Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lite Feet


 * 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. Courcelles 05:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Lite Feet

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Although a google search for this term turns up many hits, a total lack of reliable sources for this dance form means that a mean no verifiable article can be written about it. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a game, but I'll give it a shot. The only RS I can find is:  defines the term (behind the pay wall) "In Lite Feet dancing the name says it all Dancers move every which way looking seemingly weightless."  Nothing in google books or anything else meaningful in an news archive search. That said, it's clearly real and widely used.  weak delete unless someone can find a better RS. Hobit (talk) 14:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, my weak delete is indicating this is something I think we should have an article on, I just can't find enough RSes with which to write said article. Hobit (talk) 15:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment That was my dilemma when nominating the article. It seems that there should be an article on this topic, but there are no RSes to draw on to create the article.  The term may be used quite differently by different people and without a definitive source, there's no way to write a correct article.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:43, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Understand Understood, I'm just making sure my !vote is clear on the off chance someone finds a good source and I don't make it back to this AfD before it gets closed. :-) Hobit (talk) 20:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Needs a lot A LOT of cleanup and many more sources, so perhaps should be put on the back burner until more facts are available. The subject definitely has potential, however. Cactusjump (talk) 22:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete as above; I don't doubt that the term is "real", but it seems impossible to source properly at this time. bobrayner (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2010 (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.