Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zulqarnain (cricketer, born 1998)


 * 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 Federally Administered Tribal Areas cricket team. The "keep" !votes argue that this person meets NCRIC. However, that is only a guideline designed to be a shortcut to identify persons that are likely notable according to GNG. Once notability is challenged, however, NCRIC is not enough and it has to be established whether or not the subject meets GNG. The argument that he's still young and likely to garner more coverage is turning things upside down, we do not keep articles if we think someone might one day become notable (see WP:CRYSTAL), we create articles if the subject can be shown to be notable now. Randykitty (talk) 15:54, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Zulqarnain (cricketer, born 1998)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nothing in my searches in Pakistani papers. Fails WP:GNG. Störm  (talk)  07:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep has played in first-class and List A cricket matches, so passes WP:NCRIC. This user is now making a campaign of harassment/stalking following their lack of good-faith shown in a recent ANI thread.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Federally Administered Tribal Areas cricket team Has played 1 FC match and 2 List-A matches. While coverage may exist offline and in Pakistani source, I have been unable to find any, potentially also by his common name with other Pakistani cricketers. Using a similar precedent to that used by WP:FOOTY where a player has one or a few matches, but no coverage, they are deleted/redirected. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails GNG. It is time for Wikipedia to stop being cricketpedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment. Wow, you really are one of the most insincere and incompetent editors I've come across in my 11 years on this site John Pack Lambert. StickyWicket (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Was that personal attack really necessary? Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Further discussion needed on whether the subject should actually have an article. Note that passing WP:NCRIC means the subject is presumed notable only.
 * '''Redirect to Federally Administered Tribal Areas cricket team as per suggested above. Setreis (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:NCRIC in its current formulation and has appeared in two kinds of top-class domestic cricket. Also, at 22, it's reasonable to suppose that his top-class cricket career is not over; if nothing more has happened in, say, five years, then there might be a stronger case for deletion or redirection. Johnlp (talk) 15:28, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to List of Federally Administered Tribal Areas cricketers as an accepted ATD. No significant coverage to be found, only wide-ranging databases built on scorecard data, so fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. This trumps the trivial pass of WP:NCRIC, which is by consensus unreliable predictor of coverage for cricketers such as these who have played very few matches, in this case for a lesser regional association. With the restructuring of first-class cricket from 16 to 6 teams in 2019, in which he wasn't even selected for a 2nd XI, the supposition that he will make more FC appearances in future is not realistic without an unexpected reversal of these changes. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep he's a weak pass of WP:NCRIC, with three games at the appropriate level. But at 22, as noted above, he's at the start of his career, so it's fairly likely he will play more. DevaCat1 (talk) 08:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Predictions of future achievements and coverage are not useful here. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You and I clearly disagree on that, as on pretty much everything else. It's risible to delete someone who passes WP:NCRIC, particularly when their claim is likely to rise over time; and the proposer of AfD has repeatedly noted in his deletion proposals that people were "dropped for poor performances", "had a short career" and so forth. It would be farcical to delete an article, only to have to recreate it later. Deletionists are little more than vandals with the guile to give specious reasoning for their behaviour, and harm the project immeasurably. DevaCat1 (talk) 14:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Nope, it's you and policy (and guidelines) that disagree; NCRIC not even close to the top of that tree. And please be mindful of how you characterise others (WP:CIVIL, WP:BATTLEGROUND). wjematherplease leave a message... 14:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely clear whom you believe I was characterising; I was speaking in the abstract about deletionists and deletionism. However, as you are clearly concerned, as recommended in WP:BATTLEGROUND I will henceforth be disregard[ing] that user entirely. You can consider this conversation over. DevaCat1 (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, I edge toward keep because there is a good possibility this player will appear in more matches. Perhaps if he hasn't appeared in any further matches in 3-4 years time this could be redirected. StickyWicket (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That is inconsistent with policy, which dictates that we delete/redirect now and recreate if/when GNG is met. wjematherplease leave a message... 01:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 02:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete definitively fails WP:GNG - the three sources are all to his Cricinfo stats page or to game statistics. Not an ounce of SIGCOV. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks significant coverage. Fails WP:SPORTCRIT, which says sports database entries are not satisfactory to establish notability. Reywas92Talk 05:16, 27 March 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.