Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FitLifeDXB

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 delete. joe deckertalk 06:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FitLifeDXB[edit]

FitLifeDXB (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG and WP:CORPDEPTH. What is the point about having an article about gym unless for WP:PROMO only. scope_creep (talk) 22:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Fails CORP, WP:GNG and WP:NOT applies. Promotional piece -reads like a company press release not an encyclopedia article. Article created by WP:SPA whose only edits involve this article. An organization is not notable merely because a notable an event was associated with it. Sources in article do nothing to establish notability and Google and NYT searches provides nothing as well. CBS527Talk 02:29, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • SNOW Delete as clear advertising with only mirrored PR offered as sources, which is never convincing, regardless of number, to our policies. SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A WP:SPA article on a recent new company, indicating nothing more than a run-of-the-mill firm going about its business and hoping to expand. I see nothing in the article to indicate encyclopaedic notability and my searches are finding nothing better. AllyD (talk) 21:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.