Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brolf


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Brolf

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Seems to be a violation of WP:MADEUP, no Google search results returned.  WackyWace  talk to me, people 18:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non-notable and recently made up sport.  D C E dwards 1966  18:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article is completely unsourced; the only source that I could find is a Facebook page. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:MADEUP. SoCalSuperEagle took the words right out of my mouth. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Brolf is a legitimate sport even though it has no google searches see the discussion page on Brolf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brolf for more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.39.191.28 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 9 June 2010 — 64.39.191.28 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete, even if it really is a legitimate sport, there's no evidence that this passes our notability standards. Subjects can be notable without any online references, but it's not likely that a recently-created subject will have sufficient print coverage without any online coverage.  Nyttend (talk) 22:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Brolf has a source that may or may not appear during searches. Please follow this link to view this source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdtqWc25slo. The documentation of Brolf starts at 4:45 of the video. This video premiered June 20, 2009 at the Huron Park S.S. year end assembly. This source will be posted on the Brolf wiki page shortly. I understand that youtube is not a very reliable source but this is proof that Brolf has in fact been documented. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drandygreen (talk • contribs) 22:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, YouTube isn't a particularly reliable source, given that anyone could post a video of anything on there. I could post a video of, for example, a snowboarding trick that hadn't recieved any media attention. Therefore, this trick, no matter how many viewes it had recieved on YouTube would not justify a Wikipedia article. You also say that it's notable because a video about it has been shown at a school assmbly. Firstly, this doesn't make it notable, and secondly, there's no proof that it WAS shown at a school assembly. And since Wikipedia is about anything that is backed up by a reliable source, and YouTube is not one, and there is no proof this is either a popular sport, or something that has recieved media attention.  WackyWace  talk to me, people 11:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - It may be a legitimate sport but there is no evidence that this meets notability guidelines. One day if it gains popularity and reliable sources notice it and discuss the sport then recreate the article.   GB fan  talk 22:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 17:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails all relevant policies. Talk page is quite humorous though (especially the claim that association football was dreamt up in a pub) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:49, 14 June 2010 (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.