Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Lara's 375


 * 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   redirect to Brian Charles Lara. Consensus exists that there shouldn't be a separate article, nor was there a valid argument against a redirect. I don't think we have much consensus on if, and if how much, content to merge, but that is a question best handled through the usual editorial process. j⚛e deckertalk 00:38, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Brian Lara's 375

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unnecessary article. Lara's 375 can be covered in his main article, this article doesn't particularly do a very good job of covering the subject it is about. PinchHittingLeggy (talk) 19:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Johnlp (talk) 23:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This is an effort to start a new set of pages covering top innings in cricket. The page does refer to quotes and information about the innings. Trying to develop a Infobox for Cricket Innings. Would continue to add more information here. Please do not delete shankariima (talk) 04:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Notable? Yes. Worth its own article? No. Merge info into the legend that is Brian Charles Lara.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Can be covered in the main article.  IgnorantArmies  (talk)  14:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to an anchor point in Brian Lara. I think it's worth talking more broadly about Shankariima's effort to make pages to cover top innings. I saw in his Contributions list that one of the next articles he intends to make is for VVS Laxman's 281 at Eden Gardens. I think this highlights that there will be two types of innings which could theoretically have articles about them:
 * Innings which famously turn around a Test match, such as Laxman's 281.
 * Innings which break records simply through high scores, such as Lara's 375, or perhaps Rohit Sharma's ODI 264.
 * Of the first of those, the innings is notable only in the context of the Test match, so the article should be about the Test match, not the innings. In Laxman's case, the Second Test, 2000–01 Border–Gavaskar Trophy already has an article, and any attempts to make a separate article for Laxman's 281 would surely be merged into it. That would be a suitable location for discussion and plaudits about the innings.
 * For the second of those, including Lara's 375, it is the innings which is notable, not the Test Match. However, I don't think we have content to fill a useful article about an innings with no otherwise notable match context. The article as it stands now describes the innings in cursory detail (e.g. Lara scored 375 from x balls in y minutes with z boundaries) followed by some quotes and historical context – which is better served as a paragraph in Brian Lara. To expand the content to something which could stand alone as an article, we'd probably need to provide the ball-by-ball Cricinfo commentary; and then it just becomes a stats dump without a lot of encyclopedic value. As such, I think redirection to an anchor point is the most suitable course of action. Aspirex (talk) 23:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Brian Lara, possibly merge some content too. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2015 (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.