Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Sotis

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The result was keep (nomination withdrawn), by JJL. Non-admin close.

Tom Sotis[edit]

non notable, the martial art that he founded was just deleted for being non-notable. Prod was removed because of the claim that "spetnaz claims require an AfD" RogueNinja_talk 18:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. —RogueNinja_talk 18:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's irrelevant that AMOK! was deleted. Spetsnaz and other claims supported in at least one well-known martial arts magazine [1]; ghits attest an active and international seminar schedule; he and his art have an article in Masters of the Blade [2]. JJL (talk) 19:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WAX doesnt apply. I am saying that since it was decided that the thing he is notable for is itself not notable, he is not notable. RogueNinja_talk 21:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Regardless of the fact that the other article was deleted, the spetnaz claim seems sufficient for notability. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 22:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - the claim is nothing, it needs to be backed up by Reliable Sources. If there is none, the claim needs to be stripped out fo the article, and what is there left after that? - fchd (talk) 09:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, I withdraw RogueNinja_talk 02:49, 5 February 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.