2007 Cricket World Cup warm-up matches: Lots of the text and sources in the "Preparation problems" section is mostly about the WC in general, with only tangential references to the warm up matches themselves, the largest coverage being complaints about a pitch in one warm-up match: [26] .  Being listed as an FL in 2008 is not a valid reason to keep this article, when it doesn't meet the current standards WP:NLIST and WP:GNG .  Selective merge to 2007 Cricket World Cup#Warm-up matches would be acceptable in my opinion, as we did for CWC Qualfier warm-up match articles previously .  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 11:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket , Lists ,  and Caribbean .  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 11:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I am also nominating the following related pages because it's the same style of warm-up matches prior to another Cricket World Cup event: 2011 Cricket World Cup warm-up matches ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 11:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bangladesh , Sri Lanka ,  and India .  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 11:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I know the other AfDs closed as delete, but I'm not so sure.  This seems to be a valid WP:SPLIT as this information could be on the main World Cup article but is better presented as a stand-alone.  SportingFlyer T · C 12:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Question: how does it meet WP:SPLIT ?  There's 19k of text in 2007 Cricket World Cup and 10k of text in 2011 Cricket World Cup , and WP:SIZESPLIT says that that is not long enough to justify splitting.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 14:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Tend towards delete or a very partial merge to the parent article.  There's really not the coverage of this sequence of matches as a united whole for me.  Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 19:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Selective merge to relevant parent articles I'm not sure these articles should exist as main articles, and the majority can be covered in a small section on each relevant page, however some of the detail in here should be included in the main articles.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:16, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: I see no consensus here just a variety of opinions so far.  Considering how many editors we have here who focus on cricket, I'm surprised that there isn't more participation in discussing this article and what should happen with it.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I'm not averse to a selective merge.  Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 14:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ditto for me.  Some sort of merge is better than keeping.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 15:03, 28 June 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: merge