Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Campbell Furlong


 * 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. ✗ plicit  14:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Campbell Furlong

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Retired cricket player stub, not particularly notable in competition, definitely not notable as an accountant. I found exactly one piece of coverage on Google or Google News (though the latter might be too recent to cover the period I assume the subject played cricket), and I still don't think it establishes notability (article on him stepping down from regional cricket... org? https://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/sport/86234200/end-of-furlong-era-for-central-districts)

Anyways, no multiple sources = no WP:GNG. I also checked WP:CRIN and first-class for Central Districts Stags would be the Plunket Shield championship, but it says Plunket Shield players are only notable for the 1906-07 season, which obviously doesn't apply. Blue Edits (talk) 18:41, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket,  and New Zealand.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's an undeveloped article which says next to nothing about his cricket career. In fact, Furlong played in 139 top-class matches so, if someone has the time and inclination to pursue it, there must be a lot of coverage out there in NZ sources. If it cannot be developed quickly enough to meet GNG, then worst case scenario per WP:ATD-R must be a redirect to List of Central Districts representative cricketers, where he is already named. Bc  Jvs  UTC 21:25, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Regional cricket? It's called first class cricket and if you don't know the difference then you shouldn't be nominating anything to do with cricket. The CRIN list of tournaments says "From 1906/07, not only 1906/07" for the Plunkett Shield. There is also this article about his time as an administrator. Everyone should know that online archives of pre-2010 newspapers is often incredibly poor. The-Pope (talk) 04:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That article is mostly quotes about him failing to return to a board post for CD; the few sentences that aren't are either non-encyclopedic administrative details or are about his dad or brother. It does not contribute to GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll fully admit to not knowing much about cricket or WP:CRIN, but I hardly need to be a cricket expert to read WP:GNG and nominate articles that don't qualify. That said, hopefully the more experienced cricket editors can find some older coverage. Blue Edits (talk) 06:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment We have some very good NZ cricket editors, I'd imagine if they can't find anything then I'd suggest redirect, but given the number of games played, I imagine there to be coverage out there, so pinging to see if he can find anything. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I did a Google source on NZ websites (Google "Campbell Furlong" site:.nz) and found a few sources on nzherald.co.nz from the tail end of his career, including, that indicate that he was a known player. The only archive site for NZ newspapers I know of is Papers Past which only has papers from 1839 to 1979 so there was no help there. Whether there are any significant offline or sources is something we can only speculate but due to the likelyhood of him being a well known player I would like to suggest that we redirect the article to Hawke's Bay cricket team instead of deleting it if passing of GNG isn't established. Alvaldi (talk) 11:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * According to what I saw on CricketArchive, he played mostly for Central Districts and we generally redirect to a list of players by club, which is my rationale for suggesting List of Central Districts representative cricketers above. Bc  Jvs  UTC 12:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirecting to List of Central Districts representative cricketers is also perfectly fine by me. Alvaldi (talk) 12:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . Bc  Jvs  UTC 12:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: No consensus to delete outright, but should this be kept as-is or made a redirect? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 12:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. With 117 appearances for Central Districts, at FC/LA/T20 level, I'd imagine plenty of coverage will exist. It's why infoboxes should be populated with full stats to provide a better idea of how long their career was. Sure there's plenty out there for Sammyrice to dig up. StickyWicket (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. Alvaldi (talk) 19:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. 42 first-class appearances for Central Districts over seven years. Paora (talk) 19:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Central Districts representative cricketers, unless more suitable sources can be found, per Bc. PhantomSteve/ talk ¦ contribs \ 10:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment. I think I might have caused the keep v redirect uncertainty so I've changed my recommendation to keep (see above) with redirect as worst case scenario alternative. The article should be tagged for improvements, especially sources. Hope this helps the discussion. Bc  Jvs  UTC 12:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: As a former first-class cricket player he seems notable per WP:SNG 1AmNobody24 (talk) 13:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. Sources have been added and article expanded. Paora (talk) 09:33, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep there's enough here now - thanks due to Paora. The chances are that players with so many appearances at a senior level in New Zealand will have sources somewhere about them - I've no doubt that there are far more paper-based sources. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:27, 10 January 2023 (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.