Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baumann skin types


 * 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   speedy delete. Already speedy deleted by Fastily as a copyvio. Davewild (talk) 08:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Baumann skin types

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nominating for deletion per WP:COPYVIO. The page was blanked by a previous user, but it was listed that the entire entry is a light copy of a journal paper written by Leslie Baumann. It should be noted that all of the user's entries appear to be violations in this manner. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * By 'user' I mean the article's creator, User:FirstPaigeInc. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:02, 23 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Additional: The article would require a complete re-write from head to toe, unfortunately.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete; There are so many ways this thing should be deleted it's hard to choose, but let's go with this one.  It's a neologism created by Baumann to puff up his image.  It appears twice in GScholar -- in papers written by Baumann.  Web sources using the phrase all appear to be promotions of products. EEng (talk) 23:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The material in this Wikipedia submission is widely known in the dermatologic community and is the subject of multiple publications. This material was adapted with permission from publications including The Skin Type Solution (Bantam 2005) and Cosmetic Dermatology (McGraw Hill 2009) written by Dr. Leslie Baumann MD. Metabeauty Inc, holds the copy right to these publications and agrees to permit Wikipedia to use this adapted content. Metabeauty will accept responsibility for the use of these content on Wikipedia. I can provide a letter of agreement from metabeauty if necessary.  Please let me know how to proceed.  This material is also excerpted with permission from US patent number  US2006/0265244 A1 which was filed by Dr. Leslie Baumann and is owned by Metabeauty Inc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firstpaigeinc (talk • contribs) 16:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)  — Firstpaigeinc (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Unless the copyright holder agrees to the terms of Wikipedia's license i.e. essentially free use, republication, and adaptation of the material by anyone, including for commercial gain, then Wikipedia can't use it. Since you imply that this license hasn't been supplied yet, then as it stands the article is a copyright violation.  Therefore I'm blanking the page for now.
 * Also, from what you say the copyright holder is either Baumann, Bantam, or McGraw (not Metabeauty) so Metabeauty has no authority to license the text for use. "Accepting responsibility" is not enough.
 * Anyway, that the material is "widely known" isn't enough. It has to be the subject of multiple and substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources.  All I see is articles by Baumann and puff pieces.
 * Finally, even if it passes that test, there's no reason to use text that needs licensing. Do what other editors do, and write your own description.
 * Except you shouldn't do that, because you're connected with the subject and have a conflict of interest. If the Baumann skin types are indeed notable, someone else will write an article on them.
 * EEng (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2011 (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.