Deletion of Nabi Su

Comment: Article seems more about a school than a widespread martial art.  Lacks coverage for GNG and fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MANOTE)

Comment: My search found nothing that shows this martial art is widespread or notable.  It appears to fail both  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:MANOTE)

Comment: The article's been changed substantively enough since this AfD started that it needs to be carefully reviewed again for  and  compliance, the key question being whether this is an actual notable martial art, or simply a school of yun mu kwan under a new name.  I remain skeptical, because many of the added sources appear to be for fluff, e.g. quotations that not only do not help establish notability, they don't mention nabi su at all, and are not even of any relevance to the article and should be deleted, e.g. "Master Min Pai demonstrates the ancient Zen art of healing, which stems from the disciplines of Kung Fu, Tai Chi and Karate.... Kneeling in perfect silence and stillness... Master Pai achieved the transfer of energy...."  This is just |new-agey gibberish.  Second, various bits of local news coverage have been added, but being briefly interviewed for commentary on women's safety and martial arts, for example, doesn't at all help establish notability or tell us anything encyclopedic about nabi su, its history, its founder, or why it is notable in its own right.  And so on.  I did not start back at the top of the article and examine every citation, I just picked two and both failed.  While I appreciate the principal author's earnestness, the effort appears to be essentially promotional, and a bit standoffish, as if there's a {{em|right}} for every martial arts school and variant to have an article here.  That editor also needs to see :  Extensive but selective quotation of a projectpage on female editors to give the impression "I'm a woman editor who is going to quit if I don't get my way, because deleting this article would amount to being aggressive toward me" is not going to win anyone over at all. It's manipulative and unconvincing; being a fallacious argument to emotion, it more importantly does not rationally advance any sources- or policy-based argument for keeping this article.  All of that said, the article {{em|has}} improved in some ways, and I'm reluctant to say it should be deleted outright.  Someone from the martial arts wikiproject who is good at "rescuing" trouble articles should probably have a go at this and see if it can be both shored up with real, relevant facts and sources, and stripped of unencyclopedic blather and hand-waving. The entire thing also needs copyediting to comply with  in about a dozen ways.  Should these issues not be addressed in a timely manner, consider this comment support for "weak delete, or merge to Yun mu kwan
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:MANOTE||WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE||WP:DIVA||WP:MOS)