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) WJ94 (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chandan Madan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Chandan Madan

Stub biography of cricketer who does not satisfy cricket notability or general notability. There is nothing in this stub that describes significant coverage in a reliable source. The only reference is to a database source, and does not provide secondary coverage. The Heymann criterion is to find two reliable sources that provide secondary coverage within seven days. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Punjab. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The external links immediately leads me to this article and this one which would seem to fulfil the Heymann criteria immediately, yes? Perhaps the nom may wish to review these and consider whether they're sufficient or whether we have to drag this out for a week? Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on the basis of the links provided by Blue Square Thing. Appears to be a notable cricketer, evidence shows that they have played at the highest domestic levels. Playing for U19 indian team particularly persuasive as to notability. Jack4576 (talk) 08:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per BST. Him playing for India Under-19s actually doesn't make him notable, had he solely played for them he would fail WP:NCRIC. Having played for senior domestic teams in India, and with the sources BST has found, he meets the inclusion criteria and GNG. StickyWicket (talk) 17:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep From what we've got here, and the career he's had, I believe it likely that there would be enough in offline/non-English language sources for the article to be kept, albeit only just. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:00, 15 May 2023 (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.