Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S. Barua


 * 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. The consensus of the discussion is that none of these have adequate sources to establish their individual notability. Whether they might be appropriate entries in some list is a separate matter. RL0919 (talk) 11:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

S. Barua

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another cricketer who fails to meet WP:GNG. This RfC has already confirmed that SSGs like WP:CRIN do not supersede the GNG. CricketArchive and Cricinfo statistical profiles, which can be regarded as trivial coverage per WP:SPORTBASIC, are not sufficient to establish notability. Dee 03  05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason:


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Dee  03  05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  Dee  03  05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Dee  03  05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Dee  03  05:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - How many more of these are there? Not bitter - just a question. Bobo. 07:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Under 100, I guess. Dee  03  08:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you have a list of them somewhere - or are you taking them directly from my sandbox? Sorry - don't mean to sound like I'm badgering, just asking. Bobo. 08:16, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No problems. They are listed here. Dee  03  08:20, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Presumably that list of Ranji Trophy cricketers has been directly cribbed from my old sandbox and/or list of created articles..? I like how the only definition of "dubious" is "doesn't have a first name listed". On a serious point, hopefully one day future research will uncover these... Bobo. 08:22, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The list was compiled in 2017 by going through Category:Indian cricketers and Category:Sri Lankan cricketers. The English list was added recently by Harrias. Dee  03  09:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. My old userpage may have some left after you've gone through those lists. Bobo. 09:29, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - As I've pointed out before, this whole thing should be a lesson more in making sure established articles are cited, etc. If CA and CI are "inappropriate" references in and of themselves, shouldn't we be fixing the established articles? Let alone those lists I provided of Test cricketers without any sources... Bobo. 07:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right. But I did not say that CA and CI sources are "inappropriate"; they come in handy while expanding pages on notable cricketers. But they are inadequate to show that the cricketer would pass GNG, especially when they do not reveal any information beyond stats taken from a scorecard. Additionally, WP:PAGEDECIDE can be applied for these single-appearance cricketers. Dee  03  08:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And again, sadly, this comes back to the inconsistency in application of GNG. The only thing that still angers me is that you are expecting "more information" than is present - as any further information in the article would be superfluous. If the criterion you're working to is "must have a first name present", then this is a horrid application of the rule.... Bobo. 08:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have never stated that absence of first name is the reason for sending these articles to AfD. Having a full name does at least give us the chance of finding more sources. Unfortunately, the CA profiles of these "first name missing" cricketers seem to be filler links for scorecards, leading to verifiability concerns. Dee  03  08:29, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

*Delete All. Per norm - Fails WP:GNG and WP:CRIN.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:06, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - an an ideal world I would prefer to redirect to suitable lists, but there aren't lists for Indian players in the same way there are for most British ones. In each case we have no details which provide me with any hope that it's realistic to find suitable, in depth sources about these chaps. In almost every case we only know of one cricket match each man played in - the exception is Kunzru where we have one other miscellaneous match that we know he played in. This reinforces my view that we're never going to be able to source anything very much on them. If details do show up, the articles can be re-created easily. This appears to be consistent with recent AfD results. It is unfortunate the lists don't exist. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please forgive me for the late response. I would create them myself, but... *shrug* At some point I did have them all on my sandbox, but I would have to go back to a very old version of it... For stats' sake, of the 11 players who played in the only first-class game of Gwalior Cricket Club, they made the following number of first-class appearances (in total): 1, 2, 1, 65 (Janardan Navle, a Test cricketer), 9, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1. Bobo. 05:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If, as I always wished could happen, we could make lists of people who played for first-class teams, then I would want a fully inclusive - team-by-team - approach. At least if every team with a "category" had a list of first-class players, this could serve as a header sentence for that category where players' names had been deleted.
 * Let me tick off the easiest example: these are cricketers who played for Gwalior Cricket Club.


 * RD Mathur
 * Balbhadra Singh
 * Roop Singh
 * Janardan Navle
 * DK Yarde
 * SN Kunzru
 * Daya Shankar
 * Ram Singh
 * CN Haksar
 * Khanwilkar
 * Afzal Ahmed


 * (Yes, I chose the easiest example, a team which only played a single first-class match. Jack and I both agreed - at the time - that any Indian team which had played first-class cricket should have a "List of"... article - of course these days opinions are probably different..! And given the palaver we've gone through lately with "List of X cricketers" list, at least with a team who have played just one first-class match, an eleven-player list would be fully complete..!) Bobo. 06:18, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete all It is discouraging how many articles we have that are really just glorified directory listings.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete all- as with previous AfDs in this series, all these articles are match scoresheets masquerading as the biographies of people whose names we don't even properly know. Reyk YO! 12:40, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - Dee, Reyk, BST how would you feel about obscure Ranji Trophy team players' articles entitled List of X players - especially for the defunct Ranji Trophy teams? I would bash through some stats into it, but I'm working on other things right now... We would still delete the players' articles themselves, but at least we'd maintain the basic content. Bobo. 09:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Okey. BST has convinced me it would be a bad idea. No biggie. Bobo. 09:14, 26 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.