Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mehta (Uttar Pradesh 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 Snow Keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 23:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mehta (Uttar Pradesh cricketer)[edit]

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

Delete Almost identical situation to that of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S. Perera (Kurunegala Youth Cricket Club cricketer), where the consensus was to delete - a solitary first class appearance, but no biographical details whatsoever; not even a first name. Didn't even bat. SageGreenRider (talk) 20:03, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - There are four more similar articles with AfD at the moment S._Perera_(Old_Cambrians_cricketer) {closed as delete), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manzoor (Delhi cricketer), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Farook (Saurashtra cricketer), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narain (Madhya Pradesh cricketer). SageGreenRider (talk) 20:20, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per WP:CRIN and per my comments at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S._Perera_(Old_Cambrians_cricketer). This needs proper discussion at the relevant WP project, not in this piecemeal way. Johnlp (talk) 09:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per John's rationale. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narain (Madhya Pradesh cricketer). IgnorantArmies (talk) 03:56, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article meets WP:NCRIC, which a closing admin was previously unaware of. IgnorantArmies makes a valid point above too. The guideline is simple and provides a level playing field for the inclusion of all cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level (or in some cases international between minor cricket playing nations). I also feel this would be best discussed at the project page. PinchHittingLeggy (talk) 10:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NCRIC, and the only reason given for deletion is "it's like the other one that got deleted", which is bad logic, especially as I believe it was an awful decision to delete. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The reason for the deletion nominations was given at the outset as "a solitary first class appearance, but no biographical details whatsoever; not even a first name. Didn't even bat." Lack of notability is the issue, obviously. The presumption in NCRIC that hard-to-find reliable source have substantially reported on Mehta is implausible to say the least. There's even less to write about on the topic than the others. Didn't even bat! SageGreenRider (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has played in a major match and so meets WP:NCRIC. Jack | ^{talk page} 10:03, 7 December 2015 (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.