Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underwater cycling

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. Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 04:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Underwater cycling[edit]

NOM WITHDRAWN: Keep withdraw nomination. —Gaff ^ταλκ 04:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Similar to page on Underwater Boxing currently under AfD. Perhaps move this to Aqua Cycling and do a complete re-write. —Gaff ^ταλκ 13:42, 13 October 2014 (UTC) —Gaff ^ταλκ 13:42, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep The nomination does not provide a reason to delete and the topic seems quite notable. Moving the topic and/or rewriting it would be ordinary editing not requiring deletion. AFD is not cleanup. Andrew (talk) 17:06, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sorry, I assumed the link provided to discussion on Underwater Boxing -- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Underwater_Boxing implied reasons for deletion. This article is about Underwater bicycle racing, of which the notability is not apparent. The references are not about racing. The article is written such that it is promotional for "The Underwater Bike Race is an annual charity fundraiser held in North Carolina." None of the references are about racing. So in terms of cleanup, do we just delete the lede and need to start a whole new article? I've seen other AfD discussions that end in delete if the article is written about an entirely different topic, under a given namespace. —Gaff ^ταλκ 17:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Addt'l comment: If I am clearly mistaken, please close discussion as Keep and withdraw nomination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaff (talk • contribs) 17:30, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes WP:GNG. Most of the sources refer to it as underwater cycling. Article content can be addressed by copy editing it. Source examples include:

"Man breaks underwater cycling record". The Telegraph.
"Spotlight on Aqua Studio: The Country's First Underwater Cycling Destination". Vogue.
"Russians attempt underwater cycling". The Telegraph.
"Southampton underwater record attempt 'too dangerous' to continue". BBC News.
"Underwater Cycling World Record Broken By Two Ex-Royal Marines At Southampton Boat Show". Huffington Post.
"We Tried Underwater Cycling, The Latest Exercise Craze In New York City". Houston Chronicle.
"Aqua cycling: A new underwater workout". Fox News.

– NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:11, 21 October 2014 (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.