Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harrison Powell

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. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:37, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harrison Powell[edit]

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

Non-notable cricketer. Fails WP:NCRIC. I can't find any sources other than confirmation that somebody with his first initial and last name appeared in one college cricket match. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:NCRIC. Has played two first-class cricket matches, the highest level of domestic cricket.Jevansen (talk) 01:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jevansen: How do you know? It's not in the article, and I can't find anything on Google. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 01:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It does say it - "He made his first class debut for Cardiff MCCU against Glamorgan on 1 April 2014." This is verified by the Cricinfo reference provided on the article. Jevansen (talk) 02:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I didn't think university matches counted. I guess I'm mistaken. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 02:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, often University vs County fixtures don't have first-class status, but these ones did. Not sure what the determining factor is. Jevansen (talk) 02:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - clearly passes WP:NCRIC and evidently nominated in error. St Anselm (talk) 20:34, 13 December 2016 (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.