Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Ford (cricketer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 "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 to pass GNG. Once notability is challenged, however, NCRIC is not enough and it has to be established whether or not the subject actually meets GNG. Randykitty (talk) 16:00, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Ford (cricketer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable cricketer, nothing notable in searches about him, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 02:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure there was coverage, but it doesn't satisfy GNG and isn't enough to write a biography (e.g. the fact that he made his debut, opened the bowling and was the fourth Cotham Grammar School boy to play for the county that season - Yorkshire Evening Post 9 Aug 1951).----Pontificalibus 06:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As others have said, NCRIC presumes a pass of GNG; AfD is where that presumption is proved, and clearly the actual coverage is not significant enough to meet notability. If someone finds offline sources in the future, then they can build his bio then. JoelleJay (talk) 05:16, 4 April 2021 (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.