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 keep‎. This closure just concerns the main article as this bundled AFD nomination was not set up correctly. You can't just list articles in a nomination statement, they have to be tagged and the article creators notified. Please see WP:AFD for guidance on how to handle nominating multiple articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gandaki Province cricket team

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

PROD removed without addressing concerns. Fails WP:NCRIC: team does not hold List A or T20 status as it belongs to an associate member of the ICC. The same concern with the other provincial/franchise teams. These teams all fail wider WP:GNG, so I am also nominating the following related pages:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Cricket, and Nepal. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:49, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well i am curious now if these above mentioned pages got deleted then what about other franchises wiki pages like of USA Major cricket league, Canada Global T20, UAE ILT20 all the team are associated nations league and doesn’t hold any List A or T20s status like these should we start deleting them as well? My point is if Status is the main wiki criteria then other page should consider for deletation. Godknowme1 (talk) 10:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I 100% agree. Though, some of those pass WP:GNG by having multiple sources and widespread coverage (as much as ideally I'd like teams which hold status only to have articles per WP:OFFCRIC). StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 13:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep These are all major teams of a major cricketing country (representing a seventh or eighth of the nation), that play at the national levels. There is absolutely no universe in which they would not meet GNG. Internet is not the totality of human knowledge, not yet. Even on the internet, I found enough to indicate GNG pass for teams like Lalitpur Patriots and Kathmandu Kings. There is not much on provincial cricket teams but there is again enough on provincial associations, such that those particular articles could be moved to respective association titles and with minor modifications retain information on their respective teams. And again, just on the internet, there is enough to support articles such as Lalitpur Patriots in 2017. Every games they have played in major tournaments and leagues have been covered by national newspapers. They are notable. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:28, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep While it may be debatable that these articles have enough coverage to pass WP:GNG, It's very difficult to consider the merits of each when bundled into one AfD. Some of them may have enough coverage to be kept, while others not/have a suitable WP:ATD. So procedural keep, with no issues of them being brought as separate AfDs. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep, this does fall on the WP:TRAINWRECK side of things. NotAGenious (talk) 12:49, 3 December 2023 (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.