Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academy of Shotokan Karate

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 14:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Academy of Shotokan Karate[edit]

This martial arts school has no sources to establish its notability, and it doesn't really make much of a claim of notability either. Blast Ulna (talk) 03:27, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a very regular user being so busy with work and other stuff so I am glad I logged in today and noticed this page proposed for deletion. I have seen this happen to karate pages before just because printed book references are hard to find for what is largely a spoken tradition. I am fed up with up-themselves academics who spout latin thinking they have a monopoly on what is covered by wikipedia, which is meant to be the encyclopedia of everything.
- Comment It is difficult that only the oldest martial arts have books. If you could provide a "Shotokan Karate" magazine[1] article (or a similar magazine), most people here would accept it as a valid reference. Verifiability is very important in Wiki. jmcw (talk) 12:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Wikipedia is not meant to be the encyclopedia of everything. To quote the Five Pillars. "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia incorporating elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs. All articles must follow our no original research policy, and strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references. Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, experiences, or arguments. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia is not a soapbox; an advertising platform; a vanity press; an experiment in anarchy or democracy; or a web directory. It is not a newspaper or a collection of source documents; these kinds of content should be contributed to the Wikimedia sister projects." McWomble (talk) 04:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know a couple of guys in the ASK, so I know it is an elite federation with membership limited to high quality clubs, and Sensei Dave Hazard is an instructor of legendary skill and highly respected in the karate world. They are very successful in national and international competitions. The page should be tagged for improvement not deletion.--Ninja Shewolf (talk) 14:18, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please provide evidence of this. You could start among its 157 Google hits. I don't see where I used any Latin. Blast Ulna (talk) 17:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hi Blast Ulna. I suspect Ninja Shewolf spotted the Latin on your userpage, as I did. The US google hits you provide are not relevant and probably not notable, but these from UK google will be more helpful. The ASK is very much a notable federation in karate in the British Isles and has clubs in Canada. Its founder Dave Hazard, trained in Tokyo, is an internationally renowned instructor. I generally agree with the shewolf although she should not bite an editor acting in good faith. As she says hard copy references are difficult, but there are many online refs. It must be better to have a stub article awaiting improvement than a red link and it does not take up a lot of server space. If space is a problem it would surely be better to delete some of the old vandalised pages that are of no use. I recently read that Jimmy Wales does not consider notability a criterion for deletion. I also want the article kept and improved, not deleted.
    - Every single one of those is self published, links from other karate clubs or blogs. They are not reliable sources. There is a grand total of ONE Gnews hit, a passing reference in the Salford Advertiser. In the absence of reliable sources supporting notability, delete or redirect to Shotokan. McWomble (talk) 04:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. —Jclemens (talk) 22:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable. JJL (talk) 05:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
merge+redirect into List_of_major_Shotokan_Karate_organizations, per Philcha.*Delete This article does not make any referenced claim that it is more notable than the other 500 thousand dojos in the world. jmcw (talk) 09:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comment added section List_of_Shotokan_organizations#Academy_of_Shotokan_Karate jmcw (talk) 10:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Hazard is notable, but this dojo isnot RogueNinja_talk 19:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a dojo. It is an international federation.Charles (talk) 20:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

keep / merge+redirect into List_of_major_Shotokan_Karate_organizations. I agree with "It must be better to have a stub article awaiting improvement than a red link" above, per WP:DELETE. In its present state, I'd merge+redirect, as the article is very short. Redirection would avoid red links and would make expansion easy if more content with WP:RS are added. Re WP:RS, you have to adapt to the types of material available in a field. I mainly edit paleontology and and other biology articles, and in that field there are plenty of peer-reviewed journals and books by authors who have published in peer-reviewed journals. However I know of other fields where less formal sources are all that's available. Karate has a large following but it is not a big-money sport, so gets little coverage in big-name newspapers. Hence the main sources are web sites of clubs and other organizations involved in the sport. If several clubs or prominent competitors express support for Dave Hazard's Academy of Shotokan Karate, that's as good as one can reasonably expect in this field. --Philcha (talk) 10:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Please also see WP:MANOTE for thoughts on the notablity of martial arts, artists & schools. --Nate 14 81 17:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, maybe notable enough for the list but looks to be unlikely to have enough info sourceable not to be a permanent stub. --Nate 14 81 17:17, 18 November 2008 (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.