Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Gorton (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 redirect to List of Eastern Province representative cricketers. ATD close. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

John Gorton (cricketer)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No evidence of any notability. Meets the very low requirements of WP:NCRIC, which is being disputed right now. Entries in three statistical databases (and presumably some passing mentions in match reports) are not sufficient to be considered notable enough for a separate article. A redirect to List of Eastern Province representative cricketers or a delete seem like the best solutions. Fram (talk) 15:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep passes WP:NCRIC. The guideline is being disputed by Fram, so take that for what it's worth. Article was redirected, then expanded. At worst, restore the redirect.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 15:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * See Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports). I'm hardly the only one disputing it, general agreement is for either scrapping it or rewriting it to make it a lot tighter. Fram (talk) 15:13, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect. 2020 marked the year that specialist projects could no longer make inclusions based on guidelines contrary to Wikipedia's general guidelines. The folks in WikiProject Football have taken this on board, and started deleting articles—by the numbers—on players with only 1 to 5 pro-tier games. Rugby has been cleaned up recently, and now the turn has come to cricket. Including players who are written about only in a couple of match reports, trivial or non-independent news is no longer feasible in Wikipedia, though it should be discussed on a case-by-case basis (although redirecting is often okay), and in this case there is no sensible reason for keeping. Geschichte (talk) 16:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete It is time that we delete all these one game, one match articles unless there is truly a very clear passing of GNG. We do not declare academics notable because they were the teacher of record for one class, and that would involve a lot more time than one game. For that matter, we do not declare academics notable just because they publish one book with an academic press. Nor is every writer notable just because they publish one novel. Even actors are expected to have multiple significant roles in notable productions, so passing sportsmen when they play in just one match or game is just absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This FAILS WP:NCRIC because SPORTCRIT on the same page says "Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability. This includes listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion, such as Sports Reference's college football and basketball databases." Author needs to stop creating zero-notability perma-substub "articles", whether they've played just the bare one match or not. Reywas92Talk 18:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect with any relevant information merged to List of Eastern Province representative cricketers. This has been established as a reasonable compromise over a period of time and articles like this where there is clearly some notability but not enough evidence of clear sourcing to maintain a stand alone article. I'm not convinced that, given the usual outcome, that it's a good idea to be sending this sort of article to AfD and I don't quite understand the delete votes given that this is now pretty much the default result at AfD. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Eastern Province representative cricketers. We shouldn't be making or keeping articles sourced only to statistical databases about cricketers with a single first-class match.  No sign of GNG being met, and possible revisions of NCRIC to exclude these type of articles are underway. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 20:13, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to List of Eastern Province representative cricketers. Fails all meaningful notability guidelines. NCRIC only provides a very weak presumption of notability for domestic cricketers and by consensus is unreliable, so GNG (and/or a different SNG) must be met. The only sources we have are databases which do not establish notability per SPORTCRIT. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:51, 24 December 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.