Deletion of John Roseberry

Comment: I was avoiding this but some of the comments are drawing me in.  The relevant guidelines are  and .  I suppose  could be considered but I have no idea why we have two editors bringing up .  The subject does not meet either  or .  He neither competed at the highest level (for Judo that would be the World Championships or the Olympics) nor did he found a significant style of karate.  At most it is a cluster of schools.  High rank, titles and memberships in soke councils (or similar self-congratulating organizations) have, and for good reason, never been considered as a base for notability.  This brings us to  and I don't think, when you actually look at the sources listed is being met.  The best one was the Lincoln article but in reality that is nothing more than a local interest piece (in my opinion) and is pretty borderline.  The freeserver page is in no way a RS and I don't see how it is even part of the discussion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MANOTE||WP:GNG||WP:ATHLETE||WP:ARTIST||WP:MANOTE||WP:ATHLETE||WP:GNG)

Comment: per  {{u|Ravenswing}}.:-  There are multiple third party |reliable sources that established the subject |notability as a martial artists, apart from the Reliable sources already present in the article. In addition, the subject of the article meets #1 which says that an artist is notable if ''{{tq|The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors}}.http://www.hathagojuryukaratedo.freeservers.com/index_4.html This source confirmed him as an important figure in addition to the sources already cited in the article. Also he is a founder of a recognized institution https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=o5mZntCm8hAC&pg=PA134&lpg=PA134&dq=Shorei-Shobukan+Karate&source=bl&ots=u8tMO4jvnZ&sig=5XTv_P25_IRYTHt__-r7vBDH_wM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lDkkVd_BMs3paKXSgYAF&ved=0CB0Q6AEwCQ founder of a recognized institution
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:ARTIST)