Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aamer Aziz

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. Daniel (talk) 00:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aamer Aziz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG. No coverage found. Störm (talk) 01:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep meets WP:NCRIC. Ten days ago, I reminded this editor about the closing comments of a past RfC "As with the RfC on secondary school notability, this should not be an invitation to "flood AfD with indiscriminate or excessive nominations". This is one of approx. a dozen back-to-back nominations made today within a 30 minute window, suggesting no attempt at WP:BEFORE was used pre-nomination. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete AfD should be flooded with articles that fail GNG when they fail GNG. It is high time we stopped keeping on to rubbish articles on Wikipedia. This is clearly an example of such.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails notability guideline when conducting a WP:BEFORE search as with other cricket players in AfD today. What is not indiscriminate is that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information on anything from sports to "pick a topic". Either it passes WP:N criteria or not. This one does not. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 20:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Subject trivially passes NCRIC, which by consensus only provides an extremely weak presumption of notability that is very unreliable for cricketers such as these (recent NSPORT discussion here), but fails all meaningful guidelines including GNG and SPORTCRIT. No sources beyond wide ranging databases; no suitable list to merge into. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 12:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete in the absence of a suitable list or redirect to. Trivial pass of NCRIC but failure of GNG and no suggestion that there is much of a chance of finding more in depth sources given his short career. Lack of a linked article on Urdu language Wikipedia further suggests that sources will be difficult to find. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:04, 23 January 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.