Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ExerciseTV: Difference between revisions
→ExerciseTV: cleaned up, looks good. |
m sorted under Sports, Television |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*'''Keep''' Reliable sources such as [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/1190479711.html?dids=1190479711:1190479711&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jan+07%2C+2007&author=Anne+E+Stein%2C+Special+to+the+Tribune&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=The+ups+and+downs+of+ExerciseTV&pqatl=google this article] from the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' establish notability. I have reverted the promotional, copyright-violating content to a clean version of the article. [[User:Cunard|Cunard]] ([[User talk:Cunard|talk]]) 23:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Reliable sources such as [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/1190479711.html?dids=1190479711:1190479711&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jan+07%2C+2007&author=Anne+E+Stein%2C+Special+to+the+Tribune&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=The+ups+and+downs+of+ExerciseTV&pqatl=google this article] from the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' establish notability. I have reverted the promotional, copyright-violating content to a clean version of the article. [[User:Cunard|Cunard]] ([[User talk:Cunard|talk]]) 23:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - Cleaned up now, looks good.--[[User:Unionhawk|Unionhawk]] <sup>[[User talk:Unionhawk|Talk]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:EmailUser/Unionhawk|E-mail]]</sup> 02:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - Cleaned up now, looks good.--[[User:Unionhawk|Unionhawk]] <sup>[[User talk:Unionhawk|Talk]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:EmailUser/Unionhawk|E-mail]]</sup> 02:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports|list of Sports-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>— [[User:Frankie|frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Television|list of Television-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>— [[User:Frankie|frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)</small> |
|||
Revision as of 15:21, 27 October 2011
- ExerciseTV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The first and second paragraphs of the "History" section reads like something taken directly from marketing materials, and 10 seconds worth of research confirms this. The entire "History" section was taken directly from promotional materials for Exercise TV. All three paragraphs, in their entirety, can be found on ExerciseTV's Facebook page (see [1]). For that matter, the opening section is only a very slightly modified version of the first paragraph of the history section. The entire article is blatant plagiarism at worst, and at the very least is just very un-encyclopedic in tone. As this page is of debatable notability and at the moment is just plagiarized from promotional materials that are available elsewhere, I think the page should probably be deleted unless someone is willing to step up and take over this article. Bookbaby2004 (talk) 19:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Reliable sources such as this article from the Chicago Tribune establish notability. I have reverted the promotional, copyright-violating content to a clean version of the article. Cunard (talk) 23:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - Cleaned up now, looks good.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 02:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
