Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerald Austin (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 keep. Consensus was clearly to keep. (non-admin closure)  Onel 5969  TT me 19:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Gerald Austin (cricketer)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

One of many cricket articles that fail WP:GNG big time. After four other AfDs on cricket players I started ended all in "redirect" (123), 4), I redirected some other articles with the same lack of individual notability. This was reverted for being "pointy disruption" by the article creator. So I'll nominate them for AfD instead, with no objection from my side to either deletion or redirection. I nominate them individually, as it may turn out that, despite my searches for sources, some of these can be shown to be actually notable. Fram (talk) 14:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 14:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 14:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 14:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:NCRIC. The nom made a recent failed RfC to remove the said notability requirements. Since then, they have tried to circumnavigate this by making mass redirects instead. The nom has said that they "have no beef with Lugnuts", however following their failed RfC, have seemingly gone out of their way to target artciles I've worked on. Another RfC on sporting articles closed with the comments "As with the RfC on secondary school notability, this should not be an invitation to "flood AfD with indiscriminate or excessive nominations". And yet, there have been 25+ AfDs logged by Fram in a 15/20 minute window, indicating no WP:BEFORE was used.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 14:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * For my reply, see here. Fram (talk) 14:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * There's no qualms in creating them, as they meet the notability criteria, which you tried and failed to get rid of. And this is the issue.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 14:35, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * And this guy is far from a one/two match wonder, with 29 matches under his belt.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 15:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Delete and Merge record to List of Otago representative cricketers. Death not in Wisden 1960 so not not notable enough for own page. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 20:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:NCRIC. Nominator didn't do a WP:BEFORE to show the opposite. The nominator nominated (automatically) a large amount of cricketeers. It would have been better to made a bunch of them in one nomination. As seen above, the nominator is not willing the write a reply at everey AfD. SportsOlympic (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You have posted the same incorrect claims about me (which are not relevant to keeping or deleting this article anyway) at all these AfDs. I hope you will be kind enough to take into account my answer at one of them and correct all your statements accordingly. Fram (talk) 16:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - 29 first-class matches so clearly a prominent cricketer at the time Spiderone  19:47, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Then it shouldn't be hard to find some indepth sources? Fram (talk) 08:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. 29 first-class appearances more than establishes notability from a cricketing point of view. I'd imagine other sources in NZ exist and I believe this article is going to be expanded very soon. StickyWicket (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete totally fails GNG which is the minimum standard for all articles. Any article that fails to meet GNG should be deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NCRIC. He appeared in 29 first-class matches and taken a fifer during his career. Störm   (talk)  21:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep seems reasonable to give this one a little more time. 29 appearances is a lot, and looking at British players from a similar era I would certainly expect to find some level of sourcing when there are that many appearances. That may not be the case for Otago, but I wouldn't have a problem with giving it 12 months to find out. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep seems to be a decent chance of unearthing substantial coverage via PapersPast (e.g., ) although it will take much work filtering out the endless squad announcements and scorecards. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, with 29 first-class matches meets WP:NCRIC by a substantial margin. Nsk92 (talk) 22:04, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, per WP:NCRIC. An amazingly pointless AfD nomination. Moonraker (talk) 18:31, 30 January 2021 (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.