Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1998)

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 all. Hut 8.5 21:18, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1998)[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)

I am also nominating the following related pages per the reason stated, below:

Non-notable cricketers. Have not played in a match that meets WP:NCRIC. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:18, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete first 3, they all fail NCRIC, no evidence they pass WP:GNG. Spike 'em (talk) 17:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a Mustaq Ahmed, born in Sukkur on cricinfo, but he has the wrong DoB to match the listed Mushtaq Ahmed Kalhoro. The player on cricinfo would pass NCRIC and has no (other) article on here. There is an article about Mushtaq Kalhoro (and Mohammad Taha) on Karachi Kings website but it makes no mention of him playing first class cricket, so I think it unlikely they are the same person. Spike 'em (talk) 17:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And to be clear, if it is decided they are different players, then Delete Mustaq Ahmed Kalhoro too, as he fails NCRIC and does not have enough WP:RS / WP:SECONDARY coverage to pass WP:GNG. Spike 'em (talk) 17:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Spike. I too spotted that Mushtaq Ahmed has a profile on CI (with FC matches), but I'm not able to verify if it's one and the same. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted some text / reference on the Mohammad Taha article, as it was for a different (Indian) player with the same name.Spike 'em (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the first 3, and the fourth one unless they're found to be the same player. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:29, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:01, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there are four Mohammad Arif's which pass NCRIC, Mohammad Arif (cricketer, born 1960) 1, Mohammad Arif (cricketer, born 1963), 2, Mohammad Arif (cricketer, born 1941) 3, and Mohammad Arif (Peshawar cricketer) 4, should anyone wish to invent Mohammad Arif (disabiguation). It seems that the first two may have been confused with each other as they both share the same team details although not the same biographical details. Similarly, there are five Azam Khans which pass NCRIC aside from the Test player - these are Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1964) 1, Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1983) 2, Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1952) 3, Azam Khan (Lahore Division cricketer) 4, and Azam Khan (cricketer, born 1987) 5. I hope I've got all of those right, it's late! Bobo . 23:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly does not pass our notability guide for cricketeers. That said, I think it is clearly time we tighten that guideline.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need to bring that up given this situation. This is a clear case of brightline notability standards. And once again I ask, how? Funny how people only finish that thought halfway through without being willing to suggest new universally applicable brightline requirements. "A whole season" is unenforceable. "A few" is woolly and pointless. Wanna suggest two, five, ten, one hundred? This isn't the place to be suggesting new brightline criteria. It's been 14 years. Give it a go. In the appropriate place(s). Bobo . 09:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - simply waste of time, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 19:01, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no evidence of subjects meeting WP:GNG, let alone the very generous subject-specific notability guideline. Hack (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the first three certainly. Mushtaq Ahmed Kalhoro is also a likely delete for now - I can find just the article that's at the foot of the article for now and nothing else. There is an argument that this player is likely to be notable on the grounds that non-English language sources are very likely to exist along the same lines. On the grounds that there's just the one article I can find, that's not the multiple, independent, in depth sources required by WP:GNG so I think I tend towards delete for him as well - although I would be happy with the article being kept if someone can demonstrate the likelihood of non-English language sources. The same argument has certainly been used to keep articles in the past. The others I find nothing verifiable to demonstrate that they come close to meeting GNG. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:05, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. I also made efforts to find sources, and if it's this hard, I don't think they're worth it. Daask (talk) 19:53, 21 August 2018 (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.