Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trampoline platysmaplasty

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. - Mailer Diablo 16:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trampoline platysmaplasty

Not notable, advert; very few Google hits on the term, and even "Gregory P. Mueller" and "plastic" doesn't get many. Previous prod removed by editor concerned that an expert was needed; I don't think that is necessary, I say let's just go ahead and get rid of it. Brianyoumans 03:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - This is a legitimate subject for an article, though the text is written by someone who's not very good at it. If it survives AfD, let me know - I'm a doctor with an interest in anatomy, so I'm sure I can fix it. - Richardcavell 05:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - you could fix it now which would increase its chances of surviving AFD. Editing is allowed during the AFD process. Yomangani^talk 11:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I've lost count of the number of articles I've tried to save by editing during AfD, and had my work wasted. If it's going to get deleted, there's no point. - Richardcavell 22:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I know the feeling. Yomangani^talk 22:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. I also do not see how this particular procedure, among the thousands of surgical procedures available, is notable enough for its own article. No notability shown or implied. Article is also detailed enough that I note WP is not a how-to guide. No sources, so fails WP:V. Keep noms should do more than simply claim notability because they say so. Tychocat 11:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete... neither MEDLINE nor PubMed seem to know of any journal articles about this procedure. Unless it can be legitimately sourced (for example, from the minutes of that ASAPS meeting), this article violates WP:V. --Kinu ^t/_c 19:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I prodded this and the author removed the prod tag without giving a good enough reason on the article's talk page. --Sbluen 05:24, 6 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.