Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Hour Fitness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 the subject of the article if rewritten...But the contents for now shall be deal by WP:CP. Mailer Diablo 19:48, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 24 Hour Fitness

Seems like advert with company link at bottom KarenAnn 20:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as copyvio. Can't be speedied since the article is more than 48 hours old, but there's nothing to revert to, since all previous versions are inappropriate stubs of less than three sentences. --Kinu t/c 20:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: For what it's worth, an appropriate article would be a keep, since this company definitely does meet WP:CORP. --Kinu t/c 20:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • What's going on? A major fitness company's entry on Wikipedia is listed for deletion? I'm not sure about this. Recently, somebody placed a copyvio tag, so I'm going to say delete. If we want to keep it, please put the article in their own words. Thank you. Bigtop (tk|cb|em|ea) 20:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Keep, but must be re-writed as a company stub, as long as it does not copyright policies in Wikipedia. --Bigtop (tk|cb|em|ea) 03:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Write new article I have no objection to this being speedied if it's a copyvio, but it's also a huge chain that we really should have an article on. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Stuff a company stub into the article. -- Gogo Dodo 00:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - it needs an article, just not THIS article. Stev0 03:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. 24 Hour Fitness is one of the most notable fitness clubs in the United States. Is everything within the history of this article a copyvio, or only certain elements? Anything that is a copyright violation should be removed by an administrator but subject-wise this is a definite keep. Yamaguchi先生 02:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Everything after this edit should be removed. Other than that, I see nothing wrong with this as a stub to work from. Yamaguchi先生 02:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Yamaguchi. Or if not that one as a stub, maybe this one: [1]. --Elonka 00:08, 29 July 2006 (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.