Deletion of Ultimate Kricket Challenge

Comment: Per nom, fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CRIN)

Comment: Notability is , just because some notable players were there, it doesn't make this tournament notable. Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:GNG)

Comment: per nom. Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CRIN)

Comment: possibly warrants a '''redirect''' and a sentence or two in indoor cricket single wicket cricket per  as it could be argued that it meets  (novel format). There is coverage, but a lot of it is nothing more than reworked press releases, and the remainder is not enough to meet . It's possible that future editions will generate more independent coverage from diverse sources, and should that happen the article can be recreated
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:NEVENT||WP:GNG)

Comment: this seems to be a form of single wicket cricket, which is notable enough to have its own article, and there have been a few tournaments of this form over the decades  https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/the-evolution-of-cricket-formats-309625. That, plus the notable participants, makes it pass  in my opinion.  coverage here https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/yuvraj-has-done-it-before-so-why-can-t-i-chris-gayle-keen-to-emulate-yuvraj-singh-s-feat-of-six-sixes-in-an-over-at-ukc/story-kApgXV9Fc0hBQ7LYaBxGBK.html, the Hindustan Times; and perhaps more significantly, in Wisden https://wisden.com/stories/ultimate-kricket-challenge-the-complete-fixtures-and-schedule-of-ukc-2020 - I know it's just a reworked press release, but it's still Wisden. If deleted, it should still get a mention at single wicket cricket
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS)