- 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. Cirt (talk) 15:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Dempsey roll (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This doesn't seem to establish any sort of notability in its real form or its fictional form. TTN (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: The lack of documentation of the real move and the triviality of the fictional versions does seem lacking the proper notability. The minute bit of research I did on Dempsey did not turn up anything on the move, and I believe the move was more popularized by the manga series Fighting Spirit (manga). Any details that do turn up are better suited for Jack Dempsey and the series. Unless significant coverage of the term by reliable sources turns up, I see no reason to keep the article on Wikipedia. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Comment - Jack Dempsey died before the Internet. This may be notable, or not, but paper sources need to be found. Bearian (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Two of the sources I have are HBO boxing videos. One is specifically about Dempsey and his career, but has nothing about the move. There other is about Mike Tyson's career and his analysis of other boxers, including Dempsey. Tyson was also said to have used the Demspey Roll, but there was no mention of that in his video either. To be honest, after watching fight reels, I've never seen anything that looks like what the manga and anime portrayed. There are a few fights of Dempsey and Tyson were they do 2–3 consecutive hooks in a bobbing motion, but that's as close as I've seen. That's all original research on my part though. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]
- Delete - nom has it right; if there's somehow some offline sources relevant, a redirect might be appropriate, unless somehow somebody wrote a book on this. Shadowjams (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2009 (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.