Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistani cricket team in Australia in 1996–97


 * 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 no consensus to merge/redirect, and definitely no consensus to delete. Daniel (talk) 00:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Pakistani cricket team in Australia in 1996–97

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NEVENT, nothing notable about it. Störm  (talk)  14:06, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - there are articles on touring sides for each cricket season. I don't have access to news archives but there would almost certainly be coverage of Pakistan's tour of Australia at that time in national newspapers (there always is), so the claim of non-notability is simply not true. Another option which would be a valid alternative to deletion would be a merge or redirect to 1996–1997 Australian cricket season but that article currently doesn't exist. So as not to undo the good work of cricket editors here I see why this article can't be kept pending that being created. Again, another instance where deletion is a lazy option. Deus et lex (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have a complete series of articles on the official cricket tours, and because there is a complete series, readers (remember them?) can find their way around easily. What is the encyclopedic merit in seeking to destroy that? Johnlp (talk) 12:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 1996–97 Carlton and United Series which is where the only significant matches took place. This is part of a series, not a tour in the traditional sense. For some reason this series of articles were created - I imagine in a fit of completionism. We don't have articles on any "tours" that took place ahead of, for example, the 2019 or 2015 World Cups - we include the warm up matches in those articles. So we only have the one, not articles such as Sri Lanka cricket team in England in 2019. Yes, they played in England, but as part of a tournament. This is really, really obvious stuff. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Enough of the patronising. How is a reader, interested, say, in the Pakistan team's overseas tours, expected to find a series hidden away under a long-forgotten sponsorship deal? A World Cup is patently different, in that all the main cricket-playing nations take part. Johnlp (talk) 17:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * By following the redirect, which is why a redirect and a single place for the article is better than having two articles, one of which is essentially a FORK from the other. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge and redirect to 1996–97 Carlton and United Series. Matches on this trip were organised around this series. Does not meet criteria for a standalone article. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 1996–97 Carlton and United Series The tour page isn't needed as this is basically a WP:FORK to a page that is need of some expansion to the article. HawkAussie (talk) 03:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 15:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Johnlp. This is the most useful place for the relevant and notable information in question to go. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 15:37, 31 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.