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 redirect to List of Border representative cricketers#H. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Hanley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG. This one is sourced to the traditional cricket databases but also to a national archive page about him being a lieutenant, which isn't enough for a military pass, and an ancestry site, which don't count for notability purposes (we all are eligible for an ancestry page.) A WP:BEFORE search brought up no possible sources for improvement. SportingFlyer T·C 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Border representative cricketers; per apparent consensus on the article talk page. The extremely trivial pass of NCRIC is heavily outweighed by the failure of GNG. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 17:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Border representative cricketers As per Wjemather, 1 FC match, would like to know if there was anything else in the London Gazette announcement of his award though. Redirect is a suitable WP:ATD as usual though. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - Beyond time something was done about these mass-created permastubs based on extremely trivial/non-existent passes of SNGs. SNGs are there because people wanted exceptions to GNG's requirement of two instances of SIGCOV in reliable, independent, sources. This is NOT an invitation to go on a perma-stub-creation spree based on some bare table you found! Spending 90 second per article (some of which is spent putting the templates on the talk page?) is no way to write an encyclopedia. FOARP (talk) 18:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. No need to be so passive-aggressive FOARP. Happy for a redirect here, he does appear to have been involved in the legal profession in some capacity, though books are snippet view only and from what I can tell don't stand out. StickyWicket (talk) 22:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per AOTA Noah ^💬 19:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - as stated above, looks unlikely that any coverage will be found beyond the stats of the one game he played in, in a period where (understandably) covering cricket matches was a lower priority. DevaCat1 (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. Seems sensible in this case. StickyWicket (talk) 22:38, 6 April 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.