248:
several other contributors). At the same time, I've repeatedly requested that users with detailed criticisms of the article state them on the talk page, which for the most part they haven't done. And if anyone has "negative" or "critical" information about the topic, they haven't bothered adding it to the article itself. The fact is, this article has existed for almost a year and has been edited by dozens of users. I don't think anyone believes the notability of the topic is in doubt. (A quick search of Google News shows that P90X has been seriously discussed in the
300:
ironically "there are numerous references" is an actual assertion of notability. So clean it. (or implore interested parties to clean it - is there a wikiproject that could help?) This is the wrong forum for a discussion about cleaning up a notable article with a poor tone/advert languaged article.
247:
If I can add my own two cents here: I didn't create this article, nor did I contribute the majority of information in it. I began editing it precisely because other users were complaining about its objectivity and lack of sources -- and I've put a lot of effort into dealing with those issues (as have
299:
and clean. Fred, you've described in your nomination statement things that are wrong with a particular article (and I agree that it is poorly written for an encyclopedia), but make no case for deletion. "A one paragraph mention with a few...refs could possibly do it" is a plea for clean-up, and
214:. I'm not sure how this could be rewritten as a full-blown article without it turning into an advert. A one paragraph mention with a few cherry-picked refs could possibly do it, but as it stands this should not be an encyclopaedia article. Predominantly written by
505:
it, A workout product such as this does not need it's own page. Hundreds of these types of products are created every year. I think the best soloution would be for beahcbody to create its own page and have a portion about p90x included in what it is.
532:. Clearly notable as can be seen from the large number of newspaper articles referencing the program. Does not read as an advert to me, nor a how-to. This seems to be a well-sourced description of a well-known work-out program. --
209:
Although there are numerous references this article is one big advert for a single product. It's all written from the product's POV and nothing negative, no criticism. There's even a blatant contravention of
178:
345:
78:
73:
68:
280:, which suggests to me the topic is notable. This is one of those things I hear about frequently despite having no interest in it. Probably the article needs some hacking down.--
133:
392:
I don't understand the "link farm" criticism either... most of those examples were added by IP users with no other edits, and were removed immediately after they appeared.
172:
138:
479:
it, This is nothing more than a ploy to market a product by adding an extra listing to Google a workout program does not need its own wikipedia page.
63:
460:
513:
486:
260:
magazine in the last two weeks alone.) Deleting an article merely because it discusses a commercial product seems entirely wrong to me.
380:
The article does indeed have some issues, but that editors try to turn it into a link farm isn't one of them. Just delete the links. --
435:
17:
413:- that the article requires cleanup is not a reason for deletion. The material is not in such a state that it is irredeemable. --
225:
556:
36:
541:
521:
494:
468:
443:
422:
401:
387:
371:
329:
312:
289:
269:
241:
384:
193:
342:
237:
160:
555:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
517:
464:
106:
101:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
490:
439:
110:
509:
482:
456:
431:
320:- Hits don't matter much, but it's a well known workout system, that I think has enough notable coverage.
381:
93:
341:
claims there is no criticism in the article; So add it, if you can find some that is properly sourced.
154:
338:
325:
233:
537:
393:
261:
215:
186:
397:
307:
285:
265:
219:
150:
211:
337:; It is possible to have an article about a notable product without it being an advertisement.
367:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
200:
229:
321:
353:
This article has some issues - one is that some editors try to turn it into a linkfarm:
533:
418:
301:
281:
363:
166:
127:
428:
Keep this article I had no idea what the P90x was until reading this article.
414:
97:
278:
453:
it, unless it is re-written according to encyclopedic guidelines.
549:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
89:
52:
48:
Subject is notable. Article needs improvement not deletion
360:
357:
354:
123:
119:
115:
185:
199:
228:) and a range of IPs, I wouldn't be surprised if
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
559:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
79:Articles for deletion/P90X (4th nomination)
74:Articles for deletion/P90X (3rd nomination)
69:Articles for deletion/P90X (2nd nomination)
277:: This page gets 3-4 thousand hits a day
61:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
59:
24:
1:
254:Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
576:
542:23:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
522:18:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
495:08:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
469:13:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
444:04:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
423:17:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
402:02:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
388:01:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
64:Articles for deletion/P90X
372:13:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
346:08:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
330:07:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
313:02:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
290:20:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
270:19:52, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
242:18:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
552:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
58:AfDs for this article:
232:was an issue too.
250:Chicago Sun-Times,
44:The result was
512:comment added by
485:comment added by
459:comment added by
434:comment added by
567:
554:
524:
497:
471:
446:
310:
304:
204:
203:
189:
141:
131:
113:
34:
575:
574:
570:
569:
568:
566:
565:
564:
563:
557:deletion review
550:
507:
480:
461:216.212.229.166
454:
429:
339:Fred the Oyster
308:
302:
234:Fred the Oyster
146:
137:
104:
88:
85:
83:
56:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
573:
571:
562:
561:
545:
544:
526:
525:
514:67.131.111.199
499:
498:
487:66.220.115.129
473:
472:
426:
425:
407:
406:
405:
404:
390:
375:
374:
348:
343:Buck O'Nollege
332:
315:
293:
292:
272:
207:
206:
143:
139:AfD statistics
84:
82:
81:
76:
71:
66:
60:
57:
55:
50:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
572:
560:
558:
553:
547:
546:
543:
539:
535:
531:
528:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
504:
501:
500:
496:
492:
488:
484:
478:
475:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
452:
449:
448:
447:
445:
441:
437:
433:
424:
420:
416:
412:
409:
408:
403:
399:
395:
391:
389:
386:
383:
379:
378:
377:
376:
373:
369:
365:
361:
358:
355:
352:
349:
347:
344:
340:
336:
333:
331:
327:
323:
319:
316:
314:
311:
305:
298:
295:
294:
291:
287:
283:
279:
276:
273:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
246:
245:
244:
243:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:
221:
217:
213:
202:
198:
195:
192:
188:
184:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
152:
149:
148:Find sources:
144:
140:
135:
129:
125:
121:
117:
112:
108:
103:
99:
95:
91:
87:
86:
80:
77:
75:
72:
70:
67:
65:
62:
54:
51:
49:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
551:
548:
529:
502:
476:
450:
436:71.185.52.12
427:
410:
350:
334:
317:
296:
274:
257:
253:
249:
222:
208:
196:
190:
182:
175:
169:
163:
157:
147:
45:
43:
31:
28:
530:Strong Keep
508:—Preceding
481:—Preceding
455:—Preceding
430:—Preceding
173:free images
322:Shadowjams
534:Wicked247
510:unsigned
483:unsigned
457:unsigned
432:unsigned
394:BHealthy
385:Fatuorum
282:Milowent
262:BHealthy
256:and CNN/
226:contribs
216:BHealthy
212:WP:HOWTO
134:View log
382:Malleus
364:Autarch
351:Comment
275:Comment
258:Fortune
179:WP refs
167:scholar
107:protect
102:history
503:Delete
477:Delete
451:Delete
303:Keeper
230:WP:COI
151:Google
111:delete
194:JSTOR
155:books
128:views
120:watch
116:links
16:<
538:talk
518:talk
491:talk
465:talk
440:talk
419:talk
415:Whpq
411:Keep
398:talk
368:talk
335:Keep
326:talk
318:Keep
297:Keep
286:talk
266:talk
252:the
238:talk
220:talk
187:FENS
161:news
124:logs
98:talk
94:edit
90:P90X
53:P90X
46:KEEP
201:TWL
136:•
132:– (
540:)
520:)
493:)
467:)
442:)
421:)
400:)
370:)
359:,
356:,
328:)
309:76
306:|
288:)
268:)
240:)
181:)
126:|
122:|
118:|
114:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
536:(
516:(
489:(
463:(
438:(
417:(
396:(
366:(
362:.
324:(
284:(
264:(
236:(
223:·
218:(
205:)
197:·
191:·
183:·
176:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
153:(
145:(
142:)
130:)
92:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.