Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Loxton with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948
Diclsoure: I am a member of WP:CRIC) "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article". The articles in question are fully referenced so it should be an open and shut case.That said, I have http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket&oldid=303776772#Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates.2FDoug_Ring_with_the_Australian_cricket_team_in_England_in_1948.2Farchive1 said before that I'm not comfortable with ''some'' of the articles as for someone like Ron Hamence, the main article can easily integrate Ron Hamence with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948. In fact, it Ron Hamence#International debut, England, India and the Invincibles|already does. I don't like the sentiment that at least some of these articles have been created just to collect baubles. The statement that "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Cricket&diff=302569624&oldid=302565737 you have to remember the purpose of these articles which is to achieve featured topic status for The Invincibles" strongly indicates to me that these articles are content forks, but as far as I know it is YellowMonkey not BlackJack who is the main author of these articles. That said, something like Donald Bradman with the Australian cricket team in England in 1948 is quite clearly #Article spinouts – "Summary style" articles|a spinouts from a well developed article. A closer examination of some of the smaller articles may warranted, but a bulk nomination is not. The bottom line is, the articles are well referenced, confirming their notability, and if someone chooses to write them then let them
— User:Nev1, 14:28, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:CFORK (Wikipedia:Content forking)