Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Zim Afro T10

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Zim Afro T10

[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)

Minor cricket tournament, we don't need articles for every individual season of this tournament, as they don't pass WP:GNG. Most other T10 events don't have individual season articles (apart from Abu Dhabi T10, which is questionable anyway), as there simply isn't coverage of local T10 tournaments like this one. Regardless of the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zim Afro T10, this season article should be deleted. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:44, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect with a very partial merge of the dates and venue, result, leading run scorer and wicket taker perhaps - i.e. a two to three sentence paragraph - to Zim Afro T10 would seem to be a possibility as well. I can see a delete, but perhaps redirect will help stop recreation? Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- That depends on whether Zim Afro T10 is kept or not. If that article is redirected, then redirecting this would be inappropriate. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, quite. It took two sentences to summarise the first edition there by the way. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The references seem to indicate that it passes WP:GNG. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 10:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Which specific references show significant coverage of this particular season that warrants a separate season article? Joseph2302 (talk) 11:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm with Joseph here, I really don't see great quality references throwing a tonne of coverage at the tournament. I see Indian fan sites, a couple of articles at Wisden that are marginal in terms of GNG coverage (floodlights is the best one), tweets and YouTube, but not a lot of substance. I wouldn't usually be tempted to do that "source analysis table" bs that people do, but this is really marginal for me Blue Square Thing (talk) 11:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep easily passes WP:GNG. It's a professional tournament which was significantly covered throughout the week and a half it ran in places like the Chronicle [1]. SportingFlyer T·C 15:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"It's a professional tournament" isn't a reason to keep this. Coverage of a match like [2] is just WP:ROUTINE. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:53, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Coverage from Zimbabwean newspapers. Cursory google shows international coverage from The Indian Express, Sportskeeda and india.com, none of which are exactly small sites and shows significant coverage both inside and outwith Zimbabwe. MsJoat (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should have this article merged into the Zim Afro T10 article, and as more seasons get played, have them integrated into the article. --WellThisIs TheReaper ^Grim 16:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Would be good to have less encyclopedic nonsense like these articles. StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 22:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It received considerable coverage in newspapers in Zimbabwe, India and even Bangladesh. ≈ MS Sakib «TalK» 01:45, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ArcAngel (talk) 02:46, 15 August 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.