Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zi Ran Men

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. Randykitty (talk) 22:58, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Zi Ran Men

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

Unsourced article about a non-notable martial art. All of the external links are to primary sources and there's no claim of notability. Clearly fails WP:MANOTE and WP:GNG. Mdtemp (talk) 17:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There was an old AfD with Keep decision (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zi ran men) but that was long ago, tenuous and remained un-fixed. More importantly two new articles have just appeared on Du Xinwu and Wan Laisheng which are mentioned in the text suggesting that maybe there is new impetus to fix it up. I mentioned this AfD on the new article creators talk page.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Yeah, I'd be up for fixing it next week. There's a couple of half-decent sources in Google Books [1], [2], plus some stuff in Chinese like [3] that I might need a hand with, but overall I reckon it's worth having an article on. It's one of the most obscure internal arts out there, but its two major proponents (about whom, as Peter points out, I've just been writing) are fairly noted in martial arts circles. Concur, though, that the current article is a pile of pants, and if it does get nuked I'd be perfectly happy to recreate it from scratch instead. Yunshui ^雲 _水 21:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've now made considerable changes to the article, adding several sources (worth noting that one of these, Kozma, has an entire chapter devoted to Zinranmen), expanding the training section and removing the unsourced quotes and external links. Hopefully that should be enough to demonstrate the art's notability. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The added sources and changes establish notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per PRehse and Yunshui.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:20, 13 October 2014 (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.