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 delete. -- DQ (t) (e) 01:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Donaghadee Cricket Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fourth Tier Irish cricket club, clearly fails both WP:GNG and WP:CLUB, no claim to significance made in the article. Mtking (talk) 07:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page should not be speedy deleted because the article does indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: it says that the club plays in the NCU Senior League, i.e. it is a senior cricket club in Ireland, the highest status of cricket club in Ireland (as opposed, e.g. to junior cricket).

WikiProject Cricket has devised notability guidelines. For clubs, while there is no specific guideline for Irish cricket, there is for English cricket. The guideline for English cricket is that any club that belongs to "one of the Bradford Cricket League, the Lancashire League, the Central Lancashire League or one of the ECB Premier Leagues is notable. In other words, clubs belonging to senior provincial leagues are notable. The provincial leagues in Ireland are the equivalent of these leagues in England and, therefore, clubs belonging to those leagues meet the notability guidelines.

There is no reason why each senior-league cricket club in Ireland shouldn't have at least a stub. A club may be in the fourth tier this year, but equally may be in the second or first tier in a few years' time. Mooretwin (talk) 22:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since others are trotting out stock responses/comments across a range of these articles ... Or they may not. WP:CRYSTAL may have some bearing here. If they get to a suitable level then an article may be appropriate. Until then, it is not. This club is apparently at level 3, by the way, not level 4. - Sitush (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note to closing Administrator : WikiProject Cricket have clarified the guidelines, and Irish Cricket clubs do not meet the English criteria and are notable if they meet the WP:GNG Mtking (talk) 23:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. One of the editors here, who is seeking to get the articles removed, changed the guidelines himself. Mooretwin (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Irish cricket club playing at highest club level. --HighKing (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the article, you will see it is in fact the Fourth level. Mtking (talk) 03:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete For the same reasons as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clogher Cricket Club this club is not playing at a level comparable to the ECB Premier Leagues and nothing covering this club would appear to exist. VERTott 10:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  What non-local-news coverage is there of clubs playing in the Lincolnshire League? Teams in the Lincolnshire League are considered notable under the WP Cricket guidelines, so the same standard should apply here. Mooretwin (talk) 08:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - club plays outside the top level, being in the third division/section of a provincial league (Ireland has no national league). Article is unreferenced even after being nominated here for some time. Appears to fail GNG. - Sitush (talk) 18:18, 20 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.