Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shin-Toshi

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shin-Toshi[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable martial art. Only claims are self-referenced with no indication of notability. The only independent source is a one line listing of martial arts. There is no significant independent coverage of this art.Mdtemp (talk) 18:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. A bunch of puffery cited to self-published sources. It's from the US and it's been around for half a century; if it were notable it should be easy to find multiple non-trivial discussions, but Google Books searches [1][2] only finds two trivial mentions and two trademark applications. (N.B. "shin toshi" has unrelated meanings in Japanese like "new city" so if you just search for that you'll get mostly mis-hits). 210.6.254.106 (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The hyperbole was worse earlier. Calling the martial art the first official American and mixed martial art (possibly a fundamental misunderstanding by the original editor) without supporting refs only raises suspicion that there is a bit of invention going on. Extraordinary claims require support and in this case should be easy to find. No vote yet - hope to give a chance for them to be found.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:40, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no supporting evidence to back up the claim of being the first American martial art. My search found no significant independent coverage of this style nor is any given in the article. Papaursa (talk) 15:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this never insinuates any basic notability signs, nothing at all convincing. SwisterTwister talk 07:35, 2 June 2016 (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.