Deletion of Lightsaber combat (4th nomination)

Comment: I agree that much of the content of this article appears to be culled from inappropriate sources and hence this article has sigificant  problems. However, I also agree that enough sources and content would be left if the unreliable material were culled out to make topic |notable and justifying a reasonable article. AfD covers whether the topic itself is encyclopedic, not whether the current article complies with standards in all respects. The topic supports an encyclopedic article, and that is enough
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:N)

Comment: It's already been mentioned that this article has issues with ,  as well - although apparently that's debatable. Also, it really needs some sense of objectivity instituted into it's detail heavy subsections. But... it is a notable element of the Star Wars franchise, and there are a lot of tenacious people who've put a lot of work into the article to make it W-acceptable. So I vote keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:CRUFT||WP:OR)

Comment: due to massive OR, and failure to meet .  However, I would be inclined to change my vote if the cruft was cut down, and better sources added
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:ATT)

Comment: I'm having big trouble believing this to be adequately |sourced: wikis are not |reliable sources, and fanfiction hardly helps establish notability on the level of any sort of encyclopedic importance. A fan magazine, one fanbook and multiple fan websites hardly count as reliable sources, and certainly not the type of reliable souces that establish real-world notability. The article contains large amounts of |original research, classic examples being: "The Jedi or Sith employ an attack in rare instances to use the cutting power of their lightsabers for an object at an unreachable location called the saber throw, or a throwing of his or her lightsaber. The lightsaber is thrown; usually the blade tip spins in a circular motion about the hilt; and the saber hits its target, usually to cut it. Skilled practitioners will use the Force to manipulate the trajectory of the lightsaber and then redirect it back to their hand." Love that. Not sourced at all. Incidentally, also horribly POV: "Trained in all forms by Dooku, a master of his own 4 arm style and advantage to almost invincibility; however, incapable of using the Force, one of his only weaknesses" - alright, so I don't care, but someone who did might find that large chunks of the article violate 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:ATT||WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:NPOV)

Comment: On using Wikis as sources:  from what I could read from my admittedly quick read-through, the external Wiki is listed as an external link, not a reference.  Most of the references used in the article are from published sources.  I'll leave it to individual editors to determine if the Star Wars Insider is a notable source or not, but it certainly isn't simply fanfic.  That said, the article should probably be edited to conform to 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: As an additional aside...a more appropriate check for notability guidelines on this subject is .  Somehow, I don't think anyone will argue that Star Wars is a work of fiction.  As to whether or not lightsaber combat is considered a major or minor concept within Star Wars...well, the vast majority of SW fiction certainly contains instances of lightsaber combat, particularly the prequel era works and the post-movie works.  Within the genre, I would say that it has distinctly established notability.  The OR argument has been debunked so many times in this AfD that I suspect people are simply not even trying to look at the references section of the article.  Ironically, I feel Moreschi has the best take on this-chunks of the article do need cleaned up, because Wikipedia isn't a how-to guide; the article on Karate doesn't go into detail on how to perform its art; neither should this article try to do the same.  Those segments of the article should be removed
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:FICT)

Comment: It has  issues, and may need a couple of cleanup tags, but that's no reason to delete the article as such
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:CRUFT)