Deletion of Perth Leisure Pool

Comment: as now meeting all Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, per improvements and sourcing added since the nomination to meet the nom's concern of "unreferenced" (per |WP:AFTER AND ) and per precedents set for inclusion of regional notable venues if properly sourced, as notability for a few million is just as suitable as notability for a few hundred million if it meets the guidelines for inclusion. The article '''now''' leaps past the , despite  views (sorry, but it does) with in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources. Wikipedia does not state that such are not worthy of inclusion. Wikipedia does state the requirements that need be met... and this one now qualifies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:POTENTIAL||WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: Fails .  It's a swimming pool, we don't need articles about all public pools and nothing makes this one stand out besides it occasionally being a health hazard
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Places of local interest (WP:LOCAL)

Comment: because good god what was somebody thinking in even creating it. An encyclopedia is  the yellow pages/phone book/guidebook
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)