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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tae Yun Kim[edit]

Tae Yun Kim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

False claims of being a "Dr." or becoming the "first female to reach the level of Grandmaster in TaeKwonDo". Except for this 1991 misguided NYT Sports and Leisure mention, references are mostly trivial, self-published or press releases. Other claims to notability include authoring a series of unknown books and receiving a "Silver Stevie Award". No evidence of martial arts skills to be found, and while searching about her online found some sites describing her as a fraud [1] London Hall (talk) 10:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. 05:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC) Papaursa (talk) 05:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• So there is this New York Times article about her. this sources states she is a grandmaster inducted into the taekwondo hall of fame. It does not appear she is grandmaster accredited in the USA, however this sources says she was the first female Black Belt in Korea, then the first female Master, then the first female Grandmaster in the martial arts. And this article shows that she has coached various teams. However the title of grandmaster can be awarded ceremonially. Prince of Thieves (talk) 11:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1) The New York Times article is a 1991 Sports and Leisures piece that cannot be considered journalistic or reliable; includes statements such as: "Then the class double-blocked and kicked at other obstacles such as anger and jealousy."

2) ""source"" stating that she is a grandmaster inducted in the hall of fame does not meet Wikipedia's requirement for a reliable source.

3) The 3rd source also cannot be considered a reliable piece of journalism with inclusions such as : "Two years later, in the morning mist, she caught sight of her uncles training in the martial art of TaeKwonDo. She was fascinated and knew that this is what she wanted to do. She begged her uncles to teach her but they laughed at her."

4) Coaching trivial TaeKwonDo teams does not make a person notable.

There isn't any evidence of her ever competing, or even practising martial arts. The little coverage this has received comes across as paid adverts and press releases. London Hall (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete I see nothing to show she's a notable martial artist. Rank doesn't show notability, especially when you create your own style, nor do martial arts halls of fame. Coaching a team at the "Pre World Games" (whatever those are) is not notable. As far as meeting WP:GNG goes, I'm not seeing significant independent coverage from reliable sources. She appears to be good at self-promotion, but that doesn't make her notable (or even unusual).Sandals1 (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable woman leader with numerous honors. Article could use expansion, not deletion per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 01:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis of which references? London Hall (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Tag for better sources and Sigh. She obviously meets WP:Notability, we just need to source it, not delete it. Author, philanthropist, started her own system of martial arts..... there were allegations that she was a cult leader and her and her group were investigated by the TV show inside edition (Matt Maher, Tae Yun Kim (May 1998). Inside Edition (Television). United States of America: King World Television.) And just in case that isn't enough, she's the founder and CEO of a (seemingly) major Silicon Valley Tech company [[2]] Here's an article on her winning an award for her work [[3]] Sethie (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The references you're including is a company website and press release. How do these meet WP:GNG? London Hall (talk) 20:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So you are claiming she owns the company Bussiness Wire (3rd Reference) and Inside Edition (1st reference)? Hmmm she's more notable then I thought. Sethie (talk) 20:52, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Overtly promotional piece written to make more out of what is really there. With respect to martial arts opening one school and calling it an art and yourself a grandmaster is a level of hubris not notability. No indication that any one else besides primary sources are calling her company notable and CEO of a non-notable company does not make one notable. Same can be said for fraud investigations.PRehse (talk) 22:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Dr. Tae Yun Kim has been training in the martial arts for her entire life. She has been featured on the cover of many Taekwondo Times magazine issues and is a regular columnist and is featured in news articles in the magazine. [[4]]. She was inducted into the Taekwondo Hall of Fame in 2009 [[5]] which includes all the notable martial artists involved in Taekwondo from around the world. SarahSmile516 (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SarahSmile516 is a SPA account providing a reference of Kim's "Heart to Heart" column in a magazine and a reference that does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for a reliable source. As noted by Sandals1, Kim seems efficient at promoting herself, but there isn't anything substantial to verify she has contributed in any significant way to any sport or business. London Hall (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source in question [[6]] is chock-full of notable figures in the Tae Kwon Do world, just search wiki for all the names in the ceremony picture - they're all there. Just because it doesn't look pretty doesn't make it unreliable.Lmarotz (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taking photos with notable figures does not make one notable. London Hall (talk) 09:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It is not your run of the mill promo, as the creator was not a WP:SPA, but then this dates few years back when promotion was as not sophisticated (through the use of throw-away SPAs). I can't deny the possibility that someone found the claims in the cited sources notable, but I have to lean delete. Claims of first women grandmaster are not reliably sourced, and are not mentioned in the reliable NYT publication, which would likely mention such a nice claim. The only thing we have going for her is that she "in 1978, organized the first women's division in international TaeKwonDo competition at the Pre-World Games in Seoul, South Korea." and did some coaching. That does not seem to be sufficient. Pre-World Games don't seem to be a notable event and are not mentioned in our Taekwondo#Competitions. Coachs of Olympic athletes and others who help with major events may be notable, but she doesn't seem to have been involved in anything at that level. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Other than the NYT article, the sources supporting this promotional article seem trivial or unreliable. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I think a lot of the discussion has focused around the Martial Arts, which is fine. But I disagree that the proof is "not sufficient", especially if you look into Tae Kwon Do Times' coverage of her. The first time they covered her was May 1991[[7]], then Jan '93[[8]], Nov '94[[9]] (mentions her Grandmaster title), Jul '99[[10]], March 2009 [[11]], and again in Jan '15[[12]]. So if that publication uses someone for their cover 6 times in a 19 year period (or 3 times in a 4 year span), that person would be pretty notable for the sport. Can't knock a person whose fame came before Wikipedia... Lmarotz (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is your first AfD, so you might want to review things like the notability guidelines for martial artists (WP:MANOTE) and WP:N where it says that repeated publications from the same organization "are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability", which means repeated mentions in the same magazine can be considered one source--and that's if Tae Kwon Do Times is a reliable and independent source as well as the coverage being significant. Papaursa (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, was just doing more research and came across the covers for those magazines. Out of curiosity, how would you determine if Tae Kwon Do Times is reliable enough? Seems like the publication has been going since 1980, although the articles within the publication don't seem to be freely accessible online - or are just very hard to find. Lmarotz (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Let's start with the claims of accomplishments. There's a long established WP custom on martial arts articles to ignore rank and halls of fame as indicators since anyone can start their own art and claim to be a grandmaster. A number of articles on people who fit this description have had their articles deleted here. I've seen people with 1 year of martial arts experience create their own style and suddenly claim to be a 10th dan grandmaster. There's no evidence any criteria of WP:MANOTE is met and nothing to show that the "Pre World Games" are notable or, for that matter, that whatever World Games this was a warm-up for is notable. It appears her martial art has exactly one school, hardly notable. Honorary degrees do not confer notability. Her award as "a Woman of the Year honoree by the California Legislative Women's Caucus" should be considered a local award as one women is chosen annually from each of California's 80 legislative districts and doesn't appear to be a major award, certainly nothing conferring automatic notability. Winning two Stevie awards is not indicative of notability when you consider that each application costs over $500 plus paying for a banquet to receive an award worth $200--that's even worse than most of the martial arts halls of fame. I'm not sure her books are not essentially self-published, and I see no criteria under WP:NAUTHOR that she meets. Founding a non-notable company also doesn't make her notable. That just leaves me with a lot of self-promotion and a lack of sources that meet WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2018 (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.