Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bushidokan Federation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 03:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bushidokan Federation
Notability and a walled garden. Lots of high ranks mentioned again and again but all in orgnaizations founded by the (you guessed it) the founder. Google hits on different variations dont give up very much Peter Rehse 11:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletions. —Peter Rehse 12:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - Single source (the federation itself), no matter how oft it is cited, doesn't say anything towards notability. Rather spammy, I don't see that this is encyclopaedic. /Blaxthos 11:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- It would seem that if the other federations listed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danzan_Ryu are afforded pages, then this one should also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.89.10 (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There are two distinct reasons for those articles existing. 1) They are about NOTABLE federations, which thus deserve articles, while this one is a NON-NOTABLE federation, and thus needs no article or 2) They deserve to be deleted too as non-notable themselves. Neither of these possible reasons excuses this article of its shortcomings, and notability requires that an article be referenced to independant reliable sources.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- CommentEven so all but one of those dont have there own article - just a link to a website. They would not survive here either. Small Circle Jujutsu (the only exception) is very notable in its own right.Peter Rehse 10:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There are two distinct reasons for those articles existing. 1) They are about NOTABLE federations, which thus deserve articles, while this one is a NON-NOTABLE federation, and thus needs no article or 2) They deserve to be deleted too as non-notable themselves. Neither of these possible reasons excuses this article of its shortcomings, and notability requires that an article be referenced to independant reliable sources.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of notability, as no independent sources are cited. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Cites only to primary sources, no assertion of notability. Bradford44 02:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete nn, ad, lack of WP:RS. JJL 23:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, fails WP:N. Doctorfluffy 03:18, 7 November 2007 (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.
