Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Divyang T10

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 Draftify. Star Mississippi 02:17, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

World Divyang T10[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)

Non-notable cricket tournament which fails WP:NCRIC via WP:OFFCRIC. References are just WP:ROUTINE at best and WP:PROMOTION at worst. Fails wider WP:GNG and WP:EVENT. StickyWicket (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify This was quite clearly a premature move from draftspace by obviously inexperienced editor(s). My Google search shows that it has potential to become a viable article. As a disability sport it should not be judged strictly according to NCRIC/OFCRIC standards which realistically only First Class or equivalent cricket can meet. Besides referencing the language also needs extensive improvement. I'd also strongly recommend that any future return to mainspace must be via the AFC system. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify I agree with Dodger67 here, there may well be enough for an article here, especially on a disability related topic, but the article is a mess and needs and extensive cleanup before it's suitable for mainspace. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:01, 9 March 2022 (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.