Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kwang Sung Hwang


 * 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   no consensus. Sources have been shown to exist, but there is no agreement amongst editors that those sources meet the standards required by the GNG. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:31, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Kwang Sung Hwang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

High rank does not guarantee notability nor does being an ITF officer. Lacks the significant independent coverage required to meet WP:GNG and doesn't meet WP:MANOTE either.Mdtemp (talk) 17:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Lots of mentions to his relationship with General Choi but notability is not inherited. Article has only one main source and he doesn't appear to meet WP:MANOTE. 204.126.132.231 (talk) 18:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Apologize if in the wrong place for comment. I agree in a martial art world with seemingly endless 10th & 9th degrees, high rank doesn't guarantee notability. However, when General Choi only promoted 6-7 people to ninth degree, that does make a "General Choi awarded 9th degree" pretty special. The issue with lack of references will be addressed this weekend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgkick (talk • contribs) 22:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * — Tgkick (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Weak Delete Keep No indication that he meets WP:MANOTE. I would say it doesn't matter who awarded him his degree because that would imply that the notability derived from the presenter rather than the accomplishment itself.  This strikes me as a contradiction to WP:NOTINHERITED.  Tgkick already has stated that a 9th degree award itself doesn't imply notability.  To show he's notable requires either showing he meets WP:MANOTE or that there is significant independent coverage in reliable sources about him that have nothing to do with his relationship to General Choi. Papaursa (talk) 00:27, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Besides the two independent sources in the article (which are relisted multiple times thus giving an appearance of many sources), I found two other independent sources. They are the October 1995 issue of Tae Kwon Do Times where he talks about the ITF and the July 1997 issue of Tae Kwon Do & Korean Martial Arts.  I think all of these sources combined are enough to change my vote to a weak keep. Papaursa (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Criteria supporting notability ''In general, even if an artist is notable - if there is only one paragraph or so of material about them, then that should be included in the article about their style or school if that is notable,- redirects are cheap. If they are independently notable and the style is not, then do not create the article on the style but on them.''

The style (ITF) has been noted. The point above says "one paragraph or so of material." Hardly the case, Grand Master Hwang is heavily discussed in Dr Kimms book on Taekwondo History. Amazingly enough, the book is about taekwondo history and Dr Kimm found reason to list Grand Master Hwang in about a dozen different places in the book. Dr Kimm is noted for publishing dozens of books that exhaustively cover various Korean arts and the founder of HanMuDo In addition, Taekwondo Times Magazine (TKDT) and Totally Taekwondo Magazine (TTKD) found it worthwhile to put Grand Master Hwang on the cover of their magazine a total of three times (2 for TKDT and 1 for TTKD). Also listed in the memoirs of General Choi that I'm researching to give reference if worthwhile. According to Wiki, the "Criteria supporting deletion" is Only achievement seems to be that they teach an art... Typing in Grand Master Hwang (K-9-1) shows he's not a "one paragraph" kinda guy.

This is about a man that was a key player in ITF and therefore in the art of Taekwondo/Tae Kwon Do/Taekwon-Do. Granted, and not arguing that rank, in and of itself, is of little consequence. Lord knows there's plenty of gorgeous certificates with high dahn/dan ranks and overflowing resumes that are absolutely worthless. However, this particular gentleman was a Captain in the South Korean Army and during the Vietnam Conflict, actually taught (in Vietnam) the Korean Tiger Division along with the Korean Army, US Army, US Marines, and Vietnamese Army. The Korean Tiger Division was known for being ferocious.

He also graduated from the 1st ITF instructor's course and later traveled with and assisted General Choi worldwide with seminars. Ask yourself exactly how good, how technical would you have to be in order to be worthy of being the assistant during seminars?

He was the president of KATU which was a National Governing Body (NGB) for ITF in the USA with Grand Master Sereff over the USTF. Most everyone in the USA that is/was in ITF from 1974 to mid 2000's was a part of either KATU or USTF.

Not sure why the push to delete a page of the only gentleman to simultaneously hold five offices in International Taekwon-Do Federation (ITF) under the direction of General Choi and the man who was requested to be in the room when General Choi passed away and recorded his dying words for the world to know.

I'll get those other references posted as soon as I confirm them. Thank you.tgkick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgkick (talk • contribs) 04:41, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 10:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 05:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)




 * Weak delete. I cannot verify any print references through Google books, they are either translated without notice or hoaxes. "Totally Taekwondo Magazine" seems like a net fanzine ( - "a downloadable PDF magazine"). Tae Kwon Do Times may be notable, but having one or two articles in a niche publication does not seem to satisfy WP:GNG "Significant coverage". This really needs a review from a Korean speaker, as more (reliable) sources may exist in Korean. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:40, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think Tgkick has done a good job providing sources.  Tae Kwon Do Times is the premier magazine for the sport, and to have a whole article on this person in it definitely indicates notability.  I cannot understand Piotrus' objection to this as "niche".  The place we expect to find reliable information on foo is in publications specialising in foo.  No one would seriously object to a science or engineering article being based on science books; Martial Arts practitioners should be treated no differently.  Not everyone notable is perpetually covered in national newspapers.  I also do not think that Piotrus' really believes that any of the references are fake. I prefer to assume good faith.  I think perhaps he means that, for instance, the source title Taekwondo History is a translation.  That may be the case, and the reference should give the original title along with the English translation and an ISBN or other index (ISSN, OCLC etc) that would allow it to be located by other editors.  However, that is something that can be dealt with by suitable inline tagging (or, God forbid, actually talking to the editor and asking).  It is not grounds for deletion. SpinningSpark 18:46, 2 August 2014 (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.