Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrotherapy (cosmetic)


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  03:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Electrotherapy (cosmetic)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Dubious title, dubious references, content picked up from other articles on electrical therapy Gciriani (talk) 04:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Electrotherapy is an established area in the cosmetics industry, compared to other articles which focus on physiotherapy, or the science behind it (hence the article probably should not be judges as a science and technology article, but one in the cosmetics category). I don't understand what you mean by dubious references, which includes textbooks used on accredited courses, and many others. There is actually very little content picked up from other articles, as is evident from the 50+ citations. Cosmetic electrotherapy is both notable and is supported by multiple reliable source, eg. accredited NVQ courses here, and here. Accredited BTEC courses here and here, books on electrotherapy in the beauty (cosmetic) industry, here and here (and the books devote several chapters to cosmetic electrotherapy, not just a fleeting mention). If you find the title dubious, by all means find a better alternative. --Iantresman (talk) 10:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2011 November 26.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  20:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is notable, sufficiently distinguished from existing articles not to be duplicative, and supported by reliable sources. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 23:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep It's a well-written, well-referenced article about a notable topic. I have no problem with the name, which is appropriate and unambiguous. --MelanieN (talk) 15:02, 30 November 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.