Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ards Cricket Club

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ards Cricket Club - grouped nomination

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

P.S.N.I. Cricket Club - (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Victoria Cricket Club - (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) - nb: slightly awkward as it is a name used by clubs elsewhere.

The above clubs all play in Section Three (the fourth tier) of the NCU Senior League, a provincial cricket league in Ireland. That country at present has no national league and the top Sections of each of the four provincial leagues therefore represent the highest level of cricket that can be played there.

Until recently there were articles for other clubs playing at the same level. Three of these have been deleted via individual AfD discussions.

Of the remaining other two clubs in the Section, one is already at AfD individually - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burndennett Cricket Club - and the other is Cregagh Cricket Club, which may or may not be notable and does not form part of this AfD nomination for that reason.

The articles for Ards, PSNI and Victoria at best only use primary sources, are all stubs and appear not to pass WP:GNG. The clubs are playing at the lowest level of their league and do not appear to qualify as inherently notable under the project guidelines at WP:CRIN. The project guidelines are currently subject to a fairly long-winded discussion but there is already a consensus there that clubs playing at the level of Ards, PSNI and Victoria are unlikely to qualify, an opinion made all the stronger by the fact that the three AfDs which have already resulted in deletions occurred during the process of that discussion.

I propose that Ards, PSNI and Victoria are deleted per the established precedent, perhaps best summarised by the closer of the Dungannon AfD.

I have not submitted these articles to PROD because I am aware that their creator will likely contest. - Sitush (talk) 16:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Speedy) Delete All None of these fourth tier club teams have any third party sources, the reason for this is they do't appear to exist and so fail WP:GNG. Cricket in Ireland is a very minor sport and just does not receive coverage. Mtking (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. —Mtking (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this is part of a campaign by two editors (the two who have contributed above) to delete Irish cricket articles. A discussion is ongoing at the WP cricket project, but the two editors press on with their campaign. These clubs are senior cricket clubs and as such should have articles in line with the project guidelines under which equivalent clubs in England and Wales are considered notable. Mooretwin (talk) 22:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep this off motives and on WP policies and guidelines. In this case by showing that the articles nominated meet the WP:GNG and WP:V because otherwise the closing administrator is likely to disregard your !vote as a case of WP:OTHEREDITORSDONTLIKE.Mtking (talk) 23:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update - Burndennett AfD now closed as delete also. - Sitush (talk) 23:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - 4th division club. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - play at an insufficiently high level for notability. Separately fail WP:GNG. TerriersFan (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - too far down the league structure. Where appropriate, some of this information might be reasonably placed in articles about the geographical locations of these clubs, but not as separate articles. Johnlp (talk) 17:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- All of these clubs are already mentioned in the articles for their respective towns/cities. - Sitush (talk) 09:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.