Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tear trough rejuvenation

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. Tiptoety ^talk 02:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tear trough rejuvenation

Tear trough rejuvenation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

The content is very similar to this article. It's also advertisement disguised as an article, with direct links to a surgeon's website. Would need to be entirely rewritten to avoid the conflict of interest issues. Pichpich (talk) 03:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as an advertisement. --TBC!?! 03:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, advertisment, albeit one cunningly disguised as scholarly information with all the "sources". Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC).
• Delete - concur. As crypto-spam goes, this one deserves some kind of prize. Still, it is rather essayish rather than descriptive. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Too specialised for its own article and the end credit section makes clear it was primarily written for self-promotion purposes. The author could instead consider starting an article on "cosmetic oculoplastic surgery" (or "cosmetic oculoplastics"), a topic on which the author clearly has considerable expertise, and which could then include a section on this particular procedure amongst others, and give the appropriate wider context. Note that we already have an article on oculoplastics. "cosmetic oculoplastics" is the appropriate next step as WP grows and articles subdivide and split, not an article on one specific procedure. Qwfp (talk) 13:57, 29 February 2008 (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.