Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Samson

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. — TKD::Talk 06:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Samson

Andrew Samson (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

subject does not meet terms of WP:Notability and should be deleted as per several similar cases in this discussion BlackJack | ^{talk page} 05:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Notability clearly stated. RegRCN 12:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Could you please explain how being a cricket statistician is notable, especially when he apparently has no publications? --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 20:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I have little doubts that a sport statistician, unless really something exceptionnal, is not notable at all.JForget 00:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per lack of significant coverage from independent sources. Corpx 04:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Same reason as JForget's jddphd (talk · contribs) 04:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

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.