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. Randykitty (talk) 16:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

English cricket team in Scotland in 2012

[edit]

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

Pretty clearly non-notable: no game was played, and it was cancelled a long way in advance. I appreciate a vague sense of "well there was meant to be a game, we should record that", but I don't think there is really much sense in that. Pretty sure it should be deleted. Harrias ^talk 21:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The event was scheduled, yes. It wasn't just mooted, it was scheduled. The match even had a date set. In that respect, it's similar to the 2001 FIFA Club World Championship, which still has an article despite being cancelled. – Pee Jay 23:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a significant difference in the amount of coverage the two got though. It's a shame there isn't a 2012 English cricket season style article it would be suitable to upmerge into. I agree there should be some record, I just don't think a standalone article is required. Harrias ^talk 10:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Scheduled to take place, but never did. I wouldn't have a problem if it was called off on the day, or even the day before, but this was called off nearly a month before it was due to take place. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:07, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Never happened, should be mentioned here. PinchHittingLeggy (talk) 17:55, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd vote Delete even if a game had taken place. Individual games (even in sports considerably more popular and culturally significant than cricket) in and of themselves do not merit articles.--Раціональне анархіст (talk) 20:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

International cricket tours that only consist of one match are notable in their own right. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:04, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to see the Wiki rule in support of that. It's like claiming that every MLB game involving a US team visiting Canada to play the Toronto Blue Jays merits an article. (And Scotland-from-England represents an even more tenuous assertion of "international tour" than US-to-Canada.)--Раціональне анархіст (talk) 22:33, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You raise an interesting point. I can't see anything at the Cricket Project to support what I said. However, I suspect if an article of a tour with just one match (that actually took place) was taken to AfD, it would be kept under WP:GNG. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:40, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to International cricket in 2012. Probably worth a brief mention there, but not enough meat to justify a full blown article. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:39, 27 December 2014 (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.