Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Achuthanand Ravi

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 Deleted A7 by Larry V (NAC). Mtking (talk) 09:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Achuthanand Ravi

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

An article about a young Indian cricketer. I can't find any reliable and independent sources supporting the claims in the article. [1] Possible autobiography. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:15, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. —Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Does not meet general notability criteria or the specific notability guidelines for cricket figures, in that this individual has not played at a senior enough level. Wikipeterproject (talk) 08:00, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Can a speedy deletion tag be placed twice on an article???? I had PRODed it under the impression once a speedy deletion tag is removed it can't be replaced, clearly this person thinks they're notable (how they've come to that conclusion I don't know). They've not played first-class, List A or Twenty20 cricket. They make note of having played for India Under-19s (itself is non-notable cricket) which is blatant nonsense. The entire article constitutes a hoax! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 10:00, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to replace a CSD tag. I nominated the article here, since the first CSD nom (A7) was declined with the following reasoning: "rm speedy: clearly asserts notability", and the second CSD nom {{db-g11}} was in my opinion inapplicable. I too think it is a hopeless page. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 10:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Maybe this is the latest incarnation of Adrian Shankar! But no, common sense should prevail, this is obviously a blatant hoax. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 13:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Why is there a discussion? It should have been speedy deleted, because obviously the article is not notable. Intoronto1125 TalkContributions `
Delete Can not find any sources to back up the claims in the article. As for why it is not a speedy, it makes a claim to significance ("He has a batting average of over 60 in first-class cricket") and as I don't think that it is a Hoax can't see what other grounds it meets. Mtking (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per Wikipedia guidelines. I agree that there shouldn't have been a discussion, not to mention I received 0 results on my online search when searching that name. SwisterTwister (talk) 05:59, 19 June 2011 (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.