Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Key Fitness 24/7

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 speedy deleted. Non-admin closure. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Key Fitness 24/7[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article fails to address the criteria of WP:ORG. Being one of the 24 hour gyms in Australia is not particularly notable and neither is being the only one in Tasmania to offer Technogym's VisioWeb product. Improvement notices are being removed and as the article has now been created 3 times, raising for a wider discussion. For BEFORE advocates, you may wish to be reassured that I find no matches to {"Key Fitness" Tasmania} when searching in GBooks or GNews archives. Fæ (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tasmania is a small place so to have a gym offering what key fitness offers, and to be the 1st gym in tasmania offering internet access on cardio equipment (treadmills etc) also going against the franchising model/trend that is spreading across Australia and brands itself as an alternative to the "big box" fitness centers, and to have been supported and commended by an Australian football league club (Gold coast suns) i believe that it is a worthy 1st article for myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dytas (talk • contribs) 14:50, 31 July 2011
Delete. This is just an advert and Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can i change the article to make it NOT an advert in your opinions?

blank it. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pure promotion. I can't see any match with the criteria in WP:ORG Cst17 (talk) 14:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no credible claim to notability, and no significant coverage in independent sources. Of the two sources currently there, one is apparently an advert from the company and the other one doesn't mention the gym at all. --bonadea contributions talk 14:21, 31 July 2011 (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.