Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jigo Tensin-Ryu Jujutsu


 * 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   merge please. Shii (tock) 14:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Jigo Tensin-Ryu Jujutsu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a supposedly a new martial arts style, but I can only find one school that teaches it. Everything seems to link back to one D.C. school run by the founder. I found no significant independent coverage. One of the article's sources mentions jujutsu, but doesn't specifically mention this style at all.Mdtemp (talk) 20:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  21:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

This martial art is significant because it is being used by National Defense University and being taught to the U.S. Military there. It is part of the curriculum. There are no other schools who can claim this. And yes there is independent coverage in there and the founders bio is used because there is a lot of detail in there. Please make suggestions for improvement instead of flagging for deletion. 69.243.110.100 (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Additional secondary sources have been added to this article. Emery80 (talk) 01:08, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect or merge into Dong Jin Kim The fact that courses in this art are taught does not show notability, regardless of where they're taught. The NDU is for military and civilians and is not concerned with preparing anyone for combat.  The mere fact this course is taught does not show notability--note that it's part of an article that also discusses other new offerings at the gym such as a musical cardio class.  T+here is nothing that shows this art meets WP:MANOTE or any other notability criteria to merit its own article. Astudent0 (talk) 18:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep The NDU does prepare military for combat situations, further the Army Old Guard is there at Ft. McNair with them. NDU is a U.S. military university.  Unlike other "offerings" students get academic credit for this.  Being that my main interest is including a worthy art, the U.S. military, and the NDU, I don't terribly mind it being merged with Kim's, however my preference would be to keep both.  Any suggestions on how they could be merged coherently?  I think merging Kim into Jigo Tensin-Ryu would be the best if it had to be merged, but having seen comment on the other page some may argue it should be the other way around. Emery80 (talk) 21:43, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The bottom line is that I think there's little to show notability for this art. An art that appears to be taught by one instructor and lacks significant independent coverage doesn't seem notable by WP standards.  As for my merging/redirect comment, I think it's much easier to make a case for Kim's notability than for this art which is why I voted the way I did on the two articles.  According to the NDU website their mission is to be "focused on advanced joint education, leader development and scholarship", educate "members of the U.S. Armed Forces and select others in order to develop leaders that have the ability to operate and creatively think" and "foster and promote scholarly distinction in its work and its people".  With a focus on getting a master's degree, it doesn't sound like hand to hand combat is an integral requirement and lots of schools offer martial arts classes as electives--it hardly shows notability. Astudent0 (talk) 00:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The secondary sources cited in the article either don't address Jigo Tensin-Ryu Jujutsu by name, discusses it in terms of an individual of a larger organization (specifically Mr. Stenson of the US Army as per the current #3 reference) or by the name of its inventor Dong Jin Kim (also up for AfD). The martial art itself doesn't appear to have been around very long (relatively speaking), been the subject of significant coverage, or practiced my multiple notable people and thus fails WP:GNG and WP:MANOTE.  --TreyGeek (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * NOTE Prior to this !vote I spent time on the article removing possible copyright violations and cleaning up instances where information was incorrectly cited, both in this article and Dong Jin Kim which I have also !voted delete in its AfD. --TreyGeek (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment TreyGeek there are a lot of significant people who practice this form of martial art...e.g. Scooter Libby, Tom Daschle, General Greg martin get s his Black Belt this month.  BTW, thanks for erasing my pictures, that are NOT copy right infringements. Emery80 (talk) 11:37, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * TreyGeek went into Wikicomkons and tagged every photo of mine and tagged it possible copyright. Even though I own the photos...including ones for my job (law enforcement)and of my father...wow thanks pal, thanks for the attack!Emery80 (talk) 11:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * According to WP:MANOTE a martial art is notable enough for an article if it meets certain criteria. I don't see how the subject meets any of those criteria.  You suggest it passed item 3 (multiple notable practitioners) however none of those practitioners are directly cited with independent, secondary sources.  Your conflict of interest over the subject is perhaps making you unbias in this case.
 * As for the images, if you really did take those photos, there is a procedure on Commons to verify you are the owner of those images. You are welcome to go through those procedures.
 * I'll also note that Emery has reverted my cleanup of the article. So there are specific web pages listed multiple times in the references section and references are being cited at the end of paragraphs which really don't backup the statements made in those paragraphs.  With the merge of Jin Kim's article into this one (without proper attribution) it is a huge mess that I'm not going to attempt to clean up (again) until after the AfD is resolved.  --TreyGeek (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * TreyGeek, sorry for causing a mess. I was trying to get the photos back as I though they simple been deleted off the article. As for the photos in wikicommons, I do have the right to use them (that's what I meant by mine), however, I uploaded them inccorectly in terms of the permissions.  I actually tried re upload them correctly today and put the right permissions on there, but the photos are now blocked. Sorry for accusing you of attack earlier.  I was heated up because you erased a photo of my father earlier on wikicommons and it got me heated up. That being said, I appreciate your help in making this article better.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emery80 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Emery80 (talk) 13:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge I see the side of Astudent0 and I have merged the two pages (Dong Jin Kim into Jigo Tensin Ryu). Thank you for the suggestions :)


 * Comment The AfD discussions are not a vote per say but generally speaking there should be on vote per commenter. Emery - its not helpful to use words like attack instead of fixing the problem.  Copyright is a big deal on Wikipedia for very obvious reasons.  With respect to the merge in my opinion the art should be merged into the man (ie. the other way around) which is what Astudent0 originally suggested.  As a single article (either way) I think there is enough to support a Keep.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Peter, thank you for you comment, I understand on the issues and will work to resolve them all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emery80 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's good - please also consider the changes TreyGeek made within the article vis a vis the references and such.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:56, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge As I stated on the Dong Jin Kim article discussion.  I agree with Peter Rehse.  Emery, I do NOT agree with you that this article should absorb Dong Jin Kim.  It needs to be the other way around.  Kim is one of the top Kendoka in the US interms of his experiece and teaching but his martial art is still developing.  I do not meen any disrespect by saying that, as I have a lot of respect for DJK and the sport, but uising my almost 30 years of experience in martial arts and although I feel comfortable saying that although Jigo Tensin Ryu has a lot of potential, it is not yet at the level that wiki needs it to be.  Please consider merging JTR into DJK, and make a section for JTR.MartialArtsLEO (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Emery, I also just cleaned up another article you worked on recently.MartialArtsLEO (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * As I said before, I am alright with merging them. Thank you for your input. I saw the other changes, thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emery80 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge into Dong Jin Kim. There is no doubt that this martial art does not meet any WP notability criteria (as others have already noted), so it only makes sense to merge into the article on the more notable founder.  I must admit I think even his notability is borderline, but one thing at a time. Papaursa (talk) 21:31, 12 May 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.