Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adil Zarif


 * 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. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Adil Zarif

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article clearly doesn't meet WP:GNG. The sources in the article are simply directory/stats listings, which I believe do not establish notability. Have performed a WP:BEFORE and nothing came up. I've nominated two articles previously which were similar and they have been deleted (here and here). Editors over there cited the WP:CRIN guideline which is being debated itself and for it to change, precedent is needed, clearly those guidelines aren't being accepted and seem to me like they'll never be able to satisfy the GNG. Another argument given by editors on similar pages is given that sources in other languages might exist, I am thoroughly unconvinced by this as none of these sources have materialized and I feel like it's an argument which can be used anywhere; all an editor has to do is claim that sources exist. Please note I am a new editor and this is my understanding after trying my best to read as many guidelines and past discussions as possible, I could have easily made mistake, but I am just trying to be bold. Iitianeditor (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Iitianeditor (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Iitianeditor (talk) 19:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: - unlikely to have further cricketing notability, only playing one List A match.  --Whiteguru (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG/BIO/SPORTBASIC. A great example of why there is consensus at NSPORT to rewrite NCRIC and remove the low-bar domestic appearance criteria. One solitary match played, in which he contributed very little. No sources available beyond routine and indiscriminate statistics. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:57, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete one match notability is absurd. It is not like we make people notable for being the instructor of record for one official university course. Even publishing one article in an academic journal is almost never enough to make one notable. There are a few people notable for having published one book, academic or otherwise, but they are rare. Most writers who are notable, be they academics, aretists or however else one would describe writers, have many works to their name. This one match criteria is just absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Meets NCRIC. Mass-nominating articles (at a rate of >=3/min) from one third-world country during a world-wide lockdown is not the way to change notability guidelines. Meets an SNG and I put no stock on the assertion that a search for GNG has been exhausted; it's hard enough to achieve it during normal times and with better-studied subjects in more affluent parts of the world. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Rawalpindi Rams cricketers, which would need to be created. StickyWicket (talk) 09:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.