Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Allen (Oxford University 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. Daniel (talk) 05:27, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Allen (Oxford University 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)

An Australian who while studying played two matches. Never played again as they left cricket after graduation. Nothing in sources. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 05:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Oxford University Cricket Club players Has played 2 FC matches, but I couldn't find any coverage, although searching was difficult due to common name and not knowing if anything he did/does post cricket is notable. Using a similar precedent to that used by WP:FOOTY when a player with one or a few matches but no coverage, is redirected/deleted. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 11:00, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect~~Keep per WP:HEY (per wjemather and Rugbyfan22)~~, there is a valid alternative to deletion~~. Störm, please give it a rest on on the deletion of Australian cricket articles, will you? It is becoming tedious and annoying. Deus et lex (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So we should keep junk articles on not-notables just because it's annoying? Sorry, but these articles need action and your sentiment would be better directed at the editors mass-generating these mini-stubs without ever looking for sources beyond their favourite database(s). _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 13:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My issue is that it's clear that proper WP:BEFORE searches are not being done on the articles being nominated, and policy is not being applied properly. That's what is annoying. This one is a clear example where a bit more searching could have revealed a few more sources, or a good redirect alternative that doesn't require an AfD. And don't confuse stub status with lack of notability, it's perfectly fine to create a stub. Deus et lex (talk) 22:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, you wouldn't find much if you searched for him and cricket, which is all that can be expected for a BEFORE. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Found enough sources to (just about) pass WP:GNG; article expanded. Seemingly more notable as a rugby player than a cricketer, so article title may need further discussion should this be kept. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:34, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Following the article having been updated, while his rugby league and rugby union careers are not notable, and his cricketing career are just notable, there looks just to be enough to pass WP:GNG as stated by Wjemather. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would also recommend moving this page to John Allen (sportsman, born 1974) or similar given this new information. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 15:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect - the article was improved, but I don't really see WP:GNG-qualifying coverage (though I can't access the Telegraph article): much of it is match reports, the Oxford Mail isn't bad but it's local (not excluding it, but down-weighting considering it's the clearest/best source) and the remaining sources aren't independent (Oxford captains list, his school handbook). He is more notable for rugby and would prefer a redirect to a rugby-based page if possible. SportingFlyer T·C 13:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A fair chunk of the Telegraph article is about him tbf. It's not particularly detailed, but two of the 4 paragraphs cover his role in the side and a bit about him playing rugby. He played Super Rugby for the Brumbies so that could be a possible redirect (there's no list of Brumbies players or former players section on the page). Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If he played for the Brumbies, even one match, that's an important key to his notability, but I can't verify this: is there a good historical super league player stats database similar to afltables.com? SportingFlyer T·C 17:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the site I use for stats, itsrugby, had an outage and is still be repaired. A more in depth search seems to show he didn't actually play Super Rugby and only played for the Brumbies in the Ricoh Championship, which isn't listed as a notable league at WP:NRU. For me it's a weak GNG pass as I think there's enough from sources there when combined to pass and i've updated my vote accordingly. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is where I got that information from, will add it to the article. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that when adding it, even though the Oxford Mail article says "in the Super 12". There seems to be a few mentions of him in the Sydney Morning Herald, which might help identify the match(es) he appeared in and expand on his earlier club cricket and rugby, but I can't access them at the moment as I'm waiting on my subscription renewal. I've also added more detail regarding his pre-Oxford education. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 18:15, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

wjemather Please provide links. I have access to SMH. Störm (talk) 22:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They're not on SMH or SMH archive as they don't cover the relevant period, however they are on Newspapers.com (search for him along with Brumbies/Hawkesbury/etc.). _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:29, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the post-nom expansion work. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the coverage cited in the article is sufficient to show GNG Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:09, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep would be very marginal indeed on WP:NCRIC, but passes WP:GNG on the basis of the expansion. The comment "nothing in sources" in the original AfD is risible based on the revised article, and makes it clear that there was no meaningful searching done before an AfD was submitted. DevaCat1 (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Now more sources have been found GNG is satisfied. Might be worth pinging the rugby project too, might be more sources for his rugby career out there. StickyWicket (talk) 14:59, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AssociateAffiliate Have had a look, theres's a few bits with passing mentions, but not much else. His rugby career wasn't that notable with no matches that'd pass him for WP:NRU and they were at the start of the 2000s anyway so I'm not sure if they'd be online anyway. There's enough from his cricket and other bits to pass him for GNG though as I've said above. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What really gets me though is that he's far more notable as a rugby player than he is as a cricketer, including the (local) article which addresses him specifically as a rugby player, and yet he would comprehensively fail the rugby notability guideline. This strikes me as a huge problem. Play two cricket matches without bowling a single ball or scoring a single run and have your name appear in a local article and boom! Notable! SportingFlyer T·C 21:23, 19 March 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.