Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isle of Axholme Evening league


 * 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. I see wide agreement here that we should not retain this article. Arguments are put forward for deletion and for moving to draft space to enable CreamyGoodne55 to source the article but as they are blocked indefinitely and have stated they have no intention of editing further, I have placed greater weight on the arguments for deletion and so have closed this discussion as delete. If anyone would like the page to be moved to user space or draft space so they can work on the article, just drop me a line on my talk page. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 07:24, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Isle of Axholme Evening league

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable, minor, local amateur cricket competition. Highly unlikely that any coverage exists beyond primary sources and possibly local routine results in local press. Cricket competitions below ECB Premier League level are generally not notable. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of cricket-related deletion discussions. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there any point discussing this. This is targetted harrasment by Just look at the other pages that Ive published this year and see hes done the same thing.
 * Publisher responce

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Humberside_Alliance_cricket_league

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Bob_Welton_cup

Or better yet just look at his contributions today and tell me its not targetted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wjemather

Adding So an Admin can see whats going on.CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 11:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You need more than just the fact someone is working on articles you have contributed to as evidence of harassment. I see nothing to indicate that you personally are being targeted in bad faith to harm you or Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Then whats the point, if you cant see that this is targetted harrasment then I refused to engage in the discussion about this and you can just let people run pages like its the Mafia. Weve put hundreds of hours into publishing these pages. This page today is the culmination of 2 weeks of searching newspaper articles and Ive had about 20 books on my desk to find information out but because one person wants to abuse me its just "hey lets delete it". Delete the pages, ive lost all interest in ever doing anything on Wikipedia if this is how you deal with Bullys, just let me copy all my articles into work documents and Ill host them elsewhere.CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 11:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify. I concur with 's assessment that this nomination is in good faith, I think the article's creator doing some work on improving the article in the draftspace and learning how Wikipedia's collaborative editing process works would be beneficial for them and the article.  I am familiar with WikiProject Cricket so I could put them in touch with some users who may be willing to assist, and as an AFC reviewer I would certainly keep my eye on it.  At the end of the day the article is unsourced at the moment and therefore fails verifiability tests but covers a potentially notable topic and a considerable amount of work appears to have been put into it.  Incubation in the draftspace, as opposed to deletion, would be beneficial for all those involved.    SITH   (talk)   12:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Responce to
 * As I have already said I have zero interest in contributing to anything on Wikipedia if the admins and other authors are going to support a user who is attacking people because he thinks he owns the Cricket pages on here. Interestingly you only have to look back at his contributions and hes done the same to the golf pages to the point where other people have stopped contributing. If you want proof as to why this is targetted and harrasment I will break down the full events 


 * I have published and posted these pages for the last 5 years without any other involvement past some people acknowledging them and fixing typos (my spelling is terrible). Not once has anyone tagged them for anything past the Bob welton Cup Page got tagged for not enough sources that I accepted.
 * 2 Weeks ago I edited the Lincolnshire_Premier_League page to allign it up to the other lincolnshire cricket pages
 * Deleted the table I was working on for player records stating "format cancelled season; remove awards (not significant and not reported in independent RSes at this level)"
 * As someone involved in the actual cricket league I know that Awards in that league are very significant and as is the case in Lincolnshire County Cricket league That I also published they are well recieved
 * Some Back and throwing between myself and at which point he posts on my personal page telling me "[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Lincolnshire Premier League, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. wjematherplease leave a message... 15:30, 11 September 2020 (UTC)"
 * I kindly reminded him that I was working on the page to add things and his edit, that he did 4 times! wasnt warranted and I was working on filling the page with information.
 * He immediately tags all the pages I posted around that (And has stated his intention to tag more before stepped in) for deletion.

Now if you want more evidence that this is targetted then please go to the users talk page where firstly he states at the top "Nowhere near as active as I used to be – mostly due to being busy doing other things, but also because Wikipedia as a community has proven itself absolutely incapable of" and then lists things he thinks are up with Wikipedia

and secondly he has history of doing this with Golf pages.

Now if that isnt targetted and not in good faith I dont know what is.

I am 100% willing to give this a second chance, if admits he did this to target me and all of the deletion tags are dropped because of it. If not then as I said I will not be doing another thing on Wikipedia past looking at everything does like a hawk for him to slip up. If hes man enough to admit that he was abusing the fucntions because of an argument Im happy to apologise for letting it get heated and we can end it there.CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 15:18, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. This debate has been heavily sidetracked: nevertheless, the guidelines at WP:NTEAM make it clear that we should follow general notability guidelines for this sort of organisation. There's no evidence that the league meets any of the GNG criteria and I've been unable to find any significant coverage which might demonstrate notability. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 15:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - clearly fails WP:GNG due to lack of reliable sources covering the subject in depth Spiderone  16:38, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - here's the path to keeping these articles: you've mentioned that you've done a lot of research, consulted several books, etc. That's great, but none of that is in the article. In fact, there are no references at all right now. Just because someone nominated an article for deletion doesn't mean it will be deleted -- it just means its deletion will be discussed. All anyone will care about is whether this has received sufficient coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. List those books/sources here, and people will support keeping. Resist making it about the nominator. Many of us have been in a similar situation of having hard work nominated for deletion to know it can be extremely frustrating, but you do yourself a disservice by focusing on the nomination rather than the content/sourcing. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk \\ 16:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Draftify - As it stands the article fails to meet GNG, however the user has mentioned having sources. Moving it to draft space gives it the chance to be improved once the user has returned from his current editing ban.  Grey joy talk 05:23, 18 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Draftify - if the article's primary editor does genuinely have lots of sources available, let's give him/her a chance to add them and then give it another shot in mainspace -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2020 (UTC)


 * CommentThis is my last comment on the situation as I can see that the person in question is back to harrasing golf pages now hes got his monopoly on cricket pages. If you want to see the level of pettiness he has and why I can say this is a targeted attack with zero care (Well ignoring the fact he hasnt made a single comment on any of these since doing them but apparently that isnt enough). Please turn your attention to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lincolnshire_Premier_League&action=history which is where this attack stared. Whilst I was banned The user is question went back and undid the article again, only this time he did a very quick minor edit straight after so you cant undo his changes, meaning the work I and others have done is lost without retyping it. Sadly the admin I asked to get involed doesnt seem like hes one bit interested, even going on to his page to say he can carry on delete flaggging my pages once the decision has been made on these ( for those interested). Ive spoken with everyone involed in creating and keeping up with these pages and we are all in 100% agreement that we will not be doing any more work on wikipedia so the user in question (which hilariously I have been told i will banned permanently if I say anything about him again when hes allowed to do this to 100s of hours of work) has got his way. Sad day for places like here when the obsession, gatekeeping and abuse of rules reigns over people wanting to do what this place was created for, the preseration of information for the future. CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * CommentI find it pretty laughable hes now trying to remove discussion about what hes done on a page he created and called me out for trying to remove things from earlier. But, yeah this was not a targeted attack.CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 17:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I dont think its very fair for the decision making that now I have proof that this was a targetted attack the user in question can keep removing the posts to make him look better. Can you please lock him out of making edits until a decision on this has been made.CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't ban users just because a deletion discussion is going on. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  18:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  18:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Local interest only. Nigej (talk) 14:32, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin - due to their permanent ban, the creator of this article won't be able to work on this in the draftspace Spiderone  17:32, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - I don't think we'll ever get sourcing to show that this league is notable - it certainly isn't anywhere up the standard of ECB Premier Leagues - for example the Kent Cricket League - let alone organisations such as the Lancashire League or Australian Grade Cricket. Per the cricket project guidelines it would need to show substantial sourcing and a much wider notability. Given that the only person who would be likely to work on any draft is now permanently-banned, it makes no sense to draftify. So, three green lights: pitching in line, impact in line and hitting the wickets: plumb lbw and got to go Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:03, 24 September 2020 (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.