Deletion of Arthur Norton

Comment: to List of Border representative cricketers, where this person is already mentioned. SNGs don't give blanket exemptions to  or  or , and trying to use them for that purpose is an abuse of process. I ''would'' support overhauling that list to include statistical information. That better reflects the nature of the sources anyway, which amount to a few cells in a spreadsheet
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: NCRIC is disputed at the moment because it is way too broad and includes too many people who don't meet  by a mile. One way to show that a SNG is not valid is establishing consensus at AfDs that people who meet the SNG (NCRIC in this case) should be deleted or redirected anyway. An SNG is not intended to be a free pass for people not meeting the GNG, but a way to rapidly check if people are very likely to meet the GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: meets /.  Right at the top of  (before WP:SPORTCRIT) it states (in bold) - "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline ''or'' the sport specific criteria set forth below". At worst, redirect to the list
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSPORT||WP:NCRIC)