recommend Keep it's a stub with basic info and two reliable sources. No where obvious to merge and sources suggest notability and potential. --Natet/c 17:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Recommend AFD - Another small federation 4k g-hist no relevant news hits drops top 30 as "British Isles TaeKwon-Do Federation" -wikipedia --Natet/c 17:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Second. Small fed without significant coverage. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Going out on a limb here and say AfD. Not written badly, but much of it is promotional filler or history of different styles. It does have some sources and might get kept, but the sources are all local and I've always felt that local papers cover local stuff because they have to fill space and need the local stuff to differentiate themselves from USA Today. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I looked @ this one & couldn't make a call immediately, so was going to give it a second go today. As you say not a bad article and not blatantly promotional (more just positive) but there is still the issue if a local club is notable. I'd move we leave it here for a week & get more opinions. --Natet/c
I'd vote delete on this one in a AfD, mainly because everything I can find in English is trivial roles. But not sure I'm brave enough to nominate it and listen to people complain about Chinese language sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AfD. Bad choice of titles. 1 Gnews hit (not about the org, but about them giving someone an award). 270 ghits, mostly things that won't pass WP:RS. 3 returns in Gbooks, none of which provide significant coverage. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Recommend AFD. Can't find reliable sources about this organization. Also not sure about notability. Papaursa (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
titles can be fixed with a move but no point as this doesn't look notable, not ~ 3.5k g hits news is masked by Kung-fu Panda...--Natet/c 10:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's always possible, but I don't see anything in the references or external links to change my view. I took another look earlier today and I still think AFD is the right call. If something is found, that's fine, but I haven't seen it yet. Papaursa (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably meets WP:ATHLETE. This isn't tagged for this project, so we could just ignore it. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:35, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found him mentioned in several "history of wrestling" articles and he seems to have been well known in his day. I also found him mentioned in newspapers, even the New York Times. The article needs sourcing, but I think an interested editor (which I'm not) could make a decent article on him. Papaursa (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Order of the crown thing needs a source but supports notability if sourced, looks like it needs bit of work but a keep. --Natet/c 10:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this is a translation of the Itialian Wiki article (which has some sources). jmcw (talk) 10:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AFD. Just not notable. Again, not tagged for this project, but I might nominate it anyway after this week is up. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:35, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another one I'd just ignore. Not going to find enough in English and just don't want to fight with the "I found this in the China Post Gazette and you're an ignorant xenophobe for not being able to read Cantonese" crowd. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to skip any film ones that aren't blatant, you need linguists and/or film buff to do those. --Natet/c 10:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AfD. 2 gbook returns, only 1 provides a paragraph of coverage and it's almost word for word from their website. 7 gnews hits, all are mentions and not coverage of the org itself. Most of the 11K ghits are mentions or non-RS sources. It exists. It is big, but big doesn't mean notable. Not seeing much actual (or significant) coverage of the organization itself. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This one might be a good candidate for a Transwiki, I have heard the term used by commentators on MMA events too.--Natet/c 09:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Same as I said last week, although I'm leaning toward redirecting it to Bill Duff. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
trans wiki as a dic def? and/or merge what little there is. --Natet/c 10:47, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say no on the trans wiki. There is little on Toa So Du and I saw a ref where Duff said he has a belt in Tang Soo Do and that this term was a mistake by their PR people. Without some solid sources, I'd hate to promote it as a dictionary ref. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough. --Natet/c 09:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
