This article is written in
Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This 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.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket articles
There is a toolserver based
WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in
one big list and in
CSV format)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of
India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indian Premier League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
Indian Premier League on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Hey , This map is not India's correct map. Please change this picture else we will report this issue. Please use some pic which includes kashmir as part of india.
Rising Pune Supergiants name has changed to Rising Pine Supergiant. Its better to vote at respective talk to get consensus, to change article title instead of correcting spellings In this article.
For 1st match SRH vs RCB, Chahal is lead wicket taker as per best bowling economy in RCB inngs, we can check this thing in the previous seasons/match summary.
See here for the match summary. (Cricbuzz mobile view).
117.246.70.82 (
talk)
18:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)reply
User:Lugnuts and
User:Cricket246, I wonder if either of you could help with this. I've always known it that when two or more players take the same number of wickets, the player with the fewest runs conceded regardless of overs bowled/economy rate is shown to have the best figures. The above source used by
User:117.246.70.82 is by Cricbuzz rather than Cricinfo which shows
Yuzvendra Chahal as having best figures in the innings with 1/22 off 4 overs, whereas other sources such as Sky Sports and the parent IPL TV broadcaster would credit
Stuart Binny with best figures of 1/10 off 1 over.
Joalhe1997 (
talk)
18:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)reply
In Wikipedia as well as in case of the official scorecards for IPL the player who conceeds the fewest runs, irrespective of overs bowled or economy rate, is said to have the best figures. In Wikipedia, we always stick by that convention in general so it definitely should be Stuart Binny as far as I think. 🙂
Cricket246 (
talk)
Hello users, if we observe the previous season stats, at
ESPNCriciinfowe can found the list based on the best economy. We also edited as per the stats previous season. That stats are Actual stats, based on template that's our manual of style.
117.246.70.82 (
talk)
19:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Ok, guys as your wish. But still in wiki I had seen the list or template as per the best economy. ok carry on guys, enjoy the our edits. I think we have to protect the page/article now.
117.246.70.82 (
talk)
19:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Because Cricinfo scorecards, official IPL scorecards and Indian domestic cricket in general uses the full forms. Just we follow a separate scoring pattern for Australian games, similarly this is a pattern we follow for Indian domestic games. It's not possible for me to sit and edit 9 previous seasons due to shortage of time but I've been maintaining this since last season i.e. 2016 onwards.
Cricket246 (
talk)
20:45, 6 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Then why we don't follow the cricinfo and official site, for match summary. Why used manual of style. Why we don't follow difference for similar edits.
117.249.188.42 (
talk)
07:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)reply
I think it's been fixed (infact, I'm sure I fixed it), but he's not on the list anyone, so it's moot. On a related note, I wonder why it's only the top 4 players, and not top 5. But I don't really care about that. I'm sure the cruft train will arrive in due course. LugnutsFire Walk with Me18:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
2017 Indian Premier League. 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.
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.