Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 October 6

The article was, and is continously deleted on the outcome of a deletion review 'discussion' (I put that was itself highly dubious and subjective. I am creating this review because the previous review did not allow for enough time for rebuttals, and believe me there are many, to be made to the grounds for deleting the original Kenya Kongonis Cricket Club page on any forum on wikipedia. On to the meat of this deletion review. The grounds applied for 'notability' are extraordinarily impractical for a club that operates anywhere outside test playing countries. Also the 'lack of coverage' cited by the author of the original deletion reflects more an unwillingness to scour local and regional press outside his locale than an actual absence of coverage. With these pithy words I hereby declare this deletion review open. Kimemia Maina (talk) 07:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was posted to Kenya Kongonis prefix:Wikipedia:Deletion review. I have moved it here because it purports to be a request for deletion review. I have no opinion about this page myself. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Restore and let the original creator to work on the article. Kongonis is a notable Kenyan cricket club and there's sufficient coverage to build a decent article. See for example:

I'm sure it is possible to find out more. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep deleted - I'll still argue the club is non-notable, but the league it is part of is. May be restore under a redirect to the relevant league, in a similar vain to what was done for Irish cricket clubs. A long discussion took place, which was so long no consensus was reached, but many points were agreed upon. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 12:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the specific WP:CRICKET notability guidelines, but in my opinion Kongonis Cricket Club meets WP:GNG, as it is a subject of independent coverage in multiple national (Kenyan) and international reliable sources. It means that the club is a subject of interest of international cricket community and this can be reflected also by Wikipedia. The purpose of this project is to provide encyclopedic information, and in this case it is definitely possible. I don't believe that we want to go against the interests of our readers. Sources at G-Books say that "Kongonis Cricket Club ... became the controlling body of Kenya cricket in 1932 (!)" (Red strangers: the white tribe of Kenya, ISBN 9781857252064, p. 171), or that "...Cricket in the Colony is controlled by the Kenya Kongonis Cricket Club which assumes similar responsibilities for the welfare of the game as does the Marylebone Cricket Club in England..." (The travellers' guide to Kenya and Uganda: Vol. 2 (1936), p. 196). I'm sorry, but I can see no benefit for Wikipedia in deleting this kind of information. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:09, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note I was not the closing admin. I speedied the article under G4 twice and then salted the article. The person who should have been notified is TParis (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), which I've done. causa sui (talk) 16:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Right, restore, but on the grounds that the original author can include the relevant sources which make it meet the WP:GNG requirements. Previously little information was there, then I believe a body of text was included which was removed by another editor for copyright violation. Include those sources and that'll be fine and dandy. Just don't let a certain Irish editor get wind! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 16:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]