Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Cofield

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Consensus, after a thorough discussion and examination of sources, is clearly for deletion. We would note that WP:Manote is a project essay and does not take precedence of WP:GNG JodyB talk 22:35, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

George Cofield[edit]

George Cofield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable martial artist. Running a chain of 10 schools does not make you notable. References consist of passing mentions and lists of schools--nothing to show he meets WP:GNG. There's also nothing to show he meets any criteria at WP:MANOTE. Mdtemp (talk) 18:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not notable person without any reliable references.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A three page article from Black Belt magazine is a reliable reference. Did you go through the references? [1]CrazyAces489 (talk) 21:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep Stated to be an early pioneer of Karate in America. One of the first African American instructors of Karate in America. The subject of an independent 3 page article by Black Belt Magazine. Black belt magazine is considered to be a reliable source. CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
pass MANOTE [2] by either being (1) Subject of an independent article/documentary. The high ranking rationale that you stated for deletion for a number of them applies when ... "Only achievement seems to be that they teach an art (or founded a non-notable art); perhaps also avoid even mentioning them in the article of the art unless they are one of a few high-ranked artists in an art that has thousands of students." Karate has hundred of thousand practitioners.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 08:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment No vote yet. It is hard to understand from the article on how he meets WP:MANOTE but I also have a soft spot for characters important in the development of martial arts in the West so I wait to see that claim more clearly demonstrated. I went through the Black belt articles listed in the article - which one is he the subject of a 3 page article. Perhaps I missed it.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment I am unsure how you missed it. Perhaps the citations in the article are bad. They don't differentiate between the different black belt magazine issues. [3] CrazyAces489 (talk) 18:08, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. You need to edit the references so that the Black belt issues are given - I've done that for a number of the articles your created.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am using this tool https://tools.wmflabs.org/refill/ It used to give the information, it doesn't anymore. CrazyAces489 (talk) 19:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For Black belt magazine you have to go to the reference for the information and then manually enter the issue. Annoying but it should be done.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:13, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As the article currently stands I don't see anything that allows him to meet WP:GNG--just passing mentions. There's also no evidence to show he meets any of the notability criteria at WP:MANOTE. If such evidence is presented, I will reconsider my vote. Papaursa (talk) 18:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • commentBeing a black karate pioneer in the East Coast of America is certainly notable. He passes WP:MANOTE as a result. [1]
Only if you have significant independent coverage and a passing mention that he studied with an "obscure martial artist" is not it. Papaursa (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since when is Shotokan Karate an obscure martial art? Also how is a multiple page article a passing mention? Did you go through all of the sources? [2]CrazyAces489 (talk) 12:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody said anything about shotokan being an obscure art. Please read what was actually written. --written by Revision as of 21:26, 2 March 2015 (edit) (undo) 204.126.132.231 (talk)
I would accept the article mentioned above by CrazyAces489. But the fact that it's listed several times in this discussion does not make it more than a single source and GNG requires multiple sources. CrazyAces, if you can produce another good source I will change my vote, otherwise GNG rules (especially since there's no evidence, to me, of meeting WP:MANOTE). Papaursa (talk) 02:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are a number of sources but I believe they aren't great or are just passing mentions. Take a look at them and what you might think of them. [3], [4], [5], [6] [7] CrazyAces489 (talk) 14:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Papaursa, please take a look at this youtu.be/eyqKQhJMS_Y?t=17m At 17 minutes he was listed as a highly notable person of Shotokan Karate. CrazyAces489 (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
commentI would, but you stated that there is only passing mention. So I wonder if you even looked at the references. A 3 page article on the subject is available here. [8]CrazyAces489 (talk) 12:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
comment He is also one of the first blacks to introduce Karate to America. That shows notability. [9] George is featured in Black Hero's of the Martial Arts.[10] He is the subject of an independent article in black belt magazine. [4] He definitely passes WP:MANOTE CrazyAces489 (talk) 05:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 13:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=LNQDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=tong+dojo+cofield&source=bl&ots=yk1EnLcKTQ&sig=GX9YNzegPQjZqU6vQfgjREvtZUI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=feXzVMPkBoWfggSEjICQDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=tong%20dojo%20cofield&f=false
  2. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=L84DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=george+cofield+self+defense&source=bl&ots=mg-BC87ygV&sig=lo4oRItX-Ty2kPrApld2mg84vqM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yczkVMmkHIOrgwSk_oGwCw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=george%20cofield%20self%20defense&f=false
  3. ^ http://www.kapmma.com/3/my_tweets.htm
  4. ^ http://www.thelastdragontribute.com/the-forgotten-fury-12-black-martial-arts-masters/
  5. ^ http://www.wtko.org/www/htmls/Sternbergmonth.htm
  6. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=P-Nv_LUi6KgC&pg=PA627&dq=cofield+karate&hl=en&sa=X&ei=z_v-VIW8PIbWggSay4HgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBjg8#v=onepage&q=cofield%20karate&f=false
  7. ^ https://books.google.com/books?ei=2fz-VISpPIGqNpWIgEg&id=-dsmAQAAMAAJ&dq=cofield+karate&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=cofield++
  8. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=L84DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=george+cofield+self+defense&source=bl&ots=mg-BC87ygV&sig=lo4oRItX-Ty2kPrApld2mg84vqM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yczkVMmkHIOrgwSk_oGwCw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=george%20cofield%20self%20defense&f=false
  9. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=LNQDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=tong+dojo+cofield&source=bl&ots=yk1EnLcKTQ&sig=GX9YNzegPQjZqU6vQfgjREvtZUI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=feXzVMPkBoWfggSEjICQDg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=tong%20dojo%20cofield&f=false
  10. ^ "Black Belt". google.com.

Weak Delete One good source is not enough to meet WP:GNG and no supporting evidence to show he's a notable martial artist. 131.118.229.17 (talk) 22:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It isn't one amazing source a few good sources, and a number of passing mentions. If you look at WP:Manote there is qualifications that he does meet. Also take a look at these sources here [1], [2], [3], [4] [5] This might help in your decision. CrazyAces489 (talk) 04:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are passing mentions or blogs or otherwise not what GNG would consider reliable sources. None of these can be considered significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Papaursa (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is agreed though that the 3 page article is notable and independent correct? CrazyAces489 (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[5] CrazyAces489 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.
  1. ^ http://www.kapmma.com/3/my_tweets.htm
  2. ^ http://www.thelastdragontribute.com/the-forgotten-fury-12-black-martial-arts-masters/
  3. ^ http://www.wtko.org/www/htmls/Sternbergmonth.htm
  4. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=P-Nv_LUi6KgC&pg=PA627&dq=cofield+karate&hl=en&sa=X&ei=z_v-VIW8PIbWggSay4HgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBjg8#v=onepage&q=cofield%20karate&f=false
  5. ^ https://books.google.com/books?ei=2fz-VISpPIGqNpWIgEg&id=-dsmAQAAMAAJ&dq=cofield+karate&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=cofield++
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/George_Cofield&oldid=1137875213"