Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports Biomechanics

: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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[Sports Biomechanics]]=

:{{la|Sports Biomechanics}} ([{{fullurl:Sports Biomechanics|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports Biomechanics}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

The article has the distinct feel of original research and/or being an indiscriminate collection of links vaguely associated with one another. The topic is not exactly notable; it is a stub with little purpose as it stands, and it's been sitting there for a month without any improvement. Tyrenon (talk) 06:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. --Martynas Patasius (talk) 15:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Keep, notable application of biomechanics eg [http://books.google.com/books?id=PrOKEcZXJ58C book] and [http://books.google.com/books?id=jqvvjlElfMwC book]. Article is not all that much use at present, but we have no deadline and it doesn't seem spammy or biased - just stubby. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy keep. Of course sports biomechanics is a notable topic. There's a whole scientific journal about it:[http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/14763141.asp]. Guess how many articles this search finds in Google Scholar? http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22sport%20biomechanics%22%20OR%20%22sports%20biomechanics%22%20OR%20%22biomechanics%20in%20sport%22 * Tyrenon needs to take a step back and stop nominating articles for deletion without doing any research. *3,670 articles Fences and windows (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

:*641 books and 262 news sources should help too. http://news.google.co.uk/archivesearch?um=1&ned=uk&hl=en&q=%22sport+biomechanics%22+OR+%22sports+biomechanics%22+OR+%22biomechanics+in+sport%22&cf=all http://books.google.co.uk/books?um=1&ned=uk&hl=en&q=%22sport%20biomechanics%22%20OR%20%22sports%20biomechanics%22%20OR%20%22biomechanics%20in%20sport%22&cf=all&sa=N&tab=np Fences and windows (talk) 21:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Keep AFD is not cleanup. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:04, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Keep. This is a notable field. 71.3.53.121 (talk) 15:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC) ^{User:71.3.53.121 made 19 WP:JUSTAVOTE and WP:JNN AfD recommendations in less than 30 minutes after being templated as a single-purpose account on WP:Articles for deletion/Chain smoking — Rankiri (talk) 16:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)}

: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.