Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R. Black (Leicestershire 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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

R. Black (Leicestershire 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)

PROD inexplicably removed. Player has not played first-class cricket, as suggested in the article, and all we have is a first initial and his surname. Fails WP:CRIN. StickyWicket (talk) 13:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I assume it's the same case as this AfD? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. CRIN is not policy (but wikiproject consensus) - and is predicated (as in other sports) on players in major matches surely having coverage in various sport rags. While this seems to be the case in the modern era, this seems to be untrue for players from the 18th century - and the lack of sourcing here - as well as a lack of given name - rather indicate that this figure does not have WP:SIGCOV. Icewhiz (talk) 09:11, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the reasons given above hit the nail on the head. The matches aren't first-class and we can't show any other notability so fails WP:GNG - we're looking at a name on 4 scorecard. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:41, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no biographical information, and what sourcing there is is not even enough to unambiguously identify the player. This is not enough for an article. Unclear rationale for deprod. Reyk _YO! 09:28, 29 December 2018 (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.