Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Limalama

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Limalama

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

A Non notable martial art with no sources to back up its notability Dwanyewest (talk) 00:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. —Jakejr (talk) 03:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Uncertain, leaning towards Weak Delete I couldn't find good independent sources that show this is a notable martial art, but I did find several passing mentions. I talked to several people who believe this art is notable, but they didn't have any reliable sources. Jakejr (talk) 03:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not demonstrate notability. I looked at the art's history and, on a cursory examination, nothing there indicated to me that this art is notable by Wikipedia's principles. Janggeom (talk) 08:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I got a lot of ghits, but I don't see reliable sources supporting notability. Astudent0 (talk) 18:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Added to the correct dated log on 04-Jan-2011. Jarkeld (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2011 (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.