelleJay: for their thoughts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The issues with the article have not been resolved. (t · c) buidhe 17:23, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No change. JoelleJay (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At this point I think we're approaching a consensus to delist. I generally refrain from personally closing GARs where I've weighed in with a delist or keep. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: The length of the article has not been addressed yet. Z1720 (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger / Redirect of Cruft Article

There is a consensus to merge (selectively). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I propose merging Keith Miller with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948 into Keith Miller. Its a lot of cruft mostly, with repeated content. Similar articles of the same person have been redirected here. Pinging @Trainsandotherthings @Joseph2302 @JoelleJay as I have seen them commenting on related discussions of this guy. (Apologies if inconvinience) Pharaoh496 (talk) 09:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • While it is a Featured Article, I recall when it was created (as part of a 1948 Invincibles Featured Topic) that it really didn't provide anything new that was already included in Keith Miller. I'm too lazy to check but over the years other Featured Articles in the 1948 Invincibles Topic have also been deleted. So, yes I would be in favour of a merger. --Roisterer (talk) 13:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Everything in that topic except for the actual people and the 5 test matches is baseless; and how that got to fa status is beyond me. Pharaoh496 (talk) 05:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support this. JoelleJay (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fully support a selective merge into the Keith Miller article. Basically only the role section is of any worth. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you kind editors be okay if I keep pinging you on hordes of more such pages which need to go? The Anglo-Australian cricket obsession is worse than Ive thought, with there being atleast 20 fa/gas full of cruft like this
@JoelleJay@Roisterer@Trainsandotherthings Pharaoh496 (talk) 10:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at my past comments, I've called this phenomenon the cricket insanity. It truly is wild just how much cruft people got away with back in the day. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely mergeTheLongTone (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge this isn't 1940s cricket fandom, it's an encyclopedia. And that article isn't encyclopedic and isn't a necessary
    WP:SPLIT, since most of the content is general content about the series, and the important details on that series are already in this article, and can be expanded on when merging. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Keith_Miller&oldid=1220819219"