Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chi Machine

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 of the debate was no consensus. No action taken. Mindmatrix 19:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chi Machine

It's an advertisement about a non-notable exercise machine. I mistook it for non-commercial promotion of pseudoscience, tried to document it, and ended up making it worse. Please delete. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 22:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable Tom Harrison ^(talk) 22:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• "If the page is deleted, then so be it rather than allow spam advertising, personal bias, false beliefs and lies be printed. FYI the Chi Machine is hardly non-notable when over 2 million of the original have been sold worldwide. --User:Angel26(Talk) 04:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)--
• Keep content about the merits of the device but delete any information which will lead readers to an online order form. This is an encyclopedia, not a catalog. Endomion 01:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete pseudoscientific quackery, and that's being generous. --StoatBringer 01:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete blatant advertising for misleadingly named pseudoscientific fad device. --Fire Star 20:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I'm not disagreeing that it's a pseudoscientific quack device designed to fleece people of their money, but the damn thing has sold over two million devices, which makes it notable, and thus encyclopedic. We merely need to phrase the encyclopedia entry in such a way that it is clear that this thing is not endorsed by real science or medicine. Astrology is pseudoscience too - should it not have its own article? --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 21:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete snake oil. "Passive aerobic exercise" my arse. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 11:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Even if its claims are dubious, the fact that it's been solid millions of times and there's even a paper written about it PMID 15328757 warrants inclusion. The content of the article is what will need editing, perhaps the title too...it may be more appropriately named "Sun Ancon Chi Machine". Pseudoscience and quackery, etc. are well-referenced in Wikipedia! Andrew73 13:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as blatant advertising. Wikipedia does not need an article about every product in existence. Even if it weren't quackery it would still be sub-notable. Durova 23:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, millions of sales, covered in a medical journal... it's disappointing to see so many POV votes. Kappa 05:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as per previous keep votes (remove any advertising links and make sure true scientific argument is presented). --Petros471 11:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete MSTCrow 09:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

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.