Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gastric bypass diet


 * 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, replace by redirect to Gastric bypass. --JoanneB 13:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Gastric bypass diet
Procederial nom. PROD tag was removed, and CSD tag placed. Yank sox  03:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Should be deleted. The original author keeps reverting it to a version that reads and sound like an advertisement and a how-to guide, and it also sounds like it is ripped off from a gastric bypass surgery website. The version that was up as posted by me (207.210.15.85) tried to change it to sound more encyclopedic, but it is still not encylopedia material. Should probably be deleted and redirected to the article about gastric bypasses. Rgenung 05:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Former Additional Comments have been cheerfully withdrawn with a reminder that writers are not to take articles for deletion personally or to act in a almost angrily defensive manner.


 * When called a lier and accused of plagrisum you have take it personal.--Supplements 13:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect to Gastric bypass. --Hyphen5 05:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Resolute 05:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect to Gastric bypass (you can't redirect to sections). Viridae Talk 05:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. rootology 08:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Viridae. Jacqui ★ 14:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Additional comments in response to Supplements: Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. It is not a book of home remedies. It does not take the place of a doctor, and if we were to take on that risk, it would cause the site extreme liability. Jacqui ★ 14:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

..--Supplements 13:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Viridae. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 15:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Viridae. —C.Fred (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC) On further reflection, delete, it reads somewhere between a how-to manual and diet instructions; factual information can be and is covered at Gastric bypass. I know redirects are cheap and generally harmless, but I don't see this as being a likely search term. 01:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per What Wikipedia is not bullet 8. ccwaters 14:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep--Supplements 14:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Additional comments to User:Jacqui M


 * This isn't a home based recovery article. This is backed by Doctors, Science, Health industry. The article was edited to remove all the references I have added them for proof this is not what some are making it out to be. This is has just a much a place on this site as the surgery does.


 * West Shore Endoscopy Center Gastric Bypass Diet
 * University of Pennsylvania Bariatric Surgery Program
 * St. Vincent's Bariatric Surgery
 * University of wisconsin Gastric Bypass Dietary Program
 * I really can't understand the logic in your lack of understanding this article.


 * First why not do a copyscape search for it if you believe it is ripped. Saying something is easy when you really don't know what your are talking about....


 * As far as this article is extremely important for someone to know what to do after the surgery. Having the surgery is one matter this is the recovery and life style after the surgery in steps for someone that has little if any knowledge on nutrition. Kind of figures if the person has knowledge on nutrition would they need this surgery in the first place.


 * I proved this article was correct and backed by Doctors who perform this operation now, Universities Colleges, and the Health Industry field.


 * The Gastric bypass surgery has nothing to do with after surgery why would you want to direct this to that page completely wrong.


 * I see you have removed my references from Hospitals, Doctors who perform this surgery now, and health related fields. I can't understand why this would be removed as well.... I would assume for someone to have an understanding of the article why do you only have up a portion of the article...


 * Why not have a recovery article with the surgery Like having a heart bypass and not telling the person why or what you can do to prevent this form happening again


 * Delete, I was just about to suggest adding "Wikipedia is not an instruction manual" to WP:NOT. Karwynn (talk) 17:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete (advertising and/or how-to guide) and redirect to Gastric bypass (or whereever it redirects to.) &mdash; Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 21:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have done all I could do to keep this article from being deleted because it is totally ridicules this is getting deleted by this group. It would have been good if one of you would have had some background in nutrition. I am sure we could have worked together to come to a common ground but that is not the case here.

Doing some research I found this article on University of Wisconsin Bariatric Program Kind of strange they think it is so important to have pretty much the same information and yes the call it Gastric Bypass Diet... UW Health Gastric Bypass Dietary program What is posted on the surgery page about nutrition after surgery is misleading inaduquate, and incorrect. --Supplements 13:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to move this to discussion under the heading "University of Wisconsin", I hope that's ok with you. Karwynn (talk) 16:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, file a Third opinion for the edit dispute According to this article's history, User:Supplements has reverted a large amount of edits that were an effort to wikify the article and bring it away from being some sort of health guide. I do not see anyone making The fact that all parties let this escalate to an AfD is an unacceptable way of going about it. If you want to solve an edit dispute, you do it by solving the dispute....not destroying the source of the dispute. No one has given this article a fair chance to become what it can be....so is it really fair to file a deletion? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 21:10, 4 August 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.