Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cardio Exercises Achilles Tendon Injury

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. WP:G12 -- RoySmith (talk) 11:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cardio Exercises Achilles Tendon Injury

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

Doesn't pass WP:GNG and reads like an essay attempting to give medical advice. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 21:01, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:08, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:08, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 04:25, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not contain any references/does not pass GNG, reads a lot like an essay (throughout) trying to give the reader medical advice (in parts). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As mentioned above, poorly written, totally unreferenced, and largely WP:HOWTO, all of which could be fixed. The deeper problem is that this just doesn't seem like a topic for an encyclopedia article. I could see an article on Achilles tendon injury (and in fact, we have Achilles tendon rupture), but it's hard to see how an article on achilles tendon injuries specifically related to cardio exercises makes sense. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you search for the first sentence, you'll find that this is word-for-word identical to many other sources. There's a lot of copy-paste going on here, but unclear in which direction, so add probable copyvio to the list of reasons to delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:13, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking into this further, the full text of this article was added in a single edit, just a few days ago. The other sites clearly pre-date it. Not to mention that the creator is already indef blocked for spamming. So, I'm just going to WP:G12 this (Unambiguous copyright infringement). -- RoySmith (talk) 11:23, 9 July 2017 (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.