Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catchy Shubby Cricket

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

=[[Catchy Shubby Cricket]]=

:{{la|Catchy Shubby Cricket}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Catchy_Shubby_Cricket Stats])

:({{Find sources|Catchy Shubby Cricket}})

Unremarkable form of cricket. The article consists of original research, with no sources referenced. In removal of the PROD, the article creator makes reference to a video, however this is just a YouTube video by a cricket club: Of course "Editors should also consider if the content being referenced is truly encyclopedic", this isn't. The editor also states in removal of the PROD that as it's "mostly working class people and people of colour" who play it, it needs an article, however that sounds similar to WP:ILIKEIT. In short, there is no widespread reliable coverage of the subject, nothing which makes it particularly notable. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:V. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 14:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

: Delete Claims to be an "oral tradition," but if it was a notable one, surely it would be possible to find some mention of it in reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

: Keep I agree there is a lack of sources in the article. But considering I found the following in about 10 minutes, at the very least, it would be wrong to assume this game is not making a notable impact in the world. I realize these may not pass as reliable sources by Wikipedia standards. But I'm only demonstrating that it is being mentioned, and that it is of importance in the cases mentioned.

::(a) ...The first spell in NHB starts in Holding's hometown, Kingston, Jamaica. He uses engaging anecdotes to relate his early life; however, before you get a chance to settle, to absorb how the local game of 'Catchy Shubby' would one day shape his craft -- The game was written about in the book No Holding Back by Michael Holding. Note the game is also mentioned in Michael Holdings article in the section "Early life". Link: suite101.com/article/no-holding-back-fast-and-sometimes-furious-a374374'''

:::Please note, this link is being blocked on Wikipedia because it comes from the general-use website "Suite101.com". But again I'm not offering it as a reference, only to show the content matches the Wikipedia article and other mentions.

::[http://www.kiaoval.com/tradition-returns-on-saturday/ (b)] ...However, rather than the match being straight competition between members of the community and the police, the teams will be selected by a game of ‘Catchy Shubby’, which will take place on the outfield beforehand.

::All players due to play in the game will participate in the Catchy Shubby – a form of cricket where all players bat and bowl alongside each other – allowing both captains to take a look at all the players beforehand.

::[http://blog.thecricketer.com/?p=9070 (c)] ...What happened to the offbreaks? That changed because of a game that was played in the Caribbean and particularly Jamaica that we called catchy-shubby, which is a slang term

::[http://www.brixtonblog.com/brixton-people-tony-moody-cricket-coach/6068 (d)] -- This one is a blog, but has a whole interview about the game with the creator. --bitbit (talk) 17:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment This satisfies the requirement for reliable secondary sources how? One mentions a quick game of Catchy Shabby before a match. The second is a blog interview with Michael Holding where he says he played a game by this name in his youth. The third is simply an interview with the "creator" of the game (so did he create it or was it already about in Jamaica in Holding's youth some 40 years or so ago?), so isn't a source independent of the subject. One of these is routine one off coverage, the others it seems have no value as sources. The game is making an impact in the world? Really??? The lack of coverage speaks otherwise! Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 17:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

::I only suggested that you were being hasty about it, I even mentioned twice my links wont "satisfy requirements", because I knew that would be the only (wrong) counter argument to be made. If I could link this sport, that you considered non-existant, to a notable player in 10 minutes, then maybe you shouldn't delete it. And should look for more sources. I don't even know anything about cricket. I just stumbled onto this page on the day it was up for deletion. To me, your heated temperment and triple-question-marks scream hastiness. And the fact that it is an oral teaching is not getting the appropriate weight in this discussion. Wait for people that can and want to research it before you throw it away. --bitbit (talk) 20:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete per AA. extra999 (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete as lacking the in-depth coverage in independent sources as required by WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment bitbit, I think you have defeated your own argument having uncovered so little in 10 minutes. If, as another user has said, this is a widespread oral tradition, coverage would be screaming at us. While the what is being done in Kennington with youngsters might be noble, a noble cause doesn't always imply notability. Back when the article was created, in 2005, wikipedia was young and guidelines about notability were less clear. My temperment is only ever to the point. I call a spade a spade and a kettle a kettle. Howzat?Out!Out!Out! (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
  • [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4q_sqhILzdYC&pg=PT5&lpg=PT5&dq=%22Catchy+Shubby%22&source=bl&ots=p2YDALAIUA&sig=i9iSIj67hEx5avut876wA8nMmRE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-y5bUNnqLKTs0gX4hYDYAQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Catchy%20Shubby%22&f=false Here's the coverage in Michael Holding's autobiography]. According to [http://caribbeancricket.com/news/0000/00/00/1414 this source] this is also known as "bowl for bat", under which name there is some coverage in [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22bowl+for+bat%22+cricket a few books]. Both of these names seem to be used generically for informal forms of cricket with locally agreed rules, such as also described in our articles "backyard cricket" and "street cricket". Phil Bridger (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 14:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete no real evidence of notability from reliable sources. I don't doubt that it exists, but I doubt it warrants a Wikipedia page. Probably worth adding into Cricket in the West Indies if this article ever gets expanded. Harrias talk 11:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

:*It seems that this game (or, at least, a game with this name) is also played in England. I think the best result would be to merge this with backyard cricket and street cricket to create a single article about the worldwide phenomenon of informal cricket. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

: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.