Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Duncan (2nd nomination)

Ron Duncan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I honestly have no idea why this article was re-created. Same issues from the first time around, not enough reliable sources devoted to the subject. The subject is briefly mentioned in one sentence or a group of names without any notable accomplishments described in detail about him. In fact, the only sources that note Duncan in detail (as in more than one sentence) is his own website. ALongStay (talk) 16:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per nominator. Subject has very little coverage in reliable sources. The page's current references are misleading as they do not detail the subject but instead mention him in passing. Meatsgains (talk) 17:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. At one point, based on his reputation in the MA community, I thought that we may establish notability for Duncan but I'm still not seeing the significant coverage in reliable sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:50, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was a further AfD see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald Duncan (martial arts) (2nd nomination) All resulted in a delete.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep He is considered to be the Father of American Ninjutsu. [1]. This was reported by Black Belt Magazine which is considered to be a strong source within the martial arts community. Also if you look at the March 2013 article from Black Belt Magazine, there is an article about his life. This article can be seen here [2] Cantloginnow (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2016 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]

Cantloginnow is believed to be another CrazyAces489 sockpuppet. Papaursa (talk) 23:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article doesn't have a lot of significant independent coverage in independent reliable sources, but I think Duncan is more notable (and better known) than many of the martial artists who have articles. If you look at [3], you'll see a number of covers and articles about or by him. I don't have copies of these magazines so I can't confirm the coverage is significant, but it could be. I voted to keep this article at the original AfD discussion, but I'm sitting on the fence right now. There is some coverage and I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I can't unreservedly confirm there's the coverage needed to meet WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 23:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the same place last year. I thought he probably was notable enough, but I'm not seeing the coverage to support it. Niteshift36 (talk) 00:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 10:57, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:36, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Seems to be well known but his claims are hard to verify and the coverage of him is short on significant, independent, reliable sources.Jakejr (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC
KEEP I have seen enough significant coverage to vote keep. innovatived ninjitsu. Black belt magazine article is what turned it for me. 71.190.34.72 (talk) 14:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]