Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Renzu Kwai Aikido Club, Sidcup


 * 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 &mdash; Caknuck 00:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The Renzu Kwai Aikido Club, Sidcup

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable single aikido club. Claims to be the first of this particular style of aikido but it is still very small single club and really the age is not notable in itself. Very few individual aikido clubs are on wikipedia.Peter Rehse 15:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletions.   —Peter Rehse 15:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete single Club no claim of notability reads like an advert almost a speedy --Nate1481(t/c) 16:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep If its been there 35 years, then its a community institution. need source though, and the article needs cleaned, added to. scope_creep 18:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No sourcing for oldest, or the 35 years & since when was a local club (with unspecified membership) a 'community institution'? No claim of this in the article. --Nate1481(t/c) 09:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless sourced - I saw this article when it first appeared, and because it had some claim of notability I left it to expand. Unfortunately, existing for 35 years (also not referenced) isn't notability; there are thousands of older non-notable sports associations. If its wider claims can be referenced, great, but otherwise it'll have to go.  E LIMINATOR JR  08:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete If its assertions regarding being a founding member of the british aikido board are true, then I'm inclined to believe it is notable. However, unless that can be cited to a reliable secondary source, my conclusion is delete. Bradford44 17:43, 4 November 2007 (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.