Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Head of Family Sokeship Council (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Despite the roughly 2:1 nose-count in favor of deletion, I found this one difficult to close. There's two different threads going on here, and it's not easy to tease them apart.

One thread is about whether the sources are good enough. There seems to be broad agreement that the first two sources are the best, and probably the only ones worth considering, so this thread really boils down to whether those two are sufficient. SmokeyJoe says they are. Hobit agrees, but with less enthusiasm.

The other is about whether this is overly promotional. DGG argues strongly that it is, and has a large chorus of followers in that opinion.

Where things get complicated is figuring out if the promotional aspects are inherent to the topic, or if they could be solved by editing (possibly WP:TNT, although nobody explicitly mentioned that). DGG writes, If a reliable editor wants to then rewrite it, it might possibly be notable. To which SmokeyJoe (correctly, in my opinion), points out that Deletion is not cleanup. But, he also says, I agree with DGG on the sources, they are not impressive with respect to significant coverage of the topic. I'm reading that statement as essentially being in the same camp as Hobit, which is to say that he feels the sources are adequate, but just barely.

I'm giving essentially zero weight to the first AfD. Partly because, as we all like to quote at each other, consensus can change. But also because the first AfD wasn't very well attended, and those people who did show up, didn't do a very good job of analyzing specific sources.

On balance, I think the delete camp has made a better argument than the keep camp.

Note: My previous involvement with this was closing a deletion review, six months ago. I had completely forgotten about that until I just perused the article history (after writing all of the above commentary). -- RoySmith (talk) 16:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

World Head of Family Sokeship Council
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously deleted as non-notable self-congratulatory organization. Recreated article looks different, but still lacks significant independent coverage. Lots of sources, but they're mainly quotes from members saying that the organization's members are the cream of the crop--hardly independent. The article on Sanchez was deleted previously and other articles are about people being honored, not the organization itself.Jakejr (talk) 01:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.  The article notes: "One common denominator that many grandmasters have is that they are members of an elite organization, that exists in the USA, the World Head of Family Sokeship Council (WHFSC). The WHFSC (aka the World Council) is a low profile union of some of the most famous martial arts masters in the world. It is the first American grandmaster's council, and is also one of the largest and most prestigious in existence today. There are no membership fees and application is by invitation or membership sponsorship only. The WHFSC now boasts a membership of over 250 grandmasters from all over the world. The main purpose of the WHFSC is to encourage communication between the different systems and to promote the growth of the martial arts. The Council was founded in 1992 by the internationally known and respected grandmaster of San-Jitsu, Frank E. Sanchez, a Jacksonville, Florida based martial artist orgiginally from Guam. Every year, master and grandmaster members meet in Orlando, Florida for the annual WHFSC meeting: the 'gathering of the eagles.' During this two day event, there is the grandmaster's annual meeting and dozens of training seminars that demonstrate many aspects of the martial arts." The publisher/editor in chief of Combat Magazine is Martial Arts Publications Ltd and Paul Clifton according to page 1 of the document, which also lists columnists and contributors.  From https://www.facebook.com/BlackBeltMagazine/photos/a.104691875770.106622.63378970770/10153133035760771/: "In the Feb/March 2016 issue of Black Belt, on sale now: San-jitsu founder Frank Sanchez has fought the establishment to spread Guam’s self-defense system and promote martial arts brotherhood. This is the story of the man and his brainchild, the World Head of Family Sokeship Council."  The article notes: "ORLANDO, FL— The World Head of Family Sokeship Council will celebrate its 10th anniversary here August 29–30, 2003 with a seminar symposium and awards banquet. The council is composed of more than 100 martial arts masters from around the world, including Black Belt Hall of Fame members Wally Jay, Stephen K. Hayes and Ron Van Clief, as well as Seiyu Oyata, Ji Han Jae, Ronald Duncan, Emil Farkas, Adriano Emperado and other big names. The organization is the brainchild of san-jitsu founder Frank E. Sanchez, a native of Guam who now resides in Jacksonville, Florida."  The article notes: "John Stover, founder of Stover's Martial Arts Academy on Carolina Beach Road, was recognized as Founder of the Year by the World Head of Family Sokeship Council, an organization that consists solely of ninth and tenth degree black belt grandmasters. ... The World Head of Family Sokeship Council was formed in 1993, making it the first grandmasters council formed in the United States. Its more than 160 members come from all over the world and specialize in every conceivable martial arts style and origin. The council grants membership only by invitation or sponsorship."  The article notes: "Jack Livesay of Oak Ridge was recently inducted into the World Head of Family Sokeship Council's International Martial Arts Hall of Fame as Karate Man of the Year. The council is composed solely of 9th and 10th Dan grandmasters and their equivalents. The WHFSC is considered the most prestigious martial arts hall of fame."  The article notes: "Mike Sayoc and Chris Miller of St. Cloud, plus Kissimmee's Bill Ergle and Dr. Len Wilkerson last month, were among a hand-picked few the World Head of Family Sokeship Council selected for recognition. Grandmasters Jackie Chan, Royce Gracie, Jeff Speakman, Hatsumi and Don The Dragon Wilson are among the Council's ruling hierarchy."</li> <li> The article notes: "In 1995, the world's largest council of sanctioned heads of martial-arts systems, the World Head of Family Sokeship Council, inducted Mr. [Harold] Long into its Hall of Fame and presented him a Golden Life Achievement Award."</li> <li> The article notes: "[Jeff] DeSantis' devotion to martial arts has brought him an array of honors and recognitions. In 1996, the World Head of Family Sokeship Council, the world's largest organization of grandmasters and heads of martial arts systems, inducted him into its hall of fame as instructor of the year. Only a few weeks ago, the council repeated the honor, this time picking DeSantis as one of only nine to be named master instructor."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow World Head of Family Sokeship Council to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 06:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Pinging Deletion review/Log/2016 February 17 participants:, , , , and . Cunard (talk) 06:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I see neutral well-sourced coverage of a respectable and reputable organisation.  While I see little direct coverage, I see sufficient coverage of what the council recognises, and that is strong attestation of notability.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with DGG on the sources, they are not impressive with respect to significant coverage of the topic. However, I am uncomfortable with the line "If a reliable editor wants to then rewrite it, it might possibly be notable".  Either the topic is notable, or it is not, and this does not depend on the current state of the article.  WP:N states "if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability".  Deletion is not cleanup.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment Not voting yet but this is a classic walled garden organization reflected in the references. Many obscure martial artists whose only claim to fame is their membership.  Declare yourself a soke and go search for legitimacy. The non-primary pieces directly about the organization are promotional in tone.  So my gut says delete but I want to think about if the non-primary sources actually confer notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * weak keep I'd say the sources are mostly borderline for an ORG. The first two sources Cunard lists are certainly the strongest, the others are mostly passing mentions.  But I think those sources are barely above the bar (with the help of the distributed passing mentions...). Hobit (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. as advertising, probably under G11 speedy. Notability doesn't really matter in such cases. Promotionalism is an equally good reason for deletion, because it violates WP:NOT. An accumulation of promotional references makes an advertisement, not an article At the time I declined the AfC, it had 3 references: 2 to a self published book, and the 3rd to a publication by a martial arts supply store. There are more now, but they are not any better: most are   local stories about someone being admitted to the group, or the group holding an event. Such accounts   are not reliable for the notability of the group because they normally include whatever the person written about  chooses to say about the group, a group the general news reporter is not likely to have had any other information about--except whatever backgroun they gained from its own website.  The inclusion of this battery of worthless sources shows the promotional  nature of the article, and is grounds for deletion; if, as here, most of the references are such material, its grounds for deletion  under G11,  because it would take complete rewriting. If a reliable editor wants to then rewrite it, it might possibly be notable. The usable references are only the first two listed above. The third sounds plausible until you read it: it's a single paragraph. If the 10th anniversary of an organization merits only a single paragraph in a magazine about the sport, the organization is not likely to be notable.  DGG ( talk ) 22:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as walled garden filled with puffery. I concur on its blatant G11ness and have tagged accordingly - David Gerard (talk) 19:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Better to let this AfD play out rather than tag for speedy deletion even if it is blatant G11.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Even the somewhat acceptable references are heavily promotional and don't speak to notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The best source is the Combat Magazine and most of it is quoting members about the quality of the organization's membership. The list of well known martial artists in one of the articles consists of those who have honorary memberships and they are not "among the Council's ruling hierarchy". Passing mentions don't provide the coverage needed to meet GNG. Astudent0 (talk) 14:32, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete When I first looked at the number of sources, I thought this article might be a keeper. However, closer examination of them leads me to believe that my vote in the original AfD was correct.  Like other editors who voted for deletion, I don't believe that this organization has the significant independent coverage in reliable sources needed to meet WP:NORG or WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 00:12, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROMO; many of the sources offered in this AfD are PR or PR like, such as:
 * "ORLANDO, FL— The World Head of Family Sokeship Council will celebrate its 10th anniversary here August 29–30, 2003 with a seminar symposium and awards banquet." -- this is obviously a reprinted press release. Etc.
 * The content is advertorial and self-congratulatory; the amount of sources does not matter. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:19, 11 September 2016 (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.