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 Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ExerciseTV[edit]

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)[reply]

• 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)[reply]
• Keep - Cleaned up now, looks good.--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 02:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Reliable Sources. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 19:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per User:Cunard's changes. Issues with tone/possible plagiarism appear to have been resolved.  Gongshow ^Talk 03:45, 2 November 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.