Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azhar Ali (Omani 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 keep. Consensus was to keep. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Azhar Ali (Omani 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)

Nothing notable about him, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 22:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and comment - Now now, if we're stretching this to international cricketers, we have to be careful. This man was an international cricketer. If we start deleting international cricketers, this starts setting a frightening precedent. You make it sound like he came around to have a knock-about. I'm assuming Omani cricketers from this time do pass CRIN. The rules changed a million times. Bobo . 22:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider • Spider's edits)} 23:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - any sportsperson that has represented their country at senior level is notable Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider • Spider's edits)} 23:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is time we start actually applying GNG and stop hanging on to permanent micro-stub "biographies" that tell us nothing of the actual life of the person involved. It is time Wikipedia started focusing on quality over quantity.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This man played in an international cricket tournament, making seven international appearances. F the technicality that these matches are not ODIs (associate members then didn't have ODI status, with the exception of Kenya), they are still international matches played to List A status. Nominating international sportspeople for deletion has taken this from the sublime to the outright ridiculous. StickyWicket (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and comment International players now. Really? When is this going to end? As @Bobo192: says this sets a dangerous precedent. There are probably hundreds of pre-apartheid cricketers who don’t have any sources. If we start deleting these then I have no clue as to what is going to save them. CreativeNorth (talk) 10:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; trivial NCRIC pass does not outweigh the hopeless GNG failure which results in an article built on statistics by means of SYNTH and OR creating all manner of BLP issues. There may be value in compiling a List of Omani international cricketers, but the players themselves do not meet the criteria for standalone articles due to lack of any significant coverage. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep easily meets WP:NCRIC, having played in multiple top-level matches for his country. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Top-level matches"? Club cricket in Test playing nations is of a higher standard. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your SYNTH and OR. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you do not disagree. Or are you standing by your original claim that these are "top-level matches"? _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:NCRIC, per above. --IWI (talk) 11:53, 26 January 2021 (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.