Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of batsmen who scored 50,000 or more runs in all forms of recognized cricket


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

List of batsmen who scored 50,000 or more runs in all forms of recognized cricket

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An other sock creation with questionable notability. 50 000 runs seems like an very arbitrary number and what says this is notable? This is just an other list (among many others) from ESPN Cricinfo without evidence of widespread notability to pass WP:GNG. Once created and never updated (so out of date) is one issue as well. Qed237&#160;(talk) 15:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete for the reasons of geographic bias. This clearly favours English cricketers who play a lot more of first class and limited overs cricket. LibStar (talk) 15:55, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: The ESPN list works on a threshold of 40,000. StAnselm (talk) 18:52, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Completely arbitrary threshold, and there is no category called "all forms of recognized cricket". Wikipedia is not a statistics database.  IgnorantArmies  (talk)  03:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't believe this is a notable landmark (say compared to 10,000+ Test runs) - it's just a random cut-off with a vague inclusion criteria.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 12:58, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as nothing to suggest the needed solidity as its own article. SwisterTwister   talk  06:15, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Completely made up (in terms of benchmark) and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If we were to keep this list, then what stops us for having lists with 15000, 20000, 25000, 30000 runs etc? Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  06:34, 8 June 2016 (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.