Talk:Centenary Test
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Centenary Test. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051103122623/https://www.mcc.org.au:80/content/document/00000133-src.pdf to https://www.mcc.org.au/content/document/00000133-src.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051022175833/https://www.334notout.com:80/ashes/scorecards.htm to https://www.334notout.com/ashes/scorecards.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Encylopaedia "Style" and sporting jargon
editIn common with many cricket-related pages in wikipedia, this article is written as if by a newspaper reporter. It's not necessarily wrong but there is a lot that is subjective comment rather than actual fact. Whether McCosker was a "plucky opener" or Bob Willis had an "ungainly style" are both matters of opinion. "Grabbing" a wicket is also rather odd. Will people get upset if I tidy it up a bit? I shall not alter any factual statements (unless I find and can show them to be incorrect). Plingsby (talk) 14:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)