Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naseer Ahmed (WAPDA cricketer)


 * 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 Water and Power Development Authority cricketers. General consensus that the subject barely meets one of the presumptive notability criteria of WP:NCRIC, but the complete lack of indeendent sourcing is an overriding concern. Since there is a reasonable redirect target where the subject is mentioned, and that has been suggested as an option by many, placing one here appears to be the most appropriate outcome. I am adding the year that Mr. Ahmed played. Sjakkalle (Check!)  16:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Naseer Ahmed (WAPDA cricketer)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Störm  (talk)  22:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  22:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  22:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  22:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - Repeating my comment from Zia Ahmed's AfD page. Any other WAPDA cricketers to be looked at? There are considerably more WAPDA cricketers than many other categories, including at least four articles of players with international appearances and threadbare article prose content. Bobo. 22:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it makes sense to discuss each individual cricketer in a separate AfD rather than bundling them. Spiderone  22:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. More discussion still needs to happen on WT:CRIC as to content of List of X players articles too. Bobo. 22:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete absolutely a total and complete failure of GNG. It staggers me how many such articles we have.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It staggers me just as much that there are, in the main, only three editors, including myself, out of several million who were even bothered to do the legwork. I would respect conversations such as this if the people who involved themselves in these conversations also involved themselves in improving the project. Bobo. 16:57, 8 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NCRIC, or redirect to List of Water and Power Development Authority cricketers.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 17:33, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Water and Power Development Authority cricketers - Naseer Ahmed doesn't pass GNG at any level but it's still beneficial to keep a list of them, in my view. That list could be expanded to hold the information that we do know about each cricketer, even if that doesn't amount to more than a few very basic facts. Spiderone  21:59, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - If you want coverage to be found, an AfD is not the way to go about it. Bobo. 09:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It needs to be shown that substantial coverage exists. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. But the argument posited in this AfD is different, and thus it is being answered differently. Bobo. 13:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge/redirect to List of Water and Power Development Authority cricketers. Nominally passes NCRIC, which by consensus only provides an extremely weak presumption of notability, but fails all meaningful guidelines including GNG and SPORTCRIT. No sources beyond wide ranging databases. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:49, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Unlike many other teams, at least there is a list for WAPDA. Bobo. 13:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per the (slightly) new consensus in Wikipedia that 1 game to meet a project guideline isn't nearly enough when failing all other guidelines. Geschichte (talk) 10:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.