Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Lau


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. I will take you guys' word on it about notability, but I do hope to see some context added to the article so that is actually meaningful to people. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 14:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Jason Lau

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't believe this subject meets our notability requirements. There are very few reliable sources in the article to establish Lau's notability; the few references that are actually about Lau are from the website of his own "clan" or training center (for example, this), and most of the rest seem to be about things other than Lau (for example, current refs 6–10 are about the accomplishments of a couple of his students). As far as I can tell, he doesn't fit into any of the inclusion criteria listed at Notability (people). r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 02:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Also: please note that a previous version of this article was speedily deleted in 2007 (log) for failing to assert notability. I'm not an admin and can't see the old version, so I don't know how much it has changed since then. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 02:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment — Just saw this listed in DYK ... he is listed in independent publications as the teacher of some notable subjects, but take that as you will. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Would that make him subject to WP:PROF instead of the notability guideline I cited above? I'm not sure. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 03:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment — I wrote the article, so I'm biased, but it seems Lau would at least meet this criteria: "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field" under any biography. Also, WP:PROF might unfairly exclude, as the infobox template is for a martial artist. -Pecoc (talk) 03:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - borderline notability, but the article would be mightily improved with some more context about martial arts and different schools. At the moment there's too much incestuous 'so and so said' and a slight air of CV. Flagged for rescue--Moloch09 (talk) 11:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  -- Nate1481 11:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep sourcing is present and shows him as the head of a notable sub-style. Merging/renaming to the style might be an option it needs clean up. --Nate1481 11:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The Martial Arts Project Notability Guide may be of interest.--Nate1481 11:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - modest level of notability, as sources in the article confirm. JJL (talk) 14:04, 19 March 2009 (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.