Talk:BodyPump
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 15 December 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
|
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 November 2006. The result of the discussion was No consensus. |
[edit] Article name?
The correct name is BODYPUMP (all caps), and Les Mills usually includes the ® symbol. Don't know if BODYPUMP® with the ® is outside the naming convention ... but I think the article should be renamed either BODYPUMP or BODYPUMP®, since BodyPump is not actually correct.
Re: the "advertising" complaint ... The page has been updated with substantial external references, and the tone of the text is fairly neutral (if a bit wordy!). Would it be less like advertising if the track lists came out? There's a link to them anyway down below.
BODYPUMP is definitely NOT a 'more general freely distributed form of exercise'; it's a brand.Nikitin 01:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I have encoutnered the term before, but as far as I knew it was BodyPump, a copywritten exercise program. Should I vote a move to BodyPump, or is it also the name for a more general freely distributed form of exercise? Tyciol 21:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Tracklists for the current Bodypump 60 have been removed. 21st November 2006. Les Mills requires that all tracklists for the current releases are not made public till December 2006.
[edit] Name change
I went ahead and moved the article from Body pump to BodyPump, per the request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Since there was a non-trivial history at the target location, I swapped the histories in order to preserve the contributor information for the content that was merged from BodyPump to Body pump in June. -GTBacchus(talk) 19:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Still needs fixing
The article still reads a bit like advertising. Too me, the issue is that there is too much information on the specifics of the exercise routine. This might be OK if this were a full length article with history and critiques of the program. However, when it's just about the entire content of the article, it reads like promotion of the product.--Kubigula (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
