Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Newnham

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. (non-admin closure) Northern Escapee (talk) 06:46, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Newnham

[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)

No evidence of subject receiving significant coverage in reliable sources; fails WP:GNG. NCRIC falls under WP:NSPORTS, which says "This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia." It also says "A person is presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published[2] non-trivial[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]" as well as "Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability. This includes listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion, such as Sports Reference's college football and basketball databases."

This has zero significant sources; it cites only a database source of the two games played, which is specifically excluded by WP:SPORTCRIT from being able to establish notability. Hence there is not basis for the bulk-creation of this article. A possible redirect target is List of Border representative cricketers. Reywas92^Talk 04:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 04:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 05:15, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 05:15, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:NSPORT/WP:NCRIC. Right at the top of WP:NSPORT (before WP:SPORTCRIT) it states (in bold) - "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below". At worst, redirect to the list. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:31, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also note the nom incorrectly states that this person only played on one match, which is not the case. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, as if that effing matters. Immediately after that it says "If the article does meet the criteria set forth below, then it is likely that sufficient sources exist to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Well guess what? For this person, they don't. So he's not notable. It also says "All information included in Wikipedia, including articles about sports, must be verifiable. In addition, the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline" so any apparent contradictions show the idiocy of this page, and we should default to the basic expection of significant coverage beyond a database entry, not your mass-production of perma-substubs. Reywas92^Talk 08:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you're wrong here, as the article meets the notability requirements. And please don't make attacks against me. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking the SNG page. But you're wrong, because even with "or the sport specific criteria set forth below", it doesn't meet the SNG because the SNG explicity excludes the use of only databases for notability. Reywas92^Talk 17:55, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. NCRIC is disputed at the moment because it is way too broad and includes too many people who don't meet WP:GNG by a mile. One way to show that a SNG is not valid is establishing consensus at AfDs that people who meet the SNG (NCRIC in this case) should be deleted or redirected anyway. An SNG is not intended to be a free pass for people not meeting the GNG, but a way to rapidly check if people are very likely to meet the GNG. Fram (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arthur_Norton. Since this person apparently played once for two different teams, there isn't even an obvious redirect target. Reyk _YO! 13:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Reyk: - would you support a redirect to the Border list, as Newnham played for them first (1903/04), before playing for Transvaal in 1920/21? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:15, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I would have no objection to that. And on reflection a second redirect called Lewis Newnham (Transvaal player) or something like that would be agood idea too. Reyk _YO! 15:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea and thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unless such redirects have the same target, it gives the impression of two different people; better to have a note in each list explaining the appearance in the other. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; fails all meaningful notability criteria (GNG, NBIO, etc.) – by consensus, NCRIC is too permissive and should not be used as a reliable indicator of notability. Current sourcing fails SPORTBASIC and seems highly unlikely any significant coverage exists. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:40, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to a redirect to an appropriate list, but the best target is not readily apparent. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 13:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now at least. As well as two first-class matches, he also played in three non-classified matches against touring sides, two of which were Test sides (Blythe got him out in 1906 and a chap called Stevens did in 1922...). In the circumstances I think I'd want to know more about the existence, or otherwise, of written South African sources before I committed to deletion or redirection (I would be happy to redirect to the Border list - although I'd be happy to discuss the logistics of this). In other words, we should give this one a bit more time and maybe make an appeal to the South African wiki project. I very rarely suggest this course of action, but in this case the matches against touring sides suggest to me that there's potentially something here that's worth giving the time to. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep now that it has been somewhat expanded. Sammyrice (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that the article has been expanded somewhat since the original nomination for deletion. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately wide-ranging databases (WP:SPORTBASIC), inclusion in an indiscriminate list and WP:ANCESTRY.COM are insufficient to establish notability. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:41, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no access to Cricketarchive. Are these links just database reports of the match (results, statistics), or are they e.g. reprints of newspaper reports from the time? If the former, then indeed nothing in that expansion helps to establish notability. If the latter, then things may change (but then it would be better if the references said something like "Cape Newspaper, 12 March 1926, via Cricketarchive"). Ancestry is a site that probably should be avoided instead of used. Fram (talk) 10:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They are just scorecards. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's a bit of coverage of him in UK newspapers, and it's not unreasonable to suppose that there could be quite a bit more in South African newspapers, as he was quite prominent in some of the games in which he played. Johnlp (talk) 00:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you give us some references (and if possible links) for the coverage in UK newspapers? Fram (talk) 08:11, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm baffled by this comment. The "Supplement to the London Gazette" just says "Lewis Cyril Ashby Newnham. 12 Nov. 1917" among scores of other names. How in the hell is this "coverage"???? Reywas92^Talk 18:48, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 03:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as per the rationales set forth by Blue Square Thing and Lugnuts. Meets WP:NCRIC. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:54, 8 January 2021 (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.