Deletion of N. Fernando

Comment: Fails  and the coverage is routine.Now the the subject has played a single match  with his contribution being insufficient and has retired now the subject technically meets  as he has played just 1 Match but the subject comprehensively fails the General Notability Guideline and has long retired last played the 1 match in in 1991-92  thus ending any scope of future contribution or any hope of meeting General Notability Guideline and as Per Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_135#The_criteria_of_WP:NSPORT_here_are_too_inclusive|this discussion subject-specific notability guidelines do not supersede the general notability guideline, except in clear cases where GNG does not apply to.NSPORTS does not supersede GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NCRIC)

Comment: It has '''consistently''' been held that a single appearance at the highest level of a sport is sufficient for . The correct interpretation of "presumed" in WP is that it is considered to be the case, unless there is evidence to the contrary, for '''presumed notability''' to mean the subject is notable unless it can be demonstrated that it is not. In this case, no one has presented any evidence suggesting that the subject is not notable, given that he has played cricket at the highest level and meets  (see CRIC in SPORTS). Furthermore, there have been several precedents in which subjects like this one have been '''kept''' or where '''no consensus''' has been ruled (see, for example, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L. Dinaparna and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohan Rangarajan (2nd nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CRIN||WP:NCRIC||WP:NSPORTS)

Comment: as no signs of meeting . We are not database site where we should have article on every single cricketer
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: to Kandy Youth Cricket Club as valid search term – Per Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_135#The_criteria_of_SPORT_here_are_too_inclusive|this discussion, subject-specific |notability guidelines do not supersede the |general notability guideline, except in clear cases where |GNG does not apply to. ''As it is the single most recent consensus on the notability of sport bios'', I feel obliged to go with the result of the discussion: '''NSPORTS does not supersede GNG'''. This really does need to be reflected on sport guideline pages, though, as this can seriously mislead people. Also, I will note that less coverage has to be applied for this article to be considered notable. This article also fails 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:GNG||WP:BIO1E)