Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mushtaq Ahmed (cricketer, born 1997)


 * 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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Mushtaq Ahmed (cricketer, born 1997)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nothing notable found about his short career. Fails WP:GNG which should be met even though he passes WP:NCRIC. Störm  (talk)  23:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep passes WP:NCRIC, having played in six F/C and two L/A matches.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to National Bank of Pakistan cricket team Has played 6 FC matches and 2 List-A matches, but coverage is difficult to find due to his more famous and international cricketing namesake. Sources may exist both offline and in Pakistani sources, but as I can't find any then using a similar precedent to that used by WP:FOOTY where a player with one or a few appearances but no coverage, is redirected/deleted. If have no problems if this page is kept though as it's borderline for me due to number of games played. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete article fails GNG which is the bare minimum for inclusion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep he has clearly passed WP:NCRIC through virtue of 6 first class matches- as even the proposer of the AfD notes- and at 24 years old is reasonably likely to play more. Notable people shouldn't be deleted simply because they have the same name as someone more famous. I'd note that it isn't whether the article passes GNG, but whether the subject of the article does so, and that would require looking at match reports in the Pakistani press for the 2017 and 2018 seasons. DevaCat1 (talk) 01:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject does not have enough coverage, or independent sources to pass WP:GNG. It's not borderline from where I'm sitting as it is the bare minimum requirement for inclusion. Page should be deleted. Megtetg34 (talk) 23:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect if that's appropriate. Meeting a dubious presumption of GNG from a dubious SNG is not a valid reason when GNG is actually failed and hard to establish as in this case. Born in 1997, this might be a case of TOOSOON. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly fails GNG. No issue with a redirect, but deletion would be my choice. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:19, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Satisfies WP:NCRIC. StickyWicket (talk) 19:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete NCRIC's stated purpose is to provide "guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to satisfy GNG". In this case the guidance fails because a more detailed search for sources reveals a failure to meet GNG. A biography based only on sports statistics is against policy (WP:SPORTCRIT and see WP:WHYN).Pontificalibus 12:32, 1 April 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.