Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deep Joshi (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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Deep Joshi (cricketer)

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

Completely non-notable cricketer. There is no trace on Cricinfo or CricketArchive for this cricketer, the latter containing the profiles of the most minor of players. The player fails WP:NCRIC as Minor League Cricket does meet the notability inclusion guideline for players (see WP:OFFCRIC), and the same is true for supposed under-19 players. Going back to there being no Cricinfo or CricketArchive profiles, originally the infobox claimed the player has played 7 Twenty20 matches, which is simply untrue; this has now been changed but the lead claims he has played List A cricket, again untrue; if these claims were true, the player would have a CI and CA profile. StickyWicket (talk) 09:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 09:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StickyWicket (talk) 09:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:54, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete youth players are not notable for youth player actions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 15:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and other commenters. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. There are many misinformation in the article with none of the informations matching the sites sourced. Human (talk) 20:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG and hasn't played in a notable enough match either. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No record of this cricketer on CI or CA although there are multiple articles mentioning him 1 2 WellThisIsTheReaper (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC).
 * Delete per lacking reliable sourcing of content in sufficient amount to support notability. IMHO, false information not supported by the cited sources indicates a WP:HOAX eligible for speedy deletion per WP:G3. Came here by way of RfPP. Just passing through, so haven't the time to sift it out. -- Deep fried okra  ( talk ) 19:38, 5 February 2022 (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.