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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spa closures in Singapore

[edit]

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

Blatant soapboxing WuhWuzDat 17:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The following related page has also been listed for deletion:

Do not delete- notable.Spa closures in Singapore is notable due to:
newspapers reports, news TV programs about many spas closing.
huge amounts of monies, many people involved.
change in law of Singapore due to these closures.
it being a discussion in the Republic of Singapore Parliament.
its impact on consumers' rights.
its influence on consumers in Asia where these same spa operators operate.
many internet forums on this topic.
the fact that so many have been reported to be victims of the spa closures in Singapore. There is link to the culture of Singapore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaofvictim (talk • contribs) 07:34, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not notable as a phenomenon, and none of the individual spas whose closings are sourced to actual news are notable enough for a mention. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~DO NOT DELETE~~ - it is a notable event. if it is not notable in Singapore, it would not have been discussed in Parliament and featured on TV shows like Singapore Talking and BlogTV and Channel News Asia. Also, there have been many articles which talk about the individual spas which closed. The closure of BIG Spa operators have led to the openings of many small Spa shops in the heartlands of Singapore. — Spaofvictim (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment: Closing admin should note that, as of now, the first two "do not delete" votes are from the same user. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:13, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Duplicate vote struck out. WuhWuzDat 20:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sorry, this is a definite WP:SOAPBOX violation. Ravenswing 22:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The editor in question is using this article and others as part of a campaign to right great wrongs, as his user name indicates. Wikipedia is not a consumer protection site. It's possible that there's an article in here, but the current form of the article doesn't appear to be salvageable, and is definitely not neutral - . Acroterion _(talk) 22:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Irretrievable WP:SOAPBOX article from WP:SPA contributor who seems unlikely to be able to improve it. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 16:11, 12 January 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.