Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World records in International cricket


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

World records in International cricket

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete per the WP:RS and WP:VERIFY tags already applied. Adds no value, is of no use to WP:CRIC and, realistically, will not be maintained. Pointless. Jack | talk page 21:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - so many issues (even if ignore the over use of flags...). Most importantly it's in many cases a fairly arbitrary list of statistical "feats" and statistics - so NOTSTATS probably applies as well. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete – Please make it go away. (per BST). Harrias talk 21:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per all the above.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 07:57, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. The article's creator is relatively experienced editor, I can't understand why this was started in the first place.  IgnorantArmies  (talk)  10:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above. Also per WP:LISTCRITERIA. If I wanted info like this, I'd hit Cricinfo or Wisden before Wiki. They at least are going to be up-to-date. Narky Blert (talk) 23:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. All of it is unsourced; much is dubious. In addition, the phrase "world record" isn't normally used in cricket. StAnselm (talk) 06:48, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. StAnselm (talk) 06:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unsourced and arbitrary use of statistics. My personal favourite is "First player score a century in a birthday". Jevansen (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the fact that Vinod Kambli wasn't! Narky Blert (talk) 01:12, 6 November 2016 (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.