Talk:Sachin Tendulkar/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Govt Of India announces Bharat Ratna for Sachin Tendulkar

Govt Of India announces Bharat Ratna for Sachin Tendulkar, The highest civilian award. This comes on the day when Sachin Tendulkar retires. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pramodkanni (talk • contribs) 10:53, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Govt of India declare Highest Civilian Award "Bharat Ratna" on the day of his retirement from international cricket. Arusha Dawkhar (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

He will be awarded the Bharat Ratna, as declared by the Government of India on 16th November, 2013. Gpsnivas (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

change sachin city name bombay to mumbai

please sachin city name bombay to mumbai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prash2 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Question:what was the name of the city when he born? Should we not use the old name? -sarvajna (talk) 13:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 Done that too. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
In context, Bombay should be used when it was Bombay and then use Mumbai after they changed the name. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
The city was called Bombay when Sachin was born, it wasn't changed to Mumbai until 1995. The Madras (talk) 15:55, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Request for correction of spelling of 'Tendulkar'

Please carry out correction in the spelling of Tendulkar on the 5th line (as viewed by the site visitor) under ‘Career achievements’ section. Present text (taken from the source) reads as follows:-

“On 16 March 2012, Tenduklar scored his 100th international hundred.[1]” 

It has been incorrectly written as 'Tenduklar'. The 'k' and 'l' in the surname have been erroneously exchanged, and the same needs to be corrected.

Thank you. (Redacted)

14.139.123.59 (talk) 19:02, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done, thank you. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 19:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Sachin got India's highest honor, Bharat Ratna

Valmikam (talk) 21:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Already done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 01:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Reader feedback: Sachin odi 100's is not corr...

Provide full details about your observation. I do not see anything wrong in number of 100s. If details are not provided, I will close this request. --Jenis Modi (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

sachin is simply amazing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apoorva c (talk • contribs) 15:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request - Tendulkar was not the first to score an international double-century in ODIs

Belinda Clark was the first person to score an international double-century in an ODI, in 1997 against Denmark. The overview states that Tendulkar was the first, which is incorrect. He is the first male player to do so. The sentence should read "the first male player to score a double century in a One Day International." Sources: [2] [3]

  •  Done Taken care.
    Anish Viswa 03:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

grammar and vocabulary corrections

Please change "greatest batsman of modern generation" to "greatest batsman of the modern generation"

Please change "thus failing short by 79 runs" to "(typing space) thus falling short by 79 runs"

Chris.major2 (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

he is not a "former" indian cricketer 203.62.172.23 (talk) 04:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

 Not done. He has retired and is hence "former cricketer". §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Heading text

there are some business intiatives by sachin like musafir.com

Melbinmna (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. You might like to suggest additions to the Business interests section. The details are probably too much for the lead section. --Stfg (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Notable Awards section on the personal information tab

Please, can someone add Notable Awards for Sachin on the personal information tab — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utkarshsingh.1992 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Achievements

NDTV honours Sachin Tendulkar as one of the 25 living Indian legends. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Govirajput (talk • contribs) 20:46, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Please provide some source to support your information and your edit will be made.--Param Mudgal (talk) 08:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sachin Tendulkar/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 20:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

This is substantially unchanged since the previous GAN was quick-failed in October this year. The nominating editor has only made 5 edits to the article. Therefore this is another fail. In addition to the comments made by Harrias at the previous GAN, here are a few more points to consider. Please look at these and at the GA criteria before nominating this again. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

  • We don't actually need citations in the lead as the information should be in the main body and cited there. And we certainly don't need a long list of citations like we have where there are three and four references after a fact.
  • "widely acknowledged as the greatest batsman of the modern generation, popularly holds the title "God of Cricket" among his fans [2] He is also acknowledged as the greatest cricketer of all time.": I'm sorry, what? One of the greatest modern batsmen, certainly, but Lara and Ponting would be up there by most criteria. Even Dravid. Or Kallis. But "the greatest cricketer of all time"? That is certainly POV and would be challenged by most respected commentators in the cricket world.
  • "In 2002, Wisden Cricketers' Almanack ranked him the second greatest Test batsman of all time, behind Don Bradman, and the second greatest ODI batsman of all time, behind Viv Richards.": Where does Wisden say this? The reference looks very, very dubious, and such a claim should be cited directly to Wisden.
  • Rather than go through his career, one quarter of the lead is a list of fairly un-noteworthy awards. This is not necessary.
  • I would recommend much more is made of his early career in the lead, and his captaincy.
  • The article is not balanced. The early life section is too long, but then the first ten years of his international career are covered in five or six paragraphs. The vast majority of the article covers his career in the last five or six years. This must be addressed for this to be anywhere near GA level.
  • Although his maiden Test hundred gets one sentence, and his centuries in Australia in 91-92, which were widely acclaimed as insanely brilliant, get two sentences, including a pointless quote from Merv Hughes, his IPL career gets its own section.
  • We have some very, very short sections later on.
  • Why no style and technique section?
  • Coverage of his domestic career is paltry.
  • We have vast swathes of un-cited text, particularly in the "Rise through the ranks" section. There look to be many un-cited facts throughout. This should be closely looked at.
  • The external links tool reveals a few dead-links (also mentioned in the previous GAN)
  • The Dablinks tool reveals a strange redirect back to the page. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

This is just a sampling. From the formal, GA criteria viewpoint, here is the full review.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Various problems. Just two examples, but there are many others: "Ajit told Achrekar that he was feeling self-conscious due to the coach observing him, and wasn't displaying his natural game" (weak prose, use of contractions in contravention of MoS), "Tendulkar further enhanced his reputation as a future great during the 1991–1992 tour of Australia held before the 1992 Cricket World Cup, that included an unbeaten 148 in the third Test Sydney and 114 on a fast, bouncing pitch in the final Test at Perth against a world-class pace attack comprising Merv Hughes, Bruce Reid and Craig McDermott." (Long sentence, peacock terms, POV issues). I have NOT checked for copyvio issues.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Most sources look OK, but one or two require close checking. Some un-cited sections suggest OR.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Balance is all wrong. His early career is barely covered, his final few years are covered in far too much detail. No style and technique section. See above for further comments.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    POV issues along the line of "he was great" and "he was the best", or "future great". This should be written in a neutral way. It is not at the moment.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    I have not checked the images properly, but a few which come from Flickr, such as the one of his family, look dubious. Did the Flickr author really take them all? This should be looked at more carefully.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    This article has a long way to go. To be brutal, Tendulkar deserves much, much better.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Please find the link http://www.ndtv.com/photos/news/the-25-greatest-global-living-legends-16609 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Govirajput (talk • contribs) 01:21, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2014

106.192.187.164 (talk) 12:35, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. IgnorantArmies 13:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Please change- "sachin tendulkar a former indian cricketer" to "sachin tendulkar former indian captain"

Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar (Listeni/ˌsətʃɪn tɛnˈduːlkər/; born 24 April 1973) is a former Indian Captain, who widely acknowledged as the greatest batsman of the modern generation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sneha4ass (talk • contribs) 18:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

While we have some articles about sportsmen that don't name the sport they played in the title, presumably because the person is supposed to be so well known, I don't think it's a good practice. I can guarantee that most of our American readers will have no idea who Sachin is, so first we really must name his sport. HiLo48 (talk) 22:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2014

Bharat Ratna Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar Tbhurricane10 (talk) 15:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

 Not done no request made. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Recent Achievement

In 2011, Prem Become only the last player in the history of Sports to Register his name in the most luxurious and one of the most expensive books ever made (OPUS). The book i yet to be launched in India and UK. The Book is said to be in 2 editions Marquee and Little Master Edition. Marquee edition comprises of over 700 pages and weights around 37Kilo and the little master edition contains 450 pages and about 12 kilos. The Launch date and the price is uknown but we can view the details on the website http://tendulkaropus.com/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aayushjain28 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC) ∞ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.17.117.126 (talk) 16:19, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2014

182.73.53.234 (talk) 13:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC) Nitin shaw

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 14:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2014

Harisha G K (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC) Please change the GOD's Picture to new hairstyle one.

Thanks & regards

Harisha G K

Harisha G K (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

 Not done We don't have any other free images. If you have one please upload it. —Vensatry (ping) 10:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Remove the Controversies section from Sachin Bio page

I have been in discussion with other moderator here especially with @NeilN on his revert for impact of Maria Sharapova Controversy when she said she does not know who Tendulkar is? check it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Maria_Sharapova

So as per @NeilN policy any news that is not covered after 1 month of its existence does not qualify to be in the bio of the person. I have watch all the news channel in the last 23 hrs and could not find any of them covering Sachin'e tax and Ferrari controversy.--Tinaiyer1976 (talk) 09:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinaiyer1976 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if the controversy section in this article is warranted or not, but obviously Tinaiyer1976 does not understand or is misrepresenting what I said on the other talk page. This gives a succinct summary: "I'm not saying the incident has to be reported on every day. However coverage has to exist after the initial event occurs to judge its importance." --NeilN talk to me 11:51, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

If we can have controversy section on Sachin Page's why not same policy rule is applied on Maria's Page. Both are sportsperson and all the articles on the Wikipedia is govern by same set of rules and policy and should be applied in same manner irrespective of person, country and profession. --Tinaiyer1976 (talk) 12:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Merging Controversies section

I see no point in having a separate Controversies section just detailing two incidents: the Dennis Incident and Ferrari import tax. From WP:CSECTION, I feel it focuses simply on just two negative aspects; it's always better when we can merge it with the rest of the article. In any case, just having a section titled "Controversies" reflects a poor editing style, be more specific like "X incident" or "Sports-related controversies". It's not that he has many sports-related controversies like Michael Schumacher or any general controversies that need to be highlighted. I have moved the Denness Incident sub-section to his career chronologically and the Ferrari sub-section to his Personal life. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, good call. Is the Ferrari incident even worth mentioning or was he just inadvertently caught up in events? --NeilN talk to me 13:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, now come to think of it, that looks like a product of recentism to me. Obviously, receiving a Ferrari 360 Modena from Schumacher is something, so I'm moving that to the "Other honours" section. I'm completely removing that incident part since it looks undue and hope there isn't any need to elaborate briefly (maybe in one sentence) about it? Good day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2014

49.156.157.69 (talk) 12:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Not done, empty request. --NeilN talk to me 13:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2014

I want to add the details about rest of the world vs Melbourn cricket club match. Asvarma1993 (talk) 12:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Please provide the exact wording you want to add and the sources you want to use. --NeilN talk to me 13:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2014

Hi team please edit the below in wiki page

I found that information on his auto biography book is still not updated properly (this message is typed on 24-November -2014).

This is the text that i found in wiki link

Playing It My Way – an autobiography. It is scheduled to be released on 6 November 2014.[405][406][407] .This text is under his biographies section. Kindly edit this as today is 24th November which means the book is already realized 18 days before.

Kindly replace the above text with this ....Playing It My Way -auto biography -With Boria Majumdar :ISBN 978-14-736-0520-6

I hope the ISBN number is enough for the proof . Kindly update this article as soon as you can . Thanks in advance

NOTE: Content need to be changed in the following link ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachin_Tendulkar

By VIJAY E C


Induvijay (talk) 19:20, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 23:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Bharat Ratna cannot be used as a title

"Bharat Ratna", the title used for Sachin Tendulkar in the very first line should be removed.

Reason: "Bharat Ratna" cannot be used as a title. It is in violation with Article 18 of the Indian Constitution.

Reference: 1. The Indian Constitution http://india.gov.in/sites/upload_files/npi/files/coi_part_full.pdf 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharat_Ratna Sindhukush (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Done Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 09:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Not greatest, one of the greatest.

is a former Indian cricketer widely acknowledged as the greatest cricketer of all time.

This statement is ridiculous. He is one of the greatest of all time not "the greatest". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.42.167 (talk) 09:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, and this is a persistent problem with this article – I've reverted it on at least three occasions, but even with semi-protection it continues to be remade. I've reverted once again, and added text in the page's sources that will hopefully dissuade new editors. Thanks for your post. IgnorantArmies (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2015

He is the greatest batsman of all time. Vivek789 (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specificchange.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 March 2015

well i wnat to add some good photos i dont wnat to touch any information

14.139.161.3 (talk) 11:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please upload the photos first and then post the filenames here. Make sure the copyright status is correctly filled in. -- haminoon (talk) 11:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2015

He has many fan. 125.21.21.58 (talk) 13:17, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Already covered in the article. --NeilN talk to me 13:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Sachin Tendulkar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2015

chate sandeep Chatesandeep2015 (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit request

In 2009-2010 period when sachin got on 5,6,7 with lbw decisions. all these decision was wrong decision given by the umpires.Kindly make the note of that on the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.99.186.58 (talk)

I don't understand what you'd like us to change. Could you explain? --Dweller (talk) 13:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Severe English Grammar Issue

Hello,

At the start of the page, it is mentioned that Sachin Tendulkar is regarded as one of the greatest BATSMAN of all time. The word BATSMAN is absolutely illogical is this context as current context suggests more than a few BATSMEN who are considered to be included in greatest category.

The word BATSMAN must be replaced with BATSMEN.

Thank you!!

Good pickup! Thank you. I have updated the article accordingly. FillsHerTease (talk) 07:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

'Widely regarded as the greatest batsmen of all time'

Please reword this. This is completely ridiculous. How can this page possibly suggest that Tendulkar is the greatest batsman of all time when Bradman's average of 99.94 is 'often cited as the greatest achievement by any sportsman in any major sport'. Just change the sentence to 'widely considered ONE of the greatest batsman of all time'. The 'sources' used to support the claim of Tendulkar's #1 status are also completely worthless (how can an opinion piece in a newspaper be considered authoritative?).
A few weeks, ago, before I changed it, yet again, to "widely regarded as one of the greatest batsmen of all time", it said he was widely regarded as the greatest cricketer of all time! Now it has been changed, yet again, to once again claim - erroneously - that he is widely considered to be the greatest batsman of all time. I have updated it, yet again, to say "one of the greatest batsmen of all time". Obviously he was a great batsman, and it's wonderful that he has so many fans, but it's doing a disservice to him, to cricket, and to Wikipedia, when people keep updating the article to make outrageous, completely unsupported claims. Those of us who 'work' on Wikipedia want it to be respected and regarded as a reliable source of information. However there are still many people out there who don't trust it and this issue with the Tendulkar lede is exactly the reason why. We're not here to push our own agendas and opinions; we're here to try to present the truth. Can people please stop updating this article with unsupported claims? At least have the courage and courtesy to come here and debate the topic before making sweeping claims in future... FillsHerTease (talk) 06:29, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The article was modified to once again claim that he is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time. I undid the edit as it is not supported by the sources and messaged the user who made the change as follows:
"Please stop vandalizing the Sachin Tendulkar page. He is not widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time but - much more importantly - even if he was, the sources do not support the claim. Statements made in Wikipedia articles need to have sources to back them up. There is no source quoted which states that Sachin Tendulkar is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time. If you want the article to say that then you need to find some reliable sources to quote. A section on the Sachin Tendulkar Talk Page was started where you can go to discuss this issue. Please respond to me there; this message is simply to let you know that your unsupported edit was undone. Thanks and Regards," FillsHerTease (talk) 07:31, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
The following two comments come from my personal Talk Page:
"Hey there, Tendulkar is the greatest batsman of all time considered by many great crickets, experts and fans. Whether it is poll or comments or other, the winner was Sachin. Well thank you. Wikipedia wants proper sources, okay then I will add proper reference/source to the article. Then don't remove or revert. And about vandalism, I've not done any kind of vandalism. I came in Wikipedia juat because of some wrong informations of some pages." ARNAB22 (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
"As per my private message to you - which I sent to you as a courtesy - please do not reply to me here. A section has been started on the Sachin Tendulkar Talk Page and all communication regarding this topic should occur there. Thanks and Regards," FillsHerTease (talk) 08:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not going to argue with you about who the greatest batsman of all time is because our opinions on the matter are completely and utterly irrelevant. As explained - several times now - there is no source which supports the claim that Sachin Tendulkar is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time and the lack of sources is the only issue here. You have changed the article - several times now - to say that he is the greatest batsman of all time but you have provided no sources to support the claim, nor have you even provided a short explanation of the reason you have made an edit. I'm sorry but that is vandalism. You cannot keep updating a page to suit your own personal opinion; that is bad for everyone. I'm not trying to insult you, or single you out, but you have done the same thing on the Ronaldo page and you have been warned about vandalism there too. If your claim is correct then you should have no trouble finding several reliable sources to support it. In the mean time, please stop vandalising the page by making unsupported edits and keep all communication here on the Talk Page. Thanks and Regards, FillsHerTease (talk) 09:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this, FillsHerTease. You're right – ARNAB22's edits are clearly disruptive and bordering on vandalism, given the warnings they've had. I'll be keeping a close eye on things, and any further disruptive editing should be reported. IgnorantArmies (talk) 10:39, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, he is the greatest batsman of all time and I've added proper sources also and many considered he is greater than Sir Don Bradman. But you revert the article and remove the two sources. Why? Recover those. Once somebody says it the source doesn't prove that he is the greatest batsman. But I did the right thing with correct source. ARNAB22 (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

User ARNAB22 (talk) has updated the page to say Sachin Tendulkar "is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time" once again. He (or she???) has not provided sources which support this claim. I undid the edit and left the following message on the user's Talk Page. Please note that (s)he had not made the above edit to the Talk Page here until after I had left my own message. As such, my claim that (s)he had not used the Talk Page here is incorrect and I apologise for that. Nonetheless, ARNAB22 (talk) MUST NOT UPDATE THE SACHIN TENDULKAR ARTICLE AGAIN WITHOUT FIRST DISCUSSING THE MATTER HERE AND GETTING AGREEMENT ON THE PROPOSED CHANGE. FillsHerTease (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

This issue has become very serious.

1. You have been asked, several times now - courteously and politely; albeit firmly - to stop updating the Sachin Tendulkar article to say that "he is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time", without providing reliable sources to support the claim.
2. You have been instructed that there is a section on the Sachin Tendulkar Talk Page where this issue can and should be discussed.
3. You have been told that you need to include text which indicates why you are changing an article.
4. You have been warned by other editors regarding similar, unsupported and undocumented updates that you have made to other articles.

Nonetheless you have - yet again - updated the Sachin Tendulkar to say that "he is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time", without providing reliable sources to support the claim. Your unsupported update has once again been removed.

DO NOT - UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES - UPDATE THE SACHIN TENDULKAR ARTICLE AGAIN WITHOUT FIRST:

1. Discussing the issue on the Sachin Tendulkar Talk Page. It is clear that you do not understand certain things and, as such, a discussion needs to take place so that you can become acquainted with the way things work. You MUST NOT update the Sachin Tendulkar article again unless you have discussed the matter and the proposed update has been agreed to.
2. Do not reply to me here, or on my personal Talk Page. All communication should take place on the Sachin Tendulkar Talk Page.

I am sorry to be so blunt but this is an important issue. You are updating Wikipedia to include a statement - a very serious statement - which is not supported. This unsupported claim is not just read by people who come to Wikipedia itself, it is visible in other places too, such as the infobox which appears to the right if someone performs a Google search for Sachin Tendulkar. Please try to understand the ramifications of what you are doing. Your unsupported claims do not only do a massive disservice to Wikipedia - helping to propagate the false belief that it is unreliable as a source of information - they do a disservice to you, to cricket, to Sachin Tendulkar, and to the other great batsman of history. It's wonderful that you so admire Sachin Tendulkar - yes, he was an incredible batsman - but you need to understand and acknowledge that Wikipedia is not a platform for you to propagate your own personal opinions. You have been provided every opportunity to discuss the matter on the Talk Page, but you have completely failed to engage with anyone about the issue. You have been told that your updates will be agreed to if you can find reliable sources to support them, but you have gone ahead and made changes without providing such sources. I am once again giving you the opportunity to come and discuss the issue so please - PLEASE - stop vandalising the page and engage with us about what you are trying to do. Thanks and Regards, FillsHerTease (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

In response to the message above from ARNAB22 (talk):
"Hello, he is the greatest batsman of all time and I've added proper sources also and many considered he is greater than Sir Don Bradman. But you revert the article and remove the two sources. Why? Recover those. Once somebody says it the source doesn't prove that he is the greatest batsman. But I did the right thing with correct source."
1. "...he is the greatest batsman of all time..." - No, he isn't. As I said I am not going to argue about this with you because our personal opinions are irrelevant here. If you want to sit down, have a beer, and discuss our opinions on the matter then, sure, I'd be all for it. What you need to understand though is that our opinions are not relevant to the article and that's why you need to stop changing it.
2. "...I've added proper sources..." - No, you haven't provided proper sources. That is the issue here, and it is the only issue. You are changing the article to say that "he is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time". Where, in the sources you have provided, does it say anything even remotely close to that? Nowhere. When you say someone is widely considered to be the greatest in history at something it means you are talking about the general consensus. That, quite simply, isn't true of Sachin Tendulkar.
3. "...and many considered he is greater than Sir Don Bradman..." - Some people - not many - believe he is greater than Bradman. Some people think it's Lara. Bradman never played one day cricket, so some people consider Bradman to be the greatest Test batsman and Viv Richards to be the greatest one day batsman. However when you say "widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time" it basically refers to the general consensus and the general consensus is that Bradman is the greatest batsman of all time. As pointed out above, at the beginning of this section, Bradman is not only widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time, he is considered by some to be the greatest sportsman - in any sport - of all time. To support the claim that Tendulkar "is widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time", you need to provide several sources which say that; you can't just supply a couple of sources in which there's a discussion about Bradman versus Tendulkar and transform those into him be considered the greatest. Do you understand? I mean ... I haven't pointed this out before but a couple of the source which you are referring to actually claim that Bradman is greater than Tendulkar, yet you are trying to use them to say the exact opposite!
4. "But you revert the article and remove the two sources. Why?" Well ... this has been explained to you over and over again. I undid your edit because the sources you supplied do not support the claim you are making. Having said all that, I didn't mean to remove your sources so I apologise for that. I only meant to get rid of your erroneous, unsupported claim that "...he is the greatest batsman of all time...".
5. "Recover those". No I will not. DO NOT UPDATE THE ARTICLE AGAIN UNTIL YOU HAVE LOCATED SOURCES WHICH SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM AND THE CHANGE HAS BEEN AGREED TO HERE VIA A DISCUSSION. As I have said all along, I am happy for you to make the change as long as you can provide sources which support it.
6. "Once somebody says it the source doesn't prove that he is the greatest batsman". Sorry but I don't understand what you mean?
7. "But I did the right thing with correct source". No, you didn't. You did not supply sources which support the claim that "he is widely regarded as one of the greatest batsmen of all time". I realise that you think your sources support the claim but they don't. That is why you need to discuss the matter here before you make any further changes please. OK?

Listen ... I am not trying to discourage a new editor; that is why I am not reporting you or trying to get you blocked. I think that the more people who come to Wikipedia and help the better. The problem, I think, is that you don't quite understand how it works and you perhaps don't understand - because English isn't your first language - what "widely regarded as the greatest batsmen of all time" actually means. Please - PLEASE - I am not trying to insult you when I say that. I say - in all honesty - that I just want to make sure that an unsupported claim isn't made. I am happy to discuss the matter with you and try to come to an agreement. I don't want to fight with you, or discourage you, or make you look bad, or anything like that. I mean that honestly and sincerely and I hope I am clear about that. Fair enough?

:-)

Thanks and Regards, FillsHerTease (talk) 09:58, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I returned the two new sources which were added. These were deleted during the undo of the previous unsupported claim. As noted above, neither of these two new sources support the claim that Sachin Tendulkar is "widely regarded as the greatest batsmen of all time". FillsHerTease (talk) 10:06, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay you can update anything, all the sources sounds like "the greatest batsman" but you can edit anything. Add or remove the reference that had updated before. :/ And sorry for my argument. ARNAB22 (talk) 19:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi ARNAB22 (talk). I'm sorry about that very long post and I'm sorry to have been so blunt. My main reason is the fact that the Sachin Tendulkar page is very popular and, as I mentioned, that first sentence if often used as a brief description by other pages; so it's very important that the first sentence is correct, more so than the rest of the article. If that makes sense? Listen ... as I said above I am honestly not trying to discourage you, or single you out, or anything negative; I think it's great that you have decided to get a username and start making changes to articles. The more people that do that the better it is for everyone. So ... from the perspective of wanting to help you, do you understand what the problem is with what you've been trying to do? I sincerely don't want to argue with you; I want to help you understand what the problem is so that you can keep editing articles and enjoy being part of the Wikipedia family. If you want to have a discussion on your Talk Page about it, or mine, rather than here then we can do that if you like? Whatever is best for you? FillsHerTease (talk) 21:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
P.S. Just for the record - and so you understand that I'm not necessarily against what you're trying to do - I think there are a lot of valid arguments for saying that Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsman of all time. As I said, I would love to sit down, have a beer, and discuss it all with you. However we always have to remember - when editing on Wikipedia - that our own personal opinions are not relevant. As I have said all along, if you can find some sources which support what you want to write then I will join with you and fight at your side. Fair enough? I have looked for some myself but can't find any. Maybe we can come up with a new sentence that is mid-way between "widely regarded as one of the greatest batsmen of all time" and "widely regarded as the greatest batsman of all time"? I mean, we could say "considered by some modern experts to be the greatest batsman of all time", or "regarded by many as the greatest batsman of the modern era". There are a lot of options. Why don't we put our thinking caps on, have a conversation together, and come up with a sentence which puts Sachin in the place he deserves; whilst being supported by the sources? A compromise! What do you say?
:-)

FillsHerTease (talk) 21:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. So why don't you use that kind tags like "regarded by many experts as the greatest" or "often considered as the greatest" with the tag "one of the greatest". Well I'm not telling this just because of being a fanboy. He actually is. The references that were used is also titled that- " Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsman in the history "- Brian Lara, " Is Tendulkar the greatest batsman?", "Bradman vs Tendulkar: The greatest batsman" PS: Apologie If I did any mistake. ARNAB22 (talk) 04:00, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sachin Tendulkar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:03, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

hello Sir

Sir I want to play cricket for Indi Its my dream razi ahmec 16:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razi ahmed hashmi (talk • contribs)

  1. ^ "Tendulkar scores his 100th international century".
  2. ^ http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/53413.html
  3. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belinda_Clark
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sachin_Tendulkar/Archive_4&oldid=1137169206"