Wiki How:Articles for deletion/Ron Hamence with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948 (2nd nomination)

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 merge to Ron Hamence. ✗plicit 03:46, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Hamence with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948

[Hide this box]New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Quite similar circumstances to Doug Ring with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948 - essentially, Hamence's involvement with the team was "didn't do much". We do not need a fork of his main article, Ron Hamence, which basically just says in 3,204 words that he didn't do much during the tour. Hamence is notable, but this fork isn't. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Ring with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948 (2nd nomination)Some direct quotes from the article for you:

"Along with Doug Ring, Hamence and McCool called themselves "ground staff" because of their scant playing duties in the major matches"
"Hamence and Colin McCool were the only squad members who did not play a Test on tour."

More or less, this article is a giant pile of statistics and repeated material from Ron Hamence and the articles on the team and the games it played. The only thing of any worth here is the "Role" section, which could be merged into Ron Hamence. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence. The arguments made regarding the Ring article apply here. Prose is mostly contrived from statistics and scorecards, and does not directly relate to Hamence's involvement in the tour at all, which could be adequately summarised in a single paragraph. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence. He didn't play any Test matches during the tour and his significance toward it doesn't merit a fork in this case. StickyWicket (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above; I don't think there is much to merge. This article should never have been granted FA status, but that is irrelevant to this discussion. St Anselm (talk) 15:58, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence. Per the comments made by both Wjemather & AssociateAffiliate. Pahiy (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence as StickyWicket and Wjemather state, didn't play a vital enough role in the tour to generate GNG coverage of himself in relation to the event to allow a stand-alone article. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or I guess merge if there's anything really merge-worthy. I don't think any of these should have independent articles. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence but worth noting that it is currently a featured article but the Ron Hamence page is only a good article. The combined page should be worked to become a featured article. Gusfriend (talk) 08:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ron Hamence. As per comments above. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any possibly important information. It hurts to delete a Featured Article, but its probably better to work on improving the main article. BuySomeApples (talk) 05:29, 27 January 2022 (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.