Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erlu

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-08 21:25Z

Erlu

Possible CV (ordered list with creative effort in determining the order), on the other hand it's just a list of TC postures and if you've learned the posture (without which this is uninformative) you've probably learned the form that uses them. RJFJR 00:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a copyvio, I don't think, as I picked one of the routines at random and got zero non-wiki ghits. Delete as a non-notable Tai Chi routine with no assertion of notability. MER-C 03:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The list provides no assertion of notability or any reason why it belongs in an encylopedia. It also provides insufficient context for readers. Heimstern Läufer 07:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, minus CV assertion Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs} 08:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- non notable and a fairly pointless article tbh. DannyM 11:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not relevant and the article does not contain enough info for somebody unfamiliar with the subject.Telly addict 12:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In addition to lacking sources, article doesn't explain its subject sufficiently even to define it, let alone explain why anyone might find it notable. --Shirahadasha 17:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, un-verifiable. P.B. Pilhet / Talk 20:12, 4 February 2007 (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.