Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sushree Dibyadarshini

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 22:41, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sushree Dibyadarshini

Sushree Dibyadarshini (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No evidence of WP:GNG (only routine coverage) and fails WP:NCRICKET having never played for the full national team. — MarkH₂₁^talk 08:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁^talk 08:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁^talk 08:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁^talk 08:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:TOOSOON. Abishe (talk) 17:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I'm not sure I agree that there's only routine coverage - the sidebar on her and the last three paragraphs in this article [see below] certainly do a little more than that. Perhaps not enough for GNG purposes, but I reckon there are several hundred articles about sportspeople (including many cricketers) which have far less prose coverage. I haven't looked widely on this yet, so can't offer a final judgement yet. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Square Thing: I think you've posted the wrong link? Perhaps you meant this? Although if it's significant coverage, it's not much about the actual person. There's still not enough for GNG. Other sportspeople may have less prose coverage, but they satisfy sports notability guidelines which this subject does not. — MarkH₂₁^talk 23:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - thanks - I've struck through the other link now. I don't disagree that that source, by itself, would be nowhere near enough for the GNG. I will, however, be very clear that I think we know far more about her from that link compared to, say, Michael Balac who technically meets an SNG. In fact, I'd consider her already far more notable than Balac - and that's not even close: she's playing in a pretty significant tournament in one of the most cricket-mad places in the world compare to Balac who played in a friendly as a specially registered player because neither of the pros was prepared to play. It's not her fault that women's cricket isn't given equal billing to men's on a domestic level - and I think there's a very real case that the tournament she's playing in should be considered the equal of, say, a University match or a tour match. But there you go - the SNG in question isn't going to change, no matter what I think so we move on. I'll take a look for more sources, but I doubt there's really enough there. Blue Square Thing (talk) 23:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your assessment, but that's just the way the guidelines are. However, the reason why you think she is more notable is precisely where she would potentially meet GNG; there may be significant coverage from a reliable source in India. If there aren't, then perhaps even media in India don't consider the tournament that significant or her to be that notable. — MarkH₂₁^talk 02:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The only reason that this article is at AfD is because this is a female cricket and women's cricket is still not afforded the same level of official recognition that men's cricket is. This is not a criticisms of the nominator, but of the system of affording official first-class, List A and T20 status on matches and then the way in which WP:CRIN has been written to allow the "automatic" Keep responses seen at AfD of far less notable male cricketers.

There is enough independent coverage of her in media to convince me that she meets a reasonable standard of notability. For example: the source linked to above; short profile here; short article here; interview here; article here; short profile here etc... There are also tonnes of passing references about her in reports of matches (for example, here). This is way more - and I really do mean way more - than we have just now on subjects such as Michael Balac (recent AfD) or Timothy Machin (ongoing AfD). I'm not super-happy about the quality of some of those sources, but it's a lot better than I expected it to be. There are >1,300 gnews hits on her name and her name also appears in the last two editions of Wisden India - it's not fully searchable online so I don't know if there's even a line or two about her in more detail.

On balance I think we're just about at a suitable level of independent coverage in the sort of depth I'd want to start thinking about notability. Add that to the matches she's played recently in a league which has some obvious notability - it's certainly at least as notable to the single match that either Balac or Machin played in - and I'll argue for keep here. It's not clear and obvious and involved some thought over a period of time and considers the issue of non-equivalence between the men's and women's games. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:34, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of those links, two are blogs and the other three are short mentions. — MarkH₂₁^talk 07:35, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I appreciate that. The blog, I would argue, looks very much to me like a reliable source with some significant expertise behind it in the field of women's cricket. I understand that the sources aren't be best, but my argument that the sourcing we have for this article is much better than, say, Michael Balac or Timothy Machin - both recent keeps at AfD - persists.

As an additional point to add to my arguments above, she's played for the India A side recently. This is the Indian women's second XI - which means she's one of the 22 "best" women's cricketers in India - a country which is cricket mad. If she were a man, she'd have made first-class appearances by now. The only reason she hasn't is because women's cricket is afforded the same official status as men's. The way in which NCRIC is generally interpreted is that if you've played a single FC or LA match you're counted as notable - that's a problem with the way NCRIC is interpreted and means that for women it's impossible to meet without playing full international cricket. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand this sentiment here and I certainly sympathize, but it just falls short of GNG and NCRIC right now. Certainly, NCRIC could be changed if there was consensus; but an individual AfD is not the place for overturning an SNG nor the place to overturn a perceived injustice.

Also, I also don’t think playing for the B national team is as simple as meaning one of the 22 "best" women's cricketers in India, since more than 11 active players have appeared in the full national team at least once. — MarkH₂₁^talk 19:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - There are some interviews with her, primarily from an online publication about women's cricket. Like Blue Square Thing said, it's hard to find sources about women's cricket because it's not as popular as men's cricket at this time. Missvain (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The purpose of Wikipedia is not to right wrongs, if a person has not received widespread recogniztion they are not notable and we do not create articles. That said, we really should end the absurd low inclusion criteria for both cricket and football.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep profiled by CricInfo and locally, also has received some coverage for being an actress, seems like the WP:GNG coverage is more than routine to me. SportingFlyer T·C 02:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify for failing WP:NCRICKET. There are a number of news ghits in January 2020, so more might be forthcoming, but collectively these do not about to "significant coverage", she is only named in telling an account of the game. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep per Blue Square Thing. Last year BCCI named her captain of an under-23 team that included international players like Radha Yadav and Priya Punia. The lack of first-class classification in women's cricket is the reason why she isn't automatically notable per WP:CRIN. Dee03 14:29, 26 January 2020 (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.