Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/N. Kumara


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

N. Kumara

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG, and by extension WP:N, and the coverage is routine statistical listings. The subject made a single first-class appearance and is long since retired. Technically, the subject meets WP:CRIN, but this forms a part of WP:NSPORT, which clearly states that "the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept". Per this discussion, community consensus is that "subject-specific notability guidelines do not supersede the general notability guideline, except in clear cases where GNG does not apply." In this case, coverage is so meagre that we do not even have the players full name. Harrias talk 07:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Harrias  talk 07:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete No coverage found other than statistical profiles on Cricinfo and CricketArchive. This cricketer does not meet GNG. Dee  03  08:17, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - Every Ranji Trophy cricketer I've created is on an old version of my user page. Just delete them all. This is beyond a joke now. The bored deletionists who wish to censor information because they feel it is unnecessary have won. It was only a matter of time. Bobo. 09:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - it does not fail N. N clearly states or. This is the fundamental problem we are dealing with. A complete contradiction. As for "in clear cases where GNG does not apply", that is clearly stated on N. Bobo. 10:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As I've replied to you elsewhere, your understanding is flawed. Some SSGs such as WP:PROF explicitly state that they override the WP:GNG, which is what that clause covers. WP:NSPORT, and WP:CRIN as part of that, do not do that. Harrias  talk 10:44, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Double standards even within SSGs. Wow. If that isn't flawed, I would like to know what is. Bobo. 10:46, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:15, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:15, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete- This article is based on raw statistical entries that do not contain a word of prose between them. Given that we only have a first initial and a (common) surname for this player there might even be issues distinguishing him from similarly named people active around the same time. Harrias is correct that WP:CRIN defers to the general notability guideline, and not the other way around. A merge to a suitable list article might be possible if there is a good target. Reyk YO! 12:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The only other N-anything Kumar played 17 seasons later.... Bobo. 14:32, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lacks "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" and so it fails the GNG. This is exactly like S. K. Desai below with brief statistical transcriptions, no citations and apparently taken from the paywalled Cricket Archive site (mentioned as an external link) which, I am reliably informed, is an in-house self-published source that contains statistics only and no narrative. No Great Shaker (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a suitable list like at List of English cricketers (1787–1825). It may be at List of Sri Lanka first class cricketers and can accomodate several permastubs. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete The cricket inclusion criteria are clearly flawed. So for that matter are the football ones, where 2 and three leagues per country, even in a country like the US where football is not followed much at all, are included. Our inclusion criteria for actors are more demanding than for many sportspeople. It is time for us to stop giving a pass for one game, we do not give passes for one film, even when the role is significant, which is a word that does not apply to the relationship between the one appearance in a game and the role of some of these sportspeople in it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:NACTOR is an excellent comparison. Half the actors who appeared in the film which won this year's Best Picture Oscar don't seem to have their own Wikipedia articles. And like you said, inclusion criteria need to be tighter and more consistent across all fields. Dee  03  11:23, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete or, if anyone wants to create one, redirect to a suitable list. A lack any other biographical information tends to suggest that we're unlikely, at this stage, to be able to find any sources which deal with the subject in detail - I certainly can't find anything. That we know of only two matches he played in - one club match I think as well as his FC match - makes this more likely in my view. If such sources become available I would, as always, have no issue with the article being recreated. Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:53, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I think consensus is clear that the various persons with (full name and details unknown) and one first-class appearance are not inherently notable, regardless of what CRIN may say. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:28, 14 August 2019 (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.