Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vladimir Vasiliev (martial arts)
- 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 no consensus. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Vladimir Vasiliev (martial arts) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- Delete: Article does not come close to notability per WP:NOTE. All of the sources are to his own school, violating both WP:RS and possibly WP:ADVERT. Djma12 (talk) 19:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- keep - One of the most important figures in RMA; other sources can be found and replaced. --Mista-X (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - Can you please mention what sources these are? I've tried doing simple google reviews and can't find any reference do this guy per WP:NOTE, other than his own books. Djma12 (talk) 01:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Seems somewhat notable, but there may be some COI issues--Wadeperson (talk) 20:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with my mind open to change if any independent sources that discuss the subject in a meaningful way are added. (I couldn't find any!) --Stormbay (talk) 01:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. -- Nate1481 09:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - questionable notability, and looks too like an advert to be a good starting point, e.g. it uses an online shop as a source... edit: looked back in the history & there was some good material on the fence though may need stubbing to be kept.--Nate1481 10:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- See also the Martial arts project essay on notability
Keep This article needs work, not deletion. The 'Aikido Journal' article, the 'Black Belt' article and the 'Meibukan Magazine' article are good quality references and should be enough to establish notability per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_arts/Notability#Martial_artists. jmcw (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep widely known, essentially the system's head (at least for the West), appears in a substantial number of magazine articles and documentaries, has books and videos out. JJL (talk) 12:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:03, 6 January 2009 (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.