Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Cricket World Cup (2nd nomination)

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 keep. No prejudice towards a merge discussion. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Cricket World Cup[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Not enough reliable sources confirm this will be happening, and even if there was, there isn't enough detail on it to justify an article a decade before it occurs. Beerest355 Talk 19:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was going to !vote "very weak keep and improve a lot", because there's a source that says India has been selected to host. The problem is, a general google search and google news search both return nothing but editorials about China and jokes about Nepal or Afghanistan. Ansh666 21:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there is no crystal ball here, it's just been awarded and there is a reliable source saying so. The-Pope (talk) 01:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CRYSTAL, which states "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place". Actually, it would be even more notable if it didn't go ahead... Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:41, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 10:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. The article as it stands now really has no information useful to the reader other than the host. It could really just be redirected to Cricket World Cup#Future, converted to a single sentence, and recreated when more information is available. It doesn't really matter either way, but the article is definitely a valid search term, and should either be kept or redirected to the main World Cup article. IgnorantArmies 11:19, 30 June 2013 (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.