Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nabeeullah


 * 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. If, in the future, sources are found, can certainly re-create / happy to userfy if someone wants.  Go  Phightins  !  16:39, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Nabeeullah

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG, nothing in my searches. Störm  (talk)  20:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Had a significantly longer career than when I first wrote the article. I wonder if anything can be found about him since it was first written. Bobo. 20:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Well? Did we find anything?

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - I likewise could find absolutely nothing showing this person is notable. There is very little out there at all beyond some very basic player profiles. ƒirefly  ( t · c ) 21:29, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Has played 5 FC, 9 List-A and 3 T20 matches, easily passing him for WP:NCRIC. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 14:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete none of the sources provide the significant coverage which is needed to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:53, 4 March 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.