Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italian Martial Arts


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 17:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Italian Martial Arts

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Pointless list of so-called martial arts, none of which have their own WP articles and many of which can't be found on Google either. Fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:RS and WP:GNG andy (talk) 07:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:35, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Keep: references have been added and the internet links have been added. There are wikiarticles on "italian School Of Swordmanship" in the english wikipedia and on "istrumpa" and "Bastone siciliano" on the italian wikipedia: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istrumpa, http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastone_Siciliano. Simply because you guys are ignorant about something it does not mean that it does not exist. You are a very arrogant bunch. proper references to the "skill of italians in certain battles" have been added. Reliable sources are Guicciardini and Macchiavelli who reported these things as they were happening. I suggest you download the art of war by Macchiavelli and you will find the passages describing how italian and spanish soldiers armed with short swords annhiliated the famed Landsknecht and the "Invincible" swiss pikemen. Here is the link: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15772 Good reading In case you guys have trouble reading the Epub format try the txt format here: http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/15772/pg15772.txt Oh...and about the martial arts being "non notable": From 756 BC (foundation of Rome) until at least 1634 (Battle of Nordlingen) firearms were either non-existent or unreliable and cumbersome and all or most of the fighting was hand-to-hand. Now take Randy Couture, Fedor Emelianenko, Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris and put them in the time machine to transport them at the Battle of Pavia (1525). How do you think they would fare facing 4 men-at-arms skilled in the "Flower of Battle" ( the true italian martial art)? How many Martial Arts Do you know that have a written manual dating from 1410 AD and recording the "moves" in great detail? take a look for yourself: http://www.thearma.org/essays/Fiore/FioreDeiLiberi_StudyGuide.v3.6.pdf If you want to get skilled at hand-to-hand isn't it smart to learn your skill from an art developed when warfare was mostly fought hand-to-hand? So how is this martial art "non-notable"?
 * Delete per nom. All of the sources the article cites are Youtube videos with only titles of the phrases used here, and those were largely the only places that I saw that used the phrases in this article.  If some of these styles become notable, then maybe this page will have potential. Inks.LWC (talk) 07:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Many, I'll admit I didn't check all of them, of the martial arts listed are non-notable based on my searches. Nothing in the article is linked to a source. Astudent0 (talk) 14:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a collection of unsourced statements about the skills of Italians in certain battles. It seems like you could make a good article on this topic, but this current rendition needs to be totally scrapped. Papaursa (talk) 20:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep This is a very reasonable topic for an article. We have articles like Japanese Martial Arts and there is sufficient material available on traditional Italian methods of fencing and daggerwork, for example, to justify such an article. This isn't that article--not by a long stretch--but the subject of the article itself is notable. JJL (talk) 23:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Here is what Macchiavelli says in his Art of war: Philip Vicecounte of Milaine, being assaulted of xviii. thousande Suizzers, sent against theim the Counte Carminvola, whiche then was his capitaine. He with sixe thousande horse, and a fewe footemen, went to mete with them, and incounteryng theim, he was repulsed with his moste greate losse: wherby Carminvola as a prudente man, knewe straight waie the puisaunce of the enemies weapons, and how moche against the horses thei prevailed, and the debilitie of the horses, againste those on foote so appoincted: and gatheryng his men together again, he went to finde the Suizzers, and so sone as he was nere them, he made his men of armes, to a light from their horse, and in thesame mane, faightyng with them he slue theim all, excepte three thousande: the whiche seyng them selves to consume, without havyng reamedy, castyng their weapons to the grounde, yelded.

So the "invincible" Swiss surrendered throwing their weapons to the ground....a non-notable Martial art? Maybe for a martial art to be "notable" it has to have been founded in 1957, make you belong to a dojo that chages $ 50 a month and makes you kick and punch the air to earn your black belt. try punching and kicking a renaissance knight in full armor, or even a marine with his helmet and alice pack on and see how long your hands and feet last, Mr Non-notable. I have to agree the italian martial art should not be called "martial art" it should be only called "fior di battaglia", "The flower of battle" as no other name can describe it
 * 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.