Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bodytalk

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 delete. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 18:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bodytalk

Is it original research? A5b 09:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• delete - not even enough content for a stub --Sascha.leib 09:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep and invite the author to expand it. The cited inventor of the system has a published work. That work is the only Ghit on bodytalk veitheim however just the term 'bodytalk' finds this. Tonywalton  | Talk 10:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand. Fast. --Xorox 12:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete snake oil unless we can show evidence of discussions in the medical texts on which to base a verifiably neutral article. Just zis Guy you know? 12:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per JZG and sascha.leib. Mangojuice 13:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete quackerycruft. NTK 19:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete frankly in its present state should have been speedied as linkspam-Doc ^ask? 21:31, 13 April 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.