Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. G. Grace's cricket career (1864 to 1870): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:03, 21 May 2024

W. G. Grace's cricket career (1864 to 1870)

[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)

Too much cruft, must be deleted as per convention to remove the australian fanfict articles Pharaoh496 (talk) 18:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, History, Cricket, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @JoelleJay @Trainsandotherthings @Serial Number 51429 as I have seen them in support for such article removals Pharaoh496 (talk) 05:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason:

Pharaoh496 (talk) 05:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What are you referring to by "australian fanfict articles"? -1ctinus📝🗨 01:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keith Miller with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948, discussion to merge completed (please see said discussion)
- Keith Miller with the Australian cricket team in England in 1956 and Keith Miller with the Australian cricket team in England in 1953 already merged, deleted earlier. However this set of wg grace articles have hardly one ga, so many stubs and other full of stuff not required. They arent notable enough for wikipedia.
Pharaoh496 (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the two pages was merged they should not have been deleted. Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. If you copy some text from another Wikipedia page it should be clear in the edit summary and/or the talk page where the text came from. Wikipedia is not public domain. Christian75 (talk) 11:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I havent done that mate, just nominated these pages Pharaoh496 (talk) 13:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that I was pinged to this discussion, and that I'm not a fan of these articles, I believe we should delete all as fundamental violations of WP:NOT as cricket statistics turned into articles due to one person's consumption by what I like to call the cricket insanity. They are also clearly non-notable as the sources cover Grace's entire career, not simply his performance in any given event. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably merge the shorter articles, with less referencing, to larger articles covering longer periods of time. These articles do not consist entirely of statistics, though it may be appropriate to cut some material from them. A chronological split of our W G Grace article will satisfy GNG. See, for example, the coverage of the 1880s in Bax's chapter "The Glorious Eighties" [1]; the chapter on Grace in Portraits of the Eighties: [2]; Midwinter's chapters 7 and 8 on 1879 to 1891: [3]; and Darwin's chapter 6 on 1880 to 1891: [4]. So you could certainly write an article on W. G. Grace in the 1880s or the period 1879 to 1891. The question is not whether the main biography article should be split, but how. W G Grace is the subject of a large number of entire books, since he is probably considered the greatest cricketer of all time, so his biography is not realistically going to fit in a single article. James500 (talk) 04:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 *:::Right. I havent done that mate, just nominated these pages [[User:Pharaoh496|Pharaoh496]] ([[User talk:Pharaoh496|talk]]) 13:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 *Noting that I was pinged to this discussion, and that I'm not a fan of these articles, I believe we should '''delete all''' as fundamental violations of [[WP:NOT]] as cricket statistics turned into articles due to one person's consumption by what I like to call the cricket insanity. They are also clearly non-notable as the sources cover Grace's ''entire career'', not simply his performance in any given event. [[User:Trainsandotherthings|Trainsandotherthings]] ([[User talk:Trainsandotherthings|talk]]) 20:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
+*'''Probably merge the shorter articles, with less referencing, to larger articles covering longer periods of time'''. These articles do not consist entirely of statistics, though it may be appropriate to cut some material from them. A chronological split of our W G Grace article will satisfy GNG. See, for example, the coverage of the 1880s in Bax's chapter "The Glorious Eighties"  [https://archive.org/details/wggrace0000clif/page/37/mode/1up]; the chapter on Grace in Portraits of the Eighties: [https://archive.org/details/portraitsofeight00hutc/page/279/mode/1up]; Midwinter's chapters 7 and 8 on 1879 to 1891: [https://archive.org/details/wggracehislifeti0000midw/page/n12/mode/1up]; and Darwin's chapter 6 on 1880 to 1891: [https://archive.org/details/wggrace0000darw/page/60/mode/1up]. So you could certainly write an article on [[W. G. Grace in the 1880s]] or the period 1879 to 1891. The question is not whether the main biography article should be split, but how. W G Grace is the subject of a large number of entire books, since he is probably considered the greatest cricketer of all time, so his biography is not realistically going to fit in a single article. [[User:James500|James500]] ([[User talk:James500|talk]]) 04:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)