Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Pitts (cricketer, died 1847)

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 List of English cricketers (1826–1840)#P. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

George Pitts (cricketer, died 1847)[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)

Lacks notability. We know next to nothing about him, not even his regular team (the "left-handed" was only assembled for a few matches over the years). Only sources are statistics databases. No obvious redirect target, the only place he could belong to is the left vs. right page, but he isn't mentioned there (and probably shouldn't be). Fram (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a notable figure in the context of a general encyclopaedia. Even on a cricket Fandom site he would only have a brief and cursory entry. RobinCarmody (talk) 23:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of English cricketers (1826–1840) section P. That's one reason these lists exist and why I spent so much time working on them! Given the limits of what we know and that he's only ever recorded in one match of any kind, this seems reasonable. I will merge across references and add a few words to the summary just now. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- No objection to this redirect. I had been looking for some team page to redirect to, didn't think about these year-based lists. Fram (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - They're good until 1860. I must work on the 1861 to 1870 one at some point, but it's a lot of work... Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all the useful content is on the redirect page anyway, and that'll be all we ever know about him. Fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is the best solution here and it preserves what little info we do have on this individual Spiderone 18:54, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect; clear GNG failure but redirect maybe reasonable. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:54, 19 December 2020 (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.