- 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. JohnCD ( talk) 23:23, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Huan Shiying Kune Do
- Huan Shiying Kune Do ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No assertion of significance through reliable sources independent of the subject. Reads as promo piece. May be derived from Kajukenbo. Due to the lack of sufficient web results on the subject, it's difficult to ascertain whether this is even a legitimate martial arts style, that is, if anyone practices it. It is worth noting that the article doesn't even attribute the system's creation to anyone in particular. Potentially a hoax. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete There is no attempt to indicate notability or that this is something that was just recently made up. None of the references given appear to have anything to do with the subject. Peter Rehse ( talk) 23:42, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete No indication of notability. I find it strange that until this article was created there were zero Google hits for this martial art. Even if it's not a hoax it fails both WP:GNG and WP:MANOTE. Papaursa ( talk) 03:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete No references or sources for this style. ottawakungfu ( talk) 03:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete For some days, the article was quite literally a copy & paste of Kajukenbo, slightly rearranged, withe a load of offline book references at the bottom that don't appear to have anything to do with the subject. It speaks in such vague terms about the subject that it could be talking about any martial art you could name, or none. As Papaursa notes above, a few days ago there were zero Google hits for this. What's there now appears to be bot mirrors. No indication of how it might meet WP:GNG. Possibly a WP:HOAX. Ruby Murray 06:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete, Zero Google hits besides wikipedia mirrors. No notable sources, in fact, there are no sources period. Appears to be WP:HOAX. Valoem talk 15:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
- 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.