Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bob Welton cup


 * 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. Tone 11:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

The Bob Welton cup

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable low level local amateur cricket competition. Highly unlikely any sources exist beyond primary sources and routine results coverage in local press. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - clearly fails WP:GNG due to lack of reliable sources covering the subject in depth Spiderone  16:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * This is my last comment on the situation as I can see that the person in question is back to harrasing golf pages now hes got his monopoly on cricket pages. If you want to see the level of pettiness he has and why I can say this is a targeted attack with zero care (Well ignoring the fact he hasnt made a single comment on any of these since doing them but apparently that isnt enough). Please turn your attention to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lincolnshire_Premier_League&action=history which is where this attack stared. Whilst I was banned The user is question went back and undid the article again, only this time he did a very quick minor edit straight after so you cant undo his changes, meaning the work I and others have done is lost without retyping it. Sadly the admin I asked to get involed doesnt seem like hes one bit interested, even going on to his page to say he can carry on delete flaggging my pages once the decision has been made on these ( for those interested). Ive spoken with everyone involed in creating and keeping up with these pages and we are all in 100% agreement that we will not be doing any more work on wikipedia so the user in question (which hilariously I have been told i will banned permanently if I say anything about him again when hes allowed to do this to 100s of hours of work) has got his way. Sad day for places like here when the obsession, gatekeeping and abuse of rules reigns over people wanting to do what this place was created for, the preseration of information for the future. CreamyGoodne55 (talk) 12:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Look, he doesn't have a "monopoly" on the cricket pages as there are probably others that I would acclaim to that monopoly status. HawkAussie (talk) 06:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of significant coverage to demonstrate notability. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  18:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  18:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - There is no evidence that this will be able to pass WP:GNG. HawkAussie (talk) 06:06, 24 September 2020 (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.