Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zumba

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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 01:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zumba

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

Procedural nomination. Article has been repeatedly tagged for speedy deletion and repeatedly requested that it be restored. Let the community decide. I have no opinion one way or the other. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This old revision: [1] shows a list of sources which should more than satisfy WP:GNG. The article is stubby, and need supervision to avoid becoming advertisal in tone, but there is enough to justify keeping this one around. --Jayron32 06:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That version is a copyright violation and spam - it contains near-verbatim marketing copy from a promotional web site. You can find hundreds if not thousands of copies of that text on the web, it looks like that text is either part of a spamming campaign or the product is marketed by many independent marketers. The article's first edit suffers a similar problem. Talk:Zumba/Archives/2012#Past edits. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 14:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep First, I did not create this article. Second, in no way should this article be nominated for deletion. This aerobics dance craze is literally sweeping the nation and there are tons of reliable sources to prove it. That being said, I am really not in the mood to work on this article. Just because some idiot editors made it sound like an advertisement doesn't mean it should be deleted.ShamWow (talk) 06:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep your personal attacks to yourself. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make them an "idiot editor". Thank you for your cooperation. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep As embarrassing as this workout is, it seems very popular. Article needs attention. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 08:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Start over with a deletion review for quality, copyright, and promotional tone required before allowing any draft back into mainspace, but without prejudice to a decent article that clearly follows Wikipedia's policies. I am specifically not taking a stand at this time whether the subject meets WP:Notability requirements, but any draft article would have to clearly show that the subject is notable before being moved into article space. A well-written stub article with enough evidence that the topic is notable would suffice. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 14:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To those wanting to keep: Please consider creating a user-space draft that 1) establishes WP:N to a level that it's AFD-resistant at least on notability grounds, 2) is devoid of copyright violations, and 3) is strongly resistant to claims that it is spammy or promotional. If we can get a good draft before this AFD goes away, the solution may be to copy your draft over this version, or to delete this version and move your draft over it as a fresh start. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 14:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have no objections to a WP:Speedy keep/WP:SNOW closure. However, it would be nice if this AFD were kept open at least 24 hours. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It should not be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.119.152.29 (talk) 16:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly notable, based on web hits and media coverage such as [2]. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per IronMaidenRocks and JohnnyB256. This seems to be, erm, a notable fitness craze now. The article obviously needs work. GreenGourd (talk) 17:32, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- clearly notable - have added material sourced from Daily Telegraph. PamD (talk) 22:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think it would be useful to keep it open for at least a couple days to allow for plenty of participation. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep People have jumped right in and spruced the article up, there's no reason for a delete now. AcroX 23:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Added CNN reference Zumba zooms to the top of the exercise world Glen 06:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The previously-deleted talk page versions are restored. Its content as of October 31, 2009 is merged in now as well. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 06:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article should be improved, but Zumba is participated in worldwide and a legitimate fitness class at many gyms. 18:00, 30 November 2009 (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.