Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Neill


 * 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. Consensus is "keep" but leans towards "no consensus". GNG is a guideline, not the be-all and end-all of notability discussions. That said, those who vote keep need to ensure an article provides enough verifiable information from reliable sources as to provide encyclopedic value to the reader. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Alan Neill

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Hasn't been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources, failing WP:GNG. Hack (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NCRIC - "has appeared as a player or umpire in at least one cricket match that is judged by a substantial source to have been played at the highest international or domestic level". Has umpired in multiple international matches (ODIs and T20Is) and is part of the ICC Associate and Affiliate Panel of Umpires. Has also stood in matches in Ireland's top-level competitions (2017 Inter-Provincial Championship and 2017 Inter-Provincial Trophy).  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 16:54, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Walled-garden single-subject notability standards don't trump basic WP:GNG standards. --Calton | Talk 01:48, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't know exactly when a subject is considered to pass WP:GNG so I'm not going to vote. As far as I can tell there are two non-trivial mentions of Neill online are here (his Cricinfo profile which just has his basic details and the matches he's umpired) and here (which just explains that he became a member of the ICC Associate & Affiliate Panel of International Umpires for 2016), but I don't know whether or not those two pages (which are already used as refs in the article) are enough to say it passes GNG. TripleRoryFan (talk) 11:05, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 02:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 02:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 02:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 02:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose deletion - I would like to correct Lugnuts. Alan Neill is currently a member of the ICC International Panel of Umpires after Ireland became a full member of ICC. It's very much notable and could not be deleted. Cricket246 (talk) 12:40, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:NCRICKET as confirmed by reliable sources already in the article. Atlantic306 (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete this is not cricketpedia and it is not appropriate to create a special standard apart from and wildly divergent from WP:GNG to support pages on subjects that lack sig cov. The guideline cited might supoort subject's name on a list, but not a stand alone page. Legacypac (talk) 18:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't like deleting articles, but the subject simply doesn't have enough coverage to pass for being on Wikipedia. Only the source provided from Cricket Ireland says anything that could not be better provided in database form, and that one source isn't enough. I haven't found any other reliable sources. I really do recognize that NCRIC says the subject is presumed notable, but this threshold makes permastubs exist – like Masroor Ali, or the people named Ijaz Ahmed born 1943 and 1949 – that just aren't better as standalone articles. Regretfully, entries like these need to go in a list. --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 04:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I've actually reconsidered this, mostly by looking through Lugnuts's article creations. I suppose that although I don't know much (read: anything) about cricket, competitors or officials at its highest tier are similar to that of the Olympics, articles on which I wholeheartedly support having. So I guess the guidelines are there for a reason... :) --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 04:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. The international cricket umpires as a part of the Associates and Affiliates Panel on the behalf of ICC are well notable. They have established notability guidelines under WikiProject Cricket. Abishe (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The keep votes just show how absurly over-the-top the keeism of cricket advocates have gone. Nothing comes close to making him pass reasonable notability guidelines for sport officials.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete -- lacks WP:SIGCOV as would be expected of a BLP (or any other article, but BLPs in particular). WP:SPORT also requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, and a technical pass of an SNG does not exempt an article from such coverage being demonstrated. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:23, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This is a controversial unnecessary AfD as this article is a notable one. I don't know why cricket related articles have been targeted in the recent past as the nominators didn't recognize the guidelines of WikiProject Cricket. I am pledging that this article should not be deleted as more biographical content including birth dates have been added with more reliable References such as Cricinfo, CricketArchive and other secondary sources. Abishe (talk) 03:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep umpired in international matches, and there is some coverage about him. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NCRIC, umpired in ODIs. They're inherently notable. This could be different if it was about first-class umpire. Störm   (talk)  10:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note to closer, none of the keep arguments provide any proof that the subject passes WP:GNG which is telling for a contemporary "notable" person. Hack (talk) 13:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And on the same line, none of the delete arguments provide anything more than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The person meets the notability requirements of WP, per WP:NSPORT which states they may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline or another subject specific notability guideline. And they meet the latter, as per the rationales, above.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 14:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Neill has umpired games between Bangladesh and New Zealand; Ireland and New Zealand; Afghanistan and Ireland. If you think that is "at the lower levels" then you clearly have no idea about cricket and no business commenting here
 * Merge to Development Panel of ICC Umpires. These umpires officiate at the lower levels and often do not pass WP:GNG. The cricket notability guidelines are controversial and judgement is required for biographies at the lower end of their notability spectrum. This article along with other development panel umpires are likely to only ever be permastubs so merging them will preserve the information. If they progress then the article can easily be split back out again. AIRcorn (talk) 21:07, 13 February 2018 (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.