Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dentokan

Dentokan

Dentokan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article is very strange, it may well be a hoax. Certainly, it isn't backed up by any concrete sources. While I'm by no means an expert on martial arts (and if anyone is, please feel free to correct me!), I don't think it's notable. PROD removed by article creator, so came here. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 21:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - Makes no sense at all! Jenuk1985 | Talk 21:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - the arical Dentokan has sources, the refanes. i did not remove the PROD. i put it on the talk page like the PROD page said. i put more refances on the page so i moved it.Fld300b (talk) 21:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• You did remove the PROD, click here to refresh your memory! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 21:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• [1], [2] Fld300b (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - mabye i did opps. i may have not save it to the take page. put back if you like.Fld300b (talk) 21:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Too late now, I'm afraid - once a tag's removed, that's it. We'll let this AfD run, should make a better decision, anyway. Thanks for the offer, though! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 21:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - Dentokan is practiced by a lot of people. There are 3 dojos in central Missouri alone. this Saturday. 10 people are competing in the Jefferson City tournament Dentokan is a martial art that should by in wikipedia and is notable.75.105.128.38 (talk) 00:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Fld300b

• Comment - I fixed the spelling errors an put more about the competitions so don't delete this page.Fld300b (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Weak delete I don't know that much about the martial arts either, but the subject doesn't have the necessary independent sources to establish notability and the article sounds a little too much like promotion for me.  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 02:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - There is currently nothing in this article to indicate that this school is any more notable than any other of many martial art schools around the world. Almost all of the references are to articles published by the school itself, and the only reference that does not fall into this category links to an unoccupied domain (http://www.goyukan.net/). The History section, which is probably the section that is most likely to justify this school's notability, is only one sentence. All of the other sections are generic, in that they could be written about many other martial art schools. If you are reading this and you are a primary contributor to the article, I would recommend: (1) put yourself in the position of someone who is knowledgeable about martial arts and ask what would set this school apart from the thousands of other karate schools that exist (you then need to put this information into the article); (2) remove most or all of the content that could be found in the Karate article (or karate-related articles that already exist); and (3) provide independent references (i.e., not just the school's own publications, although it would be perfectly valid to include them as some of the references). Trust this helps. Janggeom (talk) 09:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - Google shows plenty of references from around the world, including this one from Liechtenstein. . . Rcawsey (talk) 10:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per Janggeom. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 10:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
• Comment - i put more on the history.