Talk:Lip lift

Article issues
This article needs some work. It reads somewhere between an advertisement for a plastic surgeon and a howto guide. It has a lot of non-footnoted claims, many of which contain weasel words. I have addressed some of these issues, but more help is needed. Thanks, PDCook (talk) 21:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you clarify?
(talk) Can you be more specific and mention explicit examples? Your criticisms seem vague. This is far from an advertisement. An advertisement generally does not discuss risks and complications. Can you clarify what is meant by weasel words?IS THAT A TECHNICAL WORD. Can you provide a reference for that word rather than the insulting tone? I respect constructive criticism but you seem to harbor some deep seated resentment. Any issues? Rather than make a broad sweeping statement and point me to an encyclopedia to read, I would prefer that you direct my attention to the offending comment/phrase/sentence/paragraph/etc. Different styles? What exactly is different and what does that mean? First person? Third person? Expository? Narrative? Please respect the fact that it took time to compose this non-biased article with well over 22 citations. I will work on the non-footnoted claims which was my mistake. This article has significantly more citations than most comparable articles. I thought this community was supposed to be helpful but your comments are void of neutrality and seem down right derogatory. Thank you. Otto Placik (talk) 16:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, please realize that I was not personally attacking you. This article, while seemingly a valid and notable article, has some issues. Here are some of them:

The use of weasel words

 * "...With the rising popularity of facial rejuvenation techniques, a number of surgeons noted..." This sentence contains the weasel words " a number of." Rather than giving specific examples (and citations) of surgeons who note the following statement, using weasel words here makes it sound as if there is consensus among surgeons without really proving it.


 * "Although many surgeons report satisfaction with their procedure to be 'high,'..." Again, "many" is a weasel word.

WP:Tone

 * The History section of the article is written more like a promotional piece than an encyclopedic article. Also be sure it is written with a neutral point of view

No footnotes

 * Having a lot of claims being made without footnotes makes it really difficult for readers and other editors to know what is verifiable fact and what is puffery.

Please realize that I'm only trying to help. If you need additional help, let me know. PDCook (talk) 16:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Picture
The picture at the top of the article is weird. It claims to be a before and after but the nose and chin are wider in the after pic, as if it has been stretched. 86.186.147.231 (talk) 00:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyedited
Richard asr (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)