Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tricking

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tricking[edit]

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

1. Notability (Neologism) 2. WP:NOTGUIDE Widefox (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There aren't enough sources in the article's current form, but numbers one and three suggest notability. I suspect a lot of original research, but it looks like there may be something worthwhile here; the solution is to edit the article and make it better, not nominate it for deletion. The name strikes me as somewhat informal though, so the page may need a rename, though I am not a martial arts expert. 143.92.1.33 (talk) 04:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete #1 has a one sentence "tricking is a new sport" entry. This entire article is OR, and is an incredible amount of overlap with parkour/freerunning/martial arts. Gaijin42 (talk) 02:13, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yeah, I too see the overlap with parkour/freerunning/martial arts. Perhaps we can let this new term/concept sit in those articles until (if ever) it is ready for primetime. Also, add it over at Wiktionary, as the threshold for inclusion is much lower there. Senator2029 (talk) 04:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is original research that seems like something for a dictionary (at best). A couple of one page mentions in books fails to show significant independent coverage. The term is very ambiguous since I've heard it used for martial arts, parkour, gymnastics, skateboarding, and even car modifications. Astudent0 (talk) 17:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article appears to be original research, perhaps based on personal experience (conjecture on my part). The article's facts may or may not be correct, but that's the problem--there's no way to verify the statements. Clearly fails WP:V and has questionable notability. Merging it into other articles doesn't solve the problem, it merely spreads it around. Mdtemp (talk) 22:01, 29 March 2012 (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.