Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahmood Zamir


 * 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 Pakistan Automobiles Corporation cricketers. Both "keep" and "delete" !voters have agreed that a redirect would be a suitable compromise. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Mahmood Zamir

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG, no coverage found. Störm  (talk)  07:13, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  10:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  10:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  10:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep meets WP:NCRIC. Or at worst, redirect to List of Pakistan Automobiles Corporation cricketers.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:40, 18 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. SportsOlympic (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. 8 appearances at the highest domestic level. We really need to start up a taskforce for South Asian cricketers, encouraging editors from those regions to join and help expand these articles where possible. StickyWicket (talk) 13:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Pakistan Automobiles Corporation cricketers until and unless someone actually demonstrates notability instead of simply claiming it based on a disputed guideline which only presumes notability as well. When such a presumption is challenged, it shouldn't simply be repeated, it should be shown to be false. Oh, and claims that "the nominator didn't do a WP:BEFORE" should be considered personal attacks unless the one making that claim can show that a simple WP:BEFORE search would have yielded useful results. In this case, no such results are to be found. Fram (talk) 14:11, 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) 21:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge/redirect to List of Pakistan Automobiles Corporation cricketers. Subject passes NCRIC, but by consensus that only provides a very weak presumption of notability that is unreliable for cricketers such as these (recent NSPORT discussion here). Fails all meaningful guidelines including GNG and SPORTCRIT. No sources beyond wide ranging databases. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:35, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Pakistan Automobiles Corporation cricketers. The number of matches played raises some questions about whether or not notability can be presumed, but given work I've done on other teams I'd suggest very strongly that this is not necessarily the case at this level, even for players on teams where there is very clear sourcing available. Get to 20 appearances and I'd be happy to be swayed by a presumption of sources argument. As it is we have a technical pass of NCRIC but not apparent sourcing at GNG level and no linked Urdu language article. If that were present then, again, I could be swayed to assume there was likely to be sourcing (perhaps someone with Urdu could check and see if there is an article but it isn't linked). Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northern Escapee (talk) 06:47, 27 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.