Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 November 13

Koryu Uchinadi – Deletion Endorsed. Please relist this if you find some better sourcing – Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.

Dear Wiki folks,

Apologies for the lack of editorial decorum, if I'm not observing proper protocol... it's all a tad confusing to me.

Just noticed the "up for deletion" request by admin [?] and I'm seeking to prevent this from happening. I read that you/someone was/were having difficulties confirming our claims to historical authenticity and would be happy to respond to any and all queries broaching the subject. In spite of KU being a contemporary interpretation of much older Okinawa/Fujian-based practices, which come directly from my teachers[Richard Kim 1917-2000, Kinjo Hiroshi 1919-, et al], I/we are most assuredly fully accredited, widely published and established worldwide.

Alternatively, if there is/are other issues at hand I am willing to do whatever it takes to maintain our site listing.

I can be contacted c/o [email protected] or [email protected]

Sincerely,

Patrick McCarthy McCarthy Sensei (talk) 23:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koryu_Uchinadi&action=edit&redlink=1[reply]

I moved this DRV nomination from Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 November 3. Cunard (talk) 02:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural advice for nominator Perhaps you would be kind enough to review WP:GNG and list maybe the best three or four references you are aware of and we can review the deletion on that basis? Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:19, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

temporarily restored for discussion at Deletion Review DGG ( talk ) 17:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion Providing credentials is not really the issue here. No amount of question-and-answer sessions with the creator of the style will get past the issue of primary sourcing. To verify notability, and thus qualify the article for inclusion, we need reliable sources which are unaffiliated with this ryu. Examples would be: unsolicited article in newspapers, journals or martial arts magazines; television coverage in a documentary or news programme; scholarly discussion in papers by independent martial arts historians; or a few paragraphs in a book (written and published independently). So far, I have found none of these. McCarthy Sensei, I'm sorry to tell you this, but you are not a valid source for this article (at least not insofar as demonstrating notability is concerned). Yunshui 雲‍水 21:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse deletion , without prejudice to re-creation if proper secondary sources can be found. If the significance is as great as the supporters of this article say, then there should be such sources. DGG ( talk ) 23:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

13 November 2011[edit]