Question: Regarding: [Sachin Tendulkar's bowling record](https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/2632/sachin-tendulkars-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](https://sports.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/278/range-of-localization-for-sports-questions?rq=1)). Given that [`trivia`](https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trivia) is [on-topic](https://sports.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/260/sports-trivia-evaluation) for Sports SE, its content should be [consistent](https://sports.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/339/consistency-in-trivia-content).

**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?

Answer: 
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.
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.