Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HypnosNLP

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. I do complement HypnosNLP on his work on the article, though. -- Kjkolb 06:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HypnosNLP

Written (almost) like a completely POV advertisement (HypnosNLP is an awesome, almost magical method, for one), the articles that assert its notability appear to be written by the company, the page itself needs vast amounts of work, the company itself is almost certainly no longer in business (No updates in 6 months on their main page, and the blog is... well, I dunno, seems a bit "current" for the actual article, and the fact that it is an old buisness is not mentioned in the article), the writter of the article is *almost* blatently tried/trying to promote his site/company, and of course, the article actually isn't even about the article, it's about this Gregory Antao guy. (Note: While the main contributor to the program is Gregory Antao, it is also User:HypnosNLP Logical2u (Wikibreak) 19:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Update: User in question has fixed some errors, and removed sme of the questionable content. History is your friend is you want to see the differences. Logical2u (Wikibreak) 20:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, to anyone who wants to comment... company does appear to be notable, but I can't really verify the articles... Logical2u (Wikibreak) 20:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Well Mr Melnikov, thanks for your constructive criticism. This was my first attempt at posting on Wikepedia - absolute newbie - and I'd thought that I'd post a short article about HypnosNLP. Rather naively I hadn't read the guidelines and have now amended the article keeping it short and informative and hopefully within the ToS. Actually FYI we're very much in business but the blog does need a bit of work. Regards, Greg —Preceding unsigned comment added by HypnosNLP (talk • contribs)

Yea, I'd like to say good job at your amendments to the article. Other editors would have likely attempted to remove the warning or even personally attack the users who placed it. It's certainly looking alot better. It might actually be applicable to remove this from AFD, but I dunno how this would work: Most AFDs are actually questionable enough to get debate. Sincerely Logical2u (Wikibreak) 20:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

PS: You can sign with ~~~~ to get links to your userpage and talk page. And it signs your name!

• Comment, nice but where is the outside verification? Fails T&E:510 ~ trialsanderrors 21:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This still reads like an advertisement. Reliable third party sources that mention all the health claims will be required, or there must be edits to clarify that the system claims efficacy, but there is no reliable evidence that this is true. Besides this, I cannot find anything about this "system" that doesn't derive from a press release (there are a mere 55 unique Ghits), so its notability needs to be asserted with some evidence that doesn't come from the company/creator itself. --DaveG12345 18:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per DaveG12345. ~ trialsanderrors 00:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per DaveG12345. All the Google hits are duplicates of each other, press releases. Despite it being an "Awesome Almost Magical System"[1]. —Centrx→talk • 06:10, 1 July 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.