Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilyas Ahmed (East Pakistan 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 List of East Pakistan first-class cricketers. as WP:ATD ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ilyas Ahmed (East Pakistan 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)

Fails WP:GNG, no coverage found. Störm (talk) 07:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:NCRIC. Ten days ago, I reminded this editor about the closing comments of a past RfC "As with the RfC on secondary school notability, this should not be an invitation to "flood AfD with indiscriminate or excessive nominations". This is one of approx. a dozen back-to-back nominations made today within a 30 minute window, suggesting no attempt at WP:BEFORE was used pre-nomination. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete totally fails GNG which is the minimum standard for all articles. Any article that fails to meet GNG should be deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:04, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails NCRIC since matches against touring sides are not be considered to be the "highest domestic or international level"; even allowing for a nominal NCRIC pass, by consensus that would only provide an extremely weak presumption of notability that is extremely unreliable for cricketers such as these (recent NSPORT discussion here). This also fails all meaningful guidelines including GNG and SPORTCRIT. No sources beyond wide ranging databases (including scorecards that do not count as SIGCOV); no suitable list to merge into. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 12:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of East Pakistan first-class cricketers seems the best solution here as the article title isn't likely to ever be used for anything else. This is consistent with a range of similar articles over the past few years. I'm not opposed to deletion as such given the lack of sources - a technical pass of NCRIC but failure of GNG. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:24, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northern Escapee (talk) 06:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, 1 game is nowhere near enough for encyclopedic inclusion when failing other guidelines, as shown in 100+ sports AFDs. Geschichte (talk) 07:47, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of East Pakistan first-class cricketers - no evidence of the sort of coverage required for a stand-alone article but ATDs must be considered Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:28, 3 February 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.