Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Jabbar (Kalat cricketer)

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 redirect to Kalat cricket team as consistent with the similar AFD on Abdur Razzaq. Sjakkalle (Check!) 17:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Jabbar (Kalat cricketer)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No coverage in WP:RS. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - When does sending things to AfD go from being fun to ever so slightly pushing a regime? If List of Kalat players exists, merge if you must. If not, then create one, otherwise don't complain other people have done the work you should be doing rather than destroying it. Bobo . 16:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Not to cast aspersions, but your deleted contributions history is interesting, Storm. You even go as far as destroying your own work. What went wrong that we are so cynical of the aims of this project? This is the ultimate in "I've just discovered a way to push exclusionism even towards my own creations". I said it when all of this started. We are no longer a cricket project. We have become Frankenstein. And to be honest, those who have worked on the project for the last 16 years probably have no interest if those who decide to create also decide to destroy. Bobo. 17:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The character assasinations on those who have wised up and realized how unsustainable the early level of articles in Wikipedia was should stop immediately.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Define "level". Number, or quality (read: length)? The whole point of Wikipedia is to start off with an article and then improve it. If you can't improve it, or refuse to do so - there is plenty of low-hanging fruit to be "improved" in the field of Test cricketers - don't complain. Bobo . 19:36, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you look at it, the work that is being removed is that of myself, Lugnuts, and 02blythed. The only three of us who have been bothered to create articles. If people refuse to work on them, that's not the fault of any of the three of us. None of us can be blamed for this. For that purpose, I am no longer bitter or angry about this. Bobo . 19:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then I suggest/request you refrain from any further disruption of these discussions (through casting aspersions and general complaining). _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. When people work towards the aims of the project in expanding it rather than destroying it. Those who have no will to do so should not be making judgements on those who have done. Until then, I will remain suspicious of their activities. There is a distinction between being angry and being suspicious. Bobo . 11:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it is high time we started ridding Wikipedia of article on non-notable people who do not meet GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or weak redirect to Kalat cricket team. As with similar AfDs (e.g. Anwar Ali), fails GNG; by consensus, the presumption of notability afforded by NCRIC to cricketers such as these is worthless. In future it may be better to be bold and redirect similar articles, and reserve AFD for only those contested. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if these decisions took place on WT:CRIC rather than AfD I might respect those who instigate the discussions. Until then I will assume they have no respect towards the aims of the project. Bobo . 11:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you want more sources to be found, an AfD is not the way to do so. Having said that, work should be done in List of X players articles anyway. "Quality of articles" and "length of articles" are not the same thing. Arguing to delete articles for "lack of quality" is nonsense. Bobo . 09:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- these database scrape articles are becoming unsustainable. Data that amounts to a few cells in a spreadsheet should be presented as such in a table, so if List of Kalat cricketers existed it could be merged/redirected there. When and if that article gets created we can still make a redirect to it. And protest the personal attacks on the nominator and other participants of this discussion. Reyk _YO! 08:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.