Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rope jousting


 * 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 to Tug of war. Spartaz Humbug! 04:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Rope jousting

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I came across this article as an unsourced martial arts article that was tagged for lack of notability. Someone has since added a source, but it's a single page from a middle school phys. ed. book. I don't believe this article satisfies the notability criteria.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions.  —Jakejr (talk) 21:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep It seems to be a variant form of tug of war, in which there are one-man teams rather than the usual eight. We might merge into that article but, per our editing policy,  there's no case for deletion. Warden (talk) 23:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree--as written this article is worth a line in the "Notes" section of Tug of war, but not a separate article. Jakejr (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment, I have flagged the article for rescue. I agree that we lack sufficient sources at this time, but perhaps with more eyes on the problem, we can find additional sources. --Nuujinn (talk) 11:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Its found in books, as well as in some news events proving it exists, and various groups do play this game.  D r e a m Focus  13:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I've seen this game plenty of places, under plenty of names, but it's hard to find any info on where it started. "Rope Jousting" is the best name I've seen, and to merge it with tug-of-war is silly-it's a very different game. -Jack from Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.195.51 (talk) 05:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge to tug of war or another appropriate target. In theory this would be a suitable topic for a page, if it was actually as historically involved as an article with a name like "Learning the way from squire to knight" might lead one to believe. However the mentions do not seem to extend far beyond "this was a game played at a school game day", and, as mentioned earlier, a page about how to play a game in a middle school phys ed book certainly is not significant coverage from multiple reliable sources.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge into Tug of war This article has 1 weak source. I'd say it's worth a one line mention in the tug of war article, at best. Papaursa (talk) 03:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * KeepFrom looking at the article's sources and searching, it seems that rope jousting is a legitimate game. However there is a lot of information yet to be backed up by trustworthy sources, especially reguarding the rules of the game.  It definitely is not the same game as tug-of-war, it just has a similar outward appearance.--CHASEMOON (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Question, what sources? I haven't found any reliable sources that give the term more than passing mention. --Nuujinn (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, nothing much in lexis nexis, the only reliable source I see is Maximum Middle School Physical Education, and that's a passing mention/instructions, and not what I would call significant coverage. I think the most we can justify is a line or two in tug of war. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge I agree with Nuujinn's comment. Astudent0 (talk) 14:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge: little indication of "significant coverage" (most cites are mere mention) either in article or Google News/Books. WP:ITEXISTS does not demonstrate that a topic is notable. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 15:58, 1 July 2011 (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.