Deletion of Abbas Shah (2nd nomination)

Comment: to List of Karnataka cricketers - only trivially passes NCRIC and we know practically nothing about this player; redirect per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)

Comment: Does the subject receive in-depth significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources? '''In-depth ''' means the subject receives comprehensive and thorough coverage. '''Significant''' means the subject receives more than routine coverage but is sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention. We all know what reliable, independent and secondary is. '''Multiple''' doesn't simply mean more than one, numerically. It actually means the subject receives separate coverage in more than one source as presented from different angles. If five reliable sources all report the same thing it is considered ONE source. The subject of this article fails  in those regards when conducting a . Over the entire breadth of these articles on these cricket players I have seen no substance from those saying we should keep other than them pointing to the past. I do not look at past AfD's because all I am concerned with is what is presented as evidence now. No one has convinced me these players pass the criteria we are to measure EVERY article by. SNG's are fine to presume notability. Presumed notability can be rebutted with facts
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:BEFORE)