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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tuen Mun Swimming Pool[edit]

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

Not notable and unreferenced. No reliable sources. No GNews or GBooks hits. GNews hits show only self-published sources or social media. Promotional. CSD for A7/G11 declined with reason that promotional language had been cleaned up (I disagree, but AGF) - no reason was given on declination for A7. GregJackP Boomer! 18:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All the information are from official website from the Hong Kong government so it's reliable. if I would like to promote the swimming pool I should add words like "the best", "good" etc. This is a public swimming pool so I don't need to advertise it. The purpose of making the English version of this article is for the new comers of Hong Kong, especially for minorities who cannot read Chinese I would further expend the article to meet the standard of the wikipedia If it's not suitable for wikipedia then my same topic in Chinese Language should be deleted long time ago..... - Samchan212 (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, existence does not confer nobility. Seems like a NN pool with no sources. Just being in another wiki is not enough, see WP:INN. meshach (talk) 21:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as lacking in-depth coverage in reliable independent third party sources. Even less sources in the native language version of the article. If the article is improve to include such sources, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:23, 2 September 2012 (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.