Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brendan Lai


 * 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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Brendan Lai

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an unsourced biography. Being a martial arts teacher and opening a martial arts supply store don't show notability. If he was actually was selected to the Inside Kung Fu and Black Belt magazine halls of fame, I would think that shows notability. My problem is that I couldn't find significant coverage of him on the websites of either magazine. It would be good if someone who actually has the magazines can source those claims. Jakejr (talk) 05:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Jakejr (talk) 05:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree with the nom: a hall of fame induction would, if sourced, at least make some case for notability. However, since the article is unsourced for nearly six years now, there is in fact no proof of even meeting WP:GNG. GregorB (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Hall of fame Induction does not mean much - pretty much a self congratulatory organization (read World Soke Council) that had no indication of notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 04:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not notable fails WP:BIO and WP:Athlete --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 09:29, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Added a few sources. Maybe weak ones, from private web sites.--Ben Ben (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The added sites were a memorial and the bio from his school. I don't think either one passes WP:RS. Jakejr (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per Rangell's rationale. NickCT (talk) 21:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Induction by those magazines means more than a typical martial arts HOF, but there's no support for that claim and nothing else to show notability. Papaursa (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2013 (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.