Deletion of American Cricketer

Comment: There's a  problem for pre-internet notability, in that the necessary sources to demonstrate notability are tucked away in archives of dead trees, so I cut them a bit more slack than some detail of David Beckham's life that is recorded to the nth degree. But I'd suggest that the fact that an ''Australian'' newspaper https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1302&dat=19061128&id=IVVVAAAAIBAJ&pg=3401,7929962 reported the death of someone whose only notability was editing this publication suggests that the publication itself had an international reputation at the time. I know that snippet doesn't ''prove'' notability in itself, but it gives me confidence that you would find evidence of notability if you delved into the archives. So I'd give it the benefit of the doubt
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Systemic bias (WP:CSB)

Comment: it existed for 50 years is not enough. No evidence of significant coverage in independent |reliable sources as required by . And the above argument that "notability is entirely subjective" is wrong, we have clear objective guidelines for notability at 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:GNG)