Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Li style Tai Chi Chuan


 * 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 for deletion. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 16:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Li style Tai Chi Chuan
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A primary source driven article, prodded once unsuccessfully, which ends up being an unverifiable advertisement. It has been tagged for a while as such, with no cites forthcoming. The question I propose is, is it a keeper without any reliable sources? Bradeos Graphon (talk) 20:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: This AfD was malformed in the formatting so I've corrected it and relisted it after deleting the malformed request. Redfarmer (talk) 20:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I had used an outdated template and didn't see it was different until it was too late. Thanks for fixing it. --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep this is a style of tai chi practised by several clubs in Britain and continental Europe which was introduced from China decades ago and is now overseen by a number of competing associations (which makes the advert claim illogical: who is advertising?).  This style of tai chi does exist.  The article could be improved although there is no evidence that it is misleading, there is merely an absence of citations.  There is no case for deletion. Man with two legs (talk) 23:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't think the nominator is asserting that the style does not exist. I think they are asserting there's not enough sources to verify the notability of the style. Redfarmer (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge - probably doesn't deserve an article on its own, but should be included, maybe in the main Tai Chi article. As a former Tai Chi practicioner, a quick scan of the article didn't show many things that are so unique that they can't be included in a short paragraph within a larger article. --Arcanios (talk) 12:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability (and accuracy) of this style isn't verified by reliable secondary sources. If no coverage from reliable sources exists, then there can be no article. Van Tucky 02:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have now added links showing some official recognition of this style. Man with two legs (talk) 15:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Also, I question if the point about reliability of sources is correct. As I have stated in the discussion page, the books were not written by existing practitioners of this style, and were published by Harper Collins. Man with two legs (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If there are some good secondary sources provided (or even one, I suppose) I'd like to ask if the closing admin to consider that as a factor in the keep decision. --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2008 (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.