Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eddie Solomon (statistician)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie Solomon (statistician)

subject does not meet terms of WP:Notability and should be deleted as per several similar cases in this discussion BlackJack | ^{talk page} 05:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

delete - Non-notable. I checked up on his umpiring, which might have justified keeping him, but he doesn't seem to have umpired in a first-class or List A match. JH (talk page) 16:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletions. -- Bduke 11:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — TKD::Talk 06:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Given the decision in Andrew Samson, I'm surprised to find that this one is still going. Can we please have some contributions? Is it me or are AfD and CfD lacking interest these days? --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 19:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is one that I skipped over, as a USian, because I simply have no idea whether the role is significant. Looks like it could use some sources, but I'm not really confident voting either way (but it would be "weak" in any case). --Dhartung | Talk 20:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Even as a Englishman, I find this one difficult to assess! I have plumb for delete because, as a scorer and cricket statistician, it is unlikely that he was known outside a narrow group of people and so is not notable. He could be mentioned in either the MCC or ACS articles, I guess, if he was particularly known in those fields. --Malcolmxl5 00:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.