Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of South Africa women Twenty20 International cricketers/archive1

• Image caption doesn't need a full stop.

• Done: changed as suggested.

• Link over appropriately in the opening sentence.

• Done: changed as suggested.

• "of the leading cricketing " really? why leading? Why not just international teams? (later... I wouldn't personally class Ireland women as a "leading" nation in cricketing terms....)

• Ireland are one of ten women's Test playing nations; look at the Women's European Championship Twenty20 2009 for example, the only one of Ireland's matches considered a T20I is the one against fellow Test nation Netherlands.

• Okay. I see where you're coming from. But perhaps you should be purely factual and say it's a match between two international teams? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem is, it's not a match between any two international teams. They are the leading cricketing nations in women's cricket. Just because the standard might be quite low it doesn't prevent them from being among the leaders. Harrias ^talk 21:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, accepted to an extent. Would it be more accurate to say the international match would have to occur between ICC-recognised female T20I teams? I know it seems I'm making a point out of this but "leading" seems purely POV/OR but I'm just after the reality of the situation! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Rephrased to ..between two of the top 10 ranked countries of the ICC in terms of women's cricket. Harrias ^talk 08:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Could (just a suggestion) abbreviate Twenty20 International to T20I so you don't have to keep repeating such a mouthful throughout the lead.

• I can and will do if you like, but purely as a personal thing, I don't like the abbreviation. Don't know why!

• No big deal, leave it how it is if you prefer to do so. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there a reason why the first T20I was played on neutral turf?

• I think they were just coinciding tours. It certainly wasn't part of an ICC tournament.

• Any chance of a note explaining why? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: have explained they were both touring at the same time. Harrias ^talk 09:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "starting with the match against New Zealand during their tour of England in 2007" do you need to repeat this information?

• Probably not, I was having difficulty working out how to phrase it though; should I just remove this altogether?

• I'd remove the repetition as a minimum. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: removed. Harrias ^talk 09:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Spell out ICC before using the abbreviation.

• Done: changed as suggested.

• No link for the inaugural world female T20I tournament?

• Done: changed as suggested.

• Second para of lead, three consecutive sentences start with They...

• Done: fixed.

• Cri-zelda -> Cri-Zelda (per our article).

• Done: changed as suggested.

• apiece -> each?

• What's wrong with apiece?

• Nothing, a bit archaic but, as they say in Oz, whatever. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "is arranged in the order of debut appearance" - "is initially arranged..."

• Done: changed as suggested.

• "are listed alphabetically " -> "are initially listed..."

• Done: changed as suggested.

• "Stumpings effected" why not "taken" or "made"?

• Because effected was in the FL (India women Test players) that I stole it from!!

• Would suggest something more "normal" (as I suggested..) The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: changed to 'taken'. Harrias ^talk 09:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I would expect the incalculable average and the en-dash bowling statistics to sort as zeros.

• Done: I've left it as it is for the bowling average, as that statistic is better the lower it is, it seems to make more sense for them to display as higher, rather than as zero. Harrias ^talk 09:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments; I've responded to most of those relating to the lead, and will work on the sortability. Harrias ^talk 20:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Full usage of the International Cricket Council should be in the first paragraph.

• Done: changed as suggested.

• Don't think we need "women" after each of the national teams when the second word in the article indicates that these are female sides. There are quite a few of these in the lead. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: changed as suggested, although I left it in one case where I feel it distinguished from South Africa's men. Harrias ^talk 20:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Further suggestion regarding the one remaining use: it feels like "The" should be added at the start of its sentence, as in "The South Africa women...". Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• That doesn't sounds right to me; I could lengthen it to the full "The South Africa national women's cricket team played their...", but I think that 'The' would be more logically followed by South African women, which isn't really saying the same thing. Harrias ^talk 19:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The sentence now starts with "South Africa women played their first...", which I don't believe is optimal grammar. That's why I made that comment in the first place. It just feels to me like something should either be taken out or added. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Done: changed. Harrias ^talk 07:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]