Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bluepeel non-surgical face lift

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. - Bobet 08:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bluepeel non-surgical face lift

• Delete A "bluepeel" is a propriety name (owned by Dr. Obagi) for a varient of traditional TCA acid peels for skin treatment. There is no reason to have a featured entry on a specific product as compared to to chemical peel which already exists. There is little to distinguish this product from hundreds of other formulae in this general category Droliver 16:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• keep Bluepeel non-surgical face lift should remain as an article. While the Obagi peel is a chemical peel it is not identical to other chemical peels. It has a different formula that makes it unique, much in the same way that Coca-Cola has a unique formula that sets it apart from Pepsi-Cola. Both are colas, but both have their own Wiki pages. Both are trademarks owned by their respective organizations. The same could be said about the various distributions of Linux. An RPM for RedHat Linux will run on Fedora and Centos, as they are almost identical, however they are different distributions of the same core product.

Comparing a small market product to multi-billion dollar corporations (Coke/Pepsi Co.) kind of misses the point. There in fact is little to distinguish Obagi (other then its brand identity) from hundreds of similar products. For the purposes of Wikipedia I think all chemical peel type of treatments are better addressed in a single heading without proprietary product entries.Droliver 03:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless some incredible notability surrounds Bluepeel. For example, is it now the standard formula used by a vast majority of dermatologists? Does it differ significantly from the other untold numbers of Trichloroacetic Acid Peels alluded to on the chemical peel page? Without some significant separating factor of notability or inventiveness, I don't think the article should stay. Sure, RedHat, Fedora, Coca-Cola, and Pepsi have their own articles because they are huge entities. A cola I brew myself and sell at a local market stand to a few thousand people a month or a Linux kernel I put together aren't notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article unless they show signs of or do become the next Coke/Pepsi or Fedora/RedHat. Xiliquiern 21:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete or merge with Chemical Peel. Not notable enough in it's own right for an article. Dipics 21:51, 18 September 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.