5

Regarding: Sachin Tendulkar's bowling record

In said question, the following was omitted:

Does the batting sensation hold any other such fascinating bowling records to his name?

As of the writing of this post, three close votes for "Too Localized" have been given (see: Range of localization for Sports questions). Given that trivia is on-topic for Sports SE, its content should be consistent.

Does said omission deserve a close vote for "Too Localized" or for any reason at all? Why or why not? Also, is said omission "provoking" to anyone?

1

Here's why I initially tried to edit this into some semblance of order, and then ultimately decided I'd vote to close (I don't really care the reason, but TL fits here and I'll explain why).

First the merits of the question. This started out as a bad question, the line you quoted there was my main concern and I initially felt that editing that out might make this a serviceable question. It's (if cricket keeps records anywhere near as thoroughly as baseball does) answerable and it's not subjective at all (does x hold stat y).

However, and this is where a judgement call comes into play, asking about a single batter vs a single bowler is something akin to asking "has Roy Halliday struck out Albert Pujols more times than any other pitcher?" I'd immediately vote to close that as too localized because that's just not interesting to anyone other than the biggest trivia nut (and it's really not all that interesting in general). Single batter vs Single pitcher stats in baseball are basically meaningless because there is rarely a significant enough sample to make a judgment on. I don't know Cricket, but applying the same rules there seems reasonable.

  • side note: Roy and Al haven't had nearly enough ABs against each other for that stat to be relevant or true – wax eagle May 15 '13 at 14:44
  • The answer to who has Albert Pujols struck out the most times against is Ben Sheets at 14. The answer to the reverse question who has Halladay struck out the most times is Derek Jeter at 24. – wax eagle May 15 '13 at 14:51
  • You are correct in assuming your baseball analogy carries over to cricket, in this case. – Bogdanovist May 16 '13 at 23:00
  • "..because that's just not interesting to anyone other than the biggest trivia nut". I would say that is just your opinion. And an opinion may not be always the reality. I have seen such trivia questions in cricinfo which attracts lots of viewers. So if it is not interesting to a few people, they can feel free to stay out of it where as interested people can answer/upvote etc. But that definitely doesn't make any sense to classify it as localized. There would be people who are not interested in your questions but how can you justify if your questions are getting closed based on that? – iDev May 17 '13 at 17:56
  • 1
    @ACB What is the difference between cricinfo and Stack Exchange? Two different sites with two different visions. It is your opinion that questions are being closed and/or classified as localized because other users are simply not interested. This meta post was intended to illustrate why said question received close votes...and you have two opinions. How else may we help you? – user527 May 17 '13 at 18:22
  • Well, my question is how do you judge the quality of questions here? If questions such as "What did Luiz Adriano do wrong in scoring a 'cheat goal'?" or "Why is Peter Siddle considered to be a Test match specialist?" or "Is there NBA player who won triple MVP in one season?" can be asked what is it about "Sachin Tendulkar's bowling record" closed as localized? And my other comment was on his comment about Trivia questions. "just not interesting to anyone" is not completely true. There is no comparison between cricinfo and SE. I was stating the fact. – iDev May 17 '13 at 18:27
  • How do we judge the quality of questions here? Mind you, we are still defining the scope as Sports SE is in beta. The basic guidelines are here in the FAQ. Usefulness and reasonably scoped are two characteristics mentioned. Yes, trivia has had a narrow scope and we have had discussions on how to properly incorporate the tag...and such also applies to subjectivity (ie, the questions you quoted above) because of its wide scope. – user527 May 17 '13 at 18:50
-2

Posting my comment from that question here:

If this question is too localized, I am not sure what would be the question you would ask in a Q&A forum for sports page. Localized was used as an option in SO to denote that the problem was very specific to the person who asked question and will not benefit anyone apart from him. I dont understand how can it be used here. OP is not talking about his personal record here to say that this is localized. It is a question about trivia and records.

I have also seen that many questions such as Hashim Amla's record of not getting out for a duck was asked before and it got many upvotes. So considering all these I dont think we can justify that.

Also I dont agree with removing this "Does the batting sensation hold any other such fascinating bowling records to his name?" from that question. OP is just asking if there are any other bowling records in a particular player's name. This can be reasonably answered by a Cricket lover if they know some unique feat of this player. I am not sure if there are any valid reasons for removing this as I cant think of anything.

  • To challenge your viewpoint: "Does the batting sensation hold any other such fascinating bowling records to his name?" can be viewed as a research request (this question is similar in nature). – user527 May 14 '13 at 0:00
  • Let X = player. Let Y = record. Consider "Which X(s) hold this Y?" Then, consider "Which Y(s) does X hold?" The latter best fits the referenced omission, and I can see why a user may perceive that question to be "too localized." With that said, would it be constructive to ask (request) which players, teams, etc. have/had the best records, stats, etc. throughout sports history? – user527 May 14 '13 at 0:12
  • Well, if we try to think it that way it will be difficult to get any good questions in a Q&A for sports. Right now as per Area51, the status of this site is "1.3 questions per day - Needs Work – 15 questions per day on average is a healthy beta, 5 questions or fewer per day needs some work." As it is going to complete 2 years, mostly likely this site will be taken down for inactivity. So it is a tough call to make and most of the time I can see that we are driving the new users away from the site due to these kind of restrictions. – iDev May 14 '13 at 18:33
  • We cant really put rules similar to StackOverflow where the no of questions raised in a day are too huge in number and they need someway to keep it clean. Whereas the case here is totally different. Closing questions and downvoting for no reason are driving interested sports lovers away from this site. Just my opinion. – iDev May 14 '13 at 18:36
  • Let's look at other stats: 99% answered - excellent – 143 (150) users with 200+ rep, 8 (10) users with 2,000+ rep, 3 (5) users with 3,000+ rep – 1,223 (1,500) visits/day. We are close, and we need the community's contribution to come up with good guidelines because it is a tough call to make, as you say. However, I disagree that we are driving new users away because of "restrictions"...I see more of a revolving door of core userbase and "one-and-done" question and/or answer posts. Also, do many sports fans know about Sports SE? Have we done enough site-promotion to determine? – user527 May 14 '13 at 18:49
  • This question wasn't closed (although close votes were made) and no downvotes were made. Now, it is encouraged that users give reasons for close and down votes, but that is more of an ideal than a reality. – user527 May 14 '13 at 18:53
  • Well, I wasn't talking about this question alone in my above comment when I said we are driving new users away. As far as this question is considered, I have already mentioned my opinion in answer. I still believe questions asking a players unique record in a particular category should be allowed. Regarding the stats you posted above, it is good to see that you are positive about that. I hope it improves. – iDev May 15 '13 at 7:54
  • We need a positive community to drive positive results. Simple as that. – user527 May 15 '13 at 13:34
  • Therefore, you feel questions along the lines of, "What knockout records do Muhammmad Ali hold?" or "What records do Roger Federer hold for championship matches?" are on topic? – user527 May 15 '13 at 13:42
  • @edmastermind29 those questions should in no way be on topic. They are open ended invitations to massive lists. – wax eagle May 15 '13 at 14:08
  • @ACB you're asking for a massive sacrifice in quality in favor of a few q/day. that's not what we're about here. We want good questions and answers. – wax eagle May 15 '13 at 14:09
  • I think I have already made my point here. If you consider that as localized, we might have to close all the trivia questions here as localized. I dont know how it is going to impact the quality of questions here. This is all about sports and those questions are also part of that. – iDev May 15 '13 at 18:20
  • @ACB Yes, your point has been made, but what is being done about it? The discussion has been raised before (1) (2) (3) (4), yet here we are. Regarding the issue, let's work together on a solution that promotes quality trivia questions. Should we do another trivia evaluation? – user527 May 16 '13 at 15:08
  • As I said, I am still not convinced with the reason which others are quoting. In my opinion, we should either remove the trivia tag and make it clear that we dont allow such questions or we should allow all such questions. – iDev May 17 '13 at 18:16
  • @ACB That's a start. Visit Should we allow sports trivia? for more information. – user527 May 17 '13 at 18:27
-2

I voted to close. As edmastermind29 points out, this forms part of an ongoing discussion about how to handle 'trivia' questions and also 'statistics' questions. Some trivia/stats questions a good, and some are sufficiently poor as to warrant closure so as to not encourage more such poor questions. How could the distinction be clearly stated? I don't know, maybe it isn't possible. In the end it will come down to a judgement call.

To my mind, that question is too localised, since it is such an obscure, highly specific question that is unlikely to be asked again. The criteria for any question on a SE site is that the question and answers to it would form part of a useful archive of information. Good questions are not meant to be merely something to satisfy the momentary curiosity of the asker, they are meant to last as a record of information that people will want to know in the future. This is not a forum, this is a Q&A site.

More questions is not always better. For potential new users who stumble across this site, seeing lots of poor question such as that is NOT going to encourage them to stick around.

  • Very good points about this being difficult territory and I agree, this is too-localized. But where we draw the line is still quite subjective in my mind and I don't have a good handle on where it should be drawn. I know in my mind that specific batter vs specific pitcher is unlikely to be useful from a baseball trivia standpoint, but is a pitcher's record against a given team interesting? I don't know. – wax eagle May 17 '13 at 0:35
  • I think, as you say, it is subjective. I'm not sure there is anyway to get around it, at least I can't come up with a succinct set of clear guidelines. – Bogdanovist May 17 '13 at 0:47
  • Agreed. We should take these questions as they are asked. We could provide good examples and not so good examples to start...and see what characteristics they have in common to make it so. It's a fine line. On one hand, there's useful and interesting...and on another, there's not so useful (in the long run) and bland at best. Which will have a longer shelf life? – user527 May 17 '13 at 0:58
  • Also, you bring up a good point about localization, in terms of Sports SE. Perhaps localized = too specific? SO are hounds about moderation and such because of the userbase and clearly defined guidelines....Sports SE is still in beta, so we are still defining these guidelines and are willing to work with anyone to create good content. This isn't a "restriction," but in relative terms, flexibility to build a good foundation here. – user527 May 17 '13 at 1:04
  • The title 'too localised' is, as you say, perhaps not the best way to put it. However I think the description "This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet." is good, and sums up the problem with questions like these. – Bogdanovist May 17 '13 at 1:13
  • @Bogdanovist The verbiage wasn't good when I quoted it here. However, in general, it works. We shouldn't compare SO to Sports SE in this regard. – user527 May 17 '13 at 1:16
  • 1
    Yeah good points there. I'd be happy to simply drop 'geographic area' and 'worldwide audience', which just leaves 'small moment in time' and 'extraordinarily narrow situation' which are the two things that these nitty gritty trivia questions trip up on. – Bogdanovist May 17 '13 at 1:36
  • I dont understand on what basis the quality of questions are judged here. Let me take examples from questions which you asked to better understand this. If questions such as "What did Luiz Adriano do wrong in scoring a 'cheat goal'?" or "Why is Peter Siddle considered to be a Test match specialist?" can be termed as quality questions which are likely to be asked again, would form part of useful archive of information and which are not asked to satisfy the momentary curiosity of the asker, this question is definitely a high quality question. – iDev May 17 '13 at 18:09
  • As I mentioned above, if somebody is not interested they can just stay out of those questions. And if you feel that these are localized, all trivia questions should be closed as localized and trivia tag itself should be removed. Just because 3-4 people didn't like a questions doesn't mean it can be closed. Again just my opinion. – iDev May 17 '13 at 18:11

You must log in to answer this question.