Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centered riding
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 keep. JForget 00:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Centered riding[edit]
- Centered riding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find any sources to indicate that this is notable. The originator, Sally Swift, might actually be notable, but not this fairly obscure topic. —Chowbok ☠ 03:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Actually, the concept is highly notable within riding circles. Sally Swift is synonymous with the Centered Riding concept, which made her famous, and she's not really famous for anything else. While she was alive, people had a lot of respect for her and her teachings. The problem is that since she has died, a small group of people copyrighted the term and are doing their darndest to make it into a cult, which is annoying, but the underlying concept is still very sound. By that standard, it's no more odd than Parelli Natural Horsemanship, and in fact, the underlying philosophy is sounder than Parelli's stuff. (LOL) The article could be inproved, but due to the zealouness of the defenders of the faith, one hesitates to edit it too much and draw their attention. (siging) Montanabw(talk) 04:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Added a couple refs -Sally Swift obits from the Boston Globe and Wall Street Journal, both of these mention the method's international popularity. Novickas (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per the WSJ and Boston Globe articles. Priyanath talk 19:59, 11 December 2009 (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.