Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ho Luen

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. Sr 13 22:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Luen[edit]

Prod removed by IP user. Created of wooden dummies for kung fu, however cannot find entire reliable sources to back up claim. A quick Google search of "Ho Luen Kung Fu" turns up a history of Yip Man, with 2 brief mentions of Ho Luen. Wildthing61476 00:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable, poorly written and no sources. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article itself has no Reliable sources; the Kung fu magazines are not proven to be reliable, and, since the magazine would be the only claim to notability - and the reliability of the magazine is not established - I am going to have to vote to delete this article. ~ Magnus animum ∵ ∫ φ γ 01:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above... --It's-is-not-a-genitive 01:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as spam. There are no reliable third party sources for this article and I suspect we won't find any, either. RFerreira 08:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I would have asked for speedy had I come across it but since it is here let's finish it. JodyB_talk 11:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I originally marked this for speedy, but the speedy tag was removed because there was a claim of notability in the article, and was replaced with a Prod tag. Wildthing61476 14:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless reliable sources can be provided to substantiate the biographical information. (aeropagitica) 17:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Very spammish. Realkyhick 20:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletions. cab 23:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 何聯葉問 ("Ho Luen" "Yip Man" in Chinese, based on how his name is written on the Yip Man page) gets 25 GHits [1], of which only 1 might be a reliable source, and that only mentions Ho trivially [2]. cab 23:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article failed to mention what Kung Fu magazine he was mentioned in, and makes verifying the facts very difficult. Hence it can't make him notable enough to have an article.--Kylohk 10:44, 11 May 2007 (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.