Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhavya Bishnoi (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Thank you everyone for your additional participation. I am deleting this based on the arguments presented, including by and others. Perhaps someday he'll be eligible for an article. Thanks again for your participation and assuming good faith. Missvain (talk) 00:23, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Bhavya Bishnoi
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously deleted as an attempted politician who failed WP:N. I G4'd a re-creation, but an argument was made he passes WP:NCRICKET because he played in The University Match (cricket). I don't buy that, but figured it was worth offering a forum to discuss it, as it may make the G4 deletion kinda shaky. Wily D 09:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:CRIN guidelines by having played first-class cricket, the highest domestic level of cricket in England. Recent AfD's, such as Articles for deletion/Michael Balac have kept cricketers who have played a lone first-class match. StickyWicket (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC) — Note to the closing admin: StickyWicket (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. -  FitIndia  Talk Commons 21:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:21, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:NCRICKET. This article was earlier deleted through this discussion as a politician or his son. Now it is back as a cricketer who just played one inter college match. Also there is no independent coverage about him as a cricketer, actually there is no coverage of him at all as a cricketer except in the following link here. If there is coverage about him then that is about politics and his father and grand father. Also why should a experienced editor write a article about him as I see other editors who wrote this before were blocked for socking which looked like paid editing. Finally as a cricketer he does not pass Wikipedia NCRICKET and GNG. 42.106.193.161 (talk) 15:00, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment He does pass WP:NCRIC as the Varsity Match is a first-class match. The creator of this article has created many articles about cricket players, I think it is bad faith to accuse him of paid editing. In the past week he has created a number of other articles about Oxford University cricketers, this seems to be no different. Spike &#39;em (talk) 17:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. How does an IP just find an AfD, I always find that curious. Spike &#39;em, didn't you know Alnod Boger paid me 80 years in advance to write his article ;) In response to the question "why should a experienced editor write a article about him", well because that's what I do on here, I write cricket articles. StickyWicket (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Reply to The first source you have added Hindustan Times has no link to the source. Could you please provide that? Also how did you make the connection that this individual is the cricketer and the politician and not two different people with same name, could you provide a source to that? Last of all to your question where did a IP find this AFD is that I had speedy this page and there is nothing to be surprised. 42.106.217.125 (talk) 08:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've added ref to what looks like the article from Hindustan Times, which describes BB as a 26 year old (in April 2019) former Delhi youth cricketer who attended St Anthony's, Oxford, which all ties in with the information on the cricket pages used as sources. CricketArchive lists various Delhi U15s games on his record. The team sheets for Varsity Matches usually list the colleges the players attend should that be needed. Spike &#39;em (talk) 11:04, 16 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete I had nominated this article the last time around as it failed WP:NPOL. I still feel it does not pass the criteria for a standalone article on Wikipedia. Another disconcerting thing here is the repeated recreation of this page. Their seems to be a concerted effort to recreate this page. (Note:I don't mean to cast any aspersions on the current creator as he/she seem to be long term trusted editors). - FitIndia  Talk Commons 21:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete- Given that nothing whatsoever has changed since the last AfD, which closed with consensus to delete, I'm not sure why G4 doesn't apply. If anything, this should have gone through DRV. Looking at the sources, I can't see that the previous AfD got this wrong. Reyk YO! 10:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I had G4'd it, but the argument was made that the new version asserts he passes WP:NCRICKET, which wasn't made or discussed in the previous AfD. So, although I'm not convinced he does, I found it a plausible enough assertion to buy that G4 may not apply.  The choice of here or DRV was perhaps somewhat arbitrary, but usually DRV is not posited as the place to consider new arguments, so ultimately I figured this was the better venue (but I don't think it actually makes a significant difference which path gets taken of those two). Wily D  10:51, 16 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm not convinced that the modern Varsity match can be considered a match played at the "top-level of domestic cricket". Perhaps in the 1920s, but it is very clearly a very, very long way below any other English first-class standard nowadays - including the "friendly" matches played at the start of the season. I'm not convinced at all that this meets NCRIC - but then I increasingly tend to think that NCRIC is a total waste of bytes anyway. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete even if the University match is first class I don't think it's enough to pass the notability guidelines. WP:ATHLETE says the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline. The guideline on this page provides bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline. Passing WP:NCRIC therefore at best only suggests that sources passing the GNG are likely to exist. The GNG is the ultimate standard, rather than the SNG. While the SNG has a lot of value in cases where the best sources may not be accessible, if he has notability based on a recent cricket match in the UK then sources passing the GNG would be available easily on the internet, and there aren't any. There are some discussing his failed run for political office in India, but we don't usually keep articles on that basis and I don't see any reason to do so here.  Hut 8.5  19:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:NCRIC, which confers a presumption of notability. Johnlp (talk) 22:11, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping from the first AFD. ミラP 16:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ミラP 16:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting due to pinging of editors for review. Want to make sure everyone gets a chance (or I'll be closing this as no consensus).
 * Delete If he passes the notability for cricketeers that is clearly flawed. Cricket does not evidently require a "first class" match to be fully pro. This tells me we should stop treating playing in one first class match a sign of notability and start requiring actual showing of multiple sources, instead of listings on directories of cricket players.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - this was implicit in my comment above, but I'll be clear about it. On the grounds that the University Match in the 21st century is nowhere close to the top level of domestic cricket in the UK, so fails CRIN. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * delete per John, and Hut. SNG does not always trump GNG. Sometimes we have to stop taking the policies to its letter, and use our common sense. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:30, 22 January 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.