William Rhodes (cricketer, born 1883): Dazzling4 ( talk ) 16:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and England .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A very quick initial look makes me think that this is either a keep, based on NEXIST, or a redirect to the List of Yorkshire County Cricket Club players - which is the long established consensus for dealing with articles where we can find so little biographical information to create an article and have little chance of doing so.  In this case we have dates and the era in which he played.  Playing for Yorkshire Second XI plenty of times between 1911 and 1913 suggests to me that there's a likelihood that sources exist in regional newspapers - presumably the Yorkshire Post and others.  Put that alongside the offline Yorkshire book source already offered and I wonder how much detail there is on the bloke.  He got a very short Wisden obituary, which is unusual for single appearance players, and my gut feeling is that there may be other offline sources there that I have no hope of being able to access.  If he were a New Zealander we'd know easily - in this case we'd need someone with access to suitable newspaper archives in the UK.  Given that we can verify who he was and that he existed from multiple sources, I have no reason to think that delete is an option here - this is either a redirect, which I wouldn't be opposed to, or a keep Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 06:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep My position remains the same as the previous AfD.  Given his 1 FC appearance, and Second XI appearances for Yorkshire, probably the most covered county in the country at the time, there will be significant offline coverage of the subject.  At worst should be a redirect to List of Yorkshire County Cricket Club players .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not opposed to redirect, but I don't think leaving the article limping on in this sad state for another 5 years is a good solution.  Dazzling4 ( talk ) 16:01, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per Rugbyfan22.  An infobox would be a nice addition.  StickyWicket aka AA ( talk ) 23:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I've added more on his brief career.  Johnlp ( talk ) 01:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: To consider Johnlp's addition and the suggested potential redirect.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 02:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment (see above for initial comments) - I'm happier to keep after Johnlp's additions Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 10:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per additions and above arguments.  St Anselm ( talk ) 17:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep