Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birchet (Surrey 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) 14:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Birchet (Surrey cricketer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD inexplicably removed. Player has not played first-class cricket, as suggested in the article, and all we have is his surname. Fails WP:CRIN. StickyWicket (talk) 13:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I assume it's the same case as this AfD?  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 09:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - very clear delete. Never played at first-class level - despite the article stating he did - and we only have a surname to go on so there's no chance we'll ever be able to build a viable biography. As a result we have no way to show notability beyond being a name on a scorecard. The same points as in the AfD Lugnuts links to apply - fails WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:N, WP:ATHLETE etc... Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. First class or not first class (CRIN is a community consensus - not policy - and sport guidelines are very much geared for the modern era, not the 18th century) - it is clear there is no SIGCOV as we are even lacking a given name.Icewhiz (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete- no biographical information, and not enough sourcing to even know the person's full name. If there's not enough sourcing to unambiguously identify the player, we should not have an article. There's also loads of original research- all that stuff about "this guy must be notable because they wrote down his name and that hardly happened in those days". This is another hopeless case. Unclear rationale for deprod. Reyk YO! 09:32, 29 December 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.