Talk:Joseph Parker (cricketer)

Reasons for removing the PROD template

I have noted the concerns expressed by the editor who proposed this article for deletion, but per the provision that one "may remove this message if [they] improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason" I have done just that, despite the provision in WP:ATHLETE suggesting that notability might be granted by playing "at the fully professional level of a sport". My reasoning is as follows:

Cricket is a sport where the distinction between professional and amateur is very often not a useful guide to the fame or skill level of a player. This was very much the case in former days (many captains of the England cricket team were amateurs) but still persists to a degree unusual in modern high-profile sport. The WikiProject Cricket guidelines state that a player who "has appeared in at least one major cricket match since 1697 as a player or umpire" should be considered notable, and in general (including on repeated occasions in AfD discussions) players who have played any first-class cricket have been considered notable by consensus.

I do accept that Parker is not as clear-cut a case as someone who had played in the County Championship, or an Oxford cricketer who had played in the University Match, but what is not in doubt is that he played first-class cricket. Since this is officially defined by the game's governing body, and is also an important identifier of matches on solid sources such as CricketArchive, it seems to me better to use this as a guide than whether or not a player was professional or amateur. This goes especially as in former years some players changed their status (in both directions) during their careers while remaining at an equivalent standard of cricket. Loganberry (Talk) 23:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)