Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saito Ninjitsu

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 20:37, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Saito Ninjitsu
A made up martial art with many fraudulent claims. Cannot be verified from external sources. I suggest we delete that page. 130.231.240.17 5 July 2005 09:09 (UTC)
 * Note that this was a fairly formidable article up to [this point]. But for all I know, the whole thing might be garbage/nn. Few Google hits that aren't WP, copied from WP or the referenced link (which is presumably the only school that offers this stuff). Note that the article was created in good faith by User:Eco, who also created a number of martial art articles, including the one on Ninjutsu. In this, he mentions Saito Ninjitsu as a very dubious art. I conclude: the article in its current form is garbage, in its old form is basically fancruft, non-verifiable and non-encyclopedic. I vote: Delete and Redirect to Ninjutsu. --Moritz 5 July 2005 09:32 (UTC)
 * Redirect Makes sense to me -Harmil 5 July 2005 13:58 (UTC)
 * Delete unverifiable. JamesBurns 6 July 2005 06:53 (UTC)
 * Delete. Insignificantly notable newly created martial art with a (very likely) bogus history. Delete as unverifiable. I don't trust many of Eco's contribs to MA articles, while done in good faith, to be factually accurate. To me it seems he has used only few random webpages and the like as a basis of articles, without any verification with established scholarly sources of Japanese history. Needless to say, Saito Ninjitsu cannot be found from any of the 40+ books I have about classical Edo-period martial arts nor from websites generally held as reliable sources (koryu.com etc.) jni 7 July 2005 11:47 (UTC)
 * Delete in agreement with the good reasons given above. Fire Star 7 July 2005 13:16 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article says "has yet to show any proof", admitting unverifiability.  Unverifiable means automatic delete. I accept jni's educated opinion.  Quale 7 July 2005 20:50 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.