Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypnosis for Weight Loss


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hypnosis for Weight Loss

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete or merge with Hypnosis. Article has no references and for this length could easily be covered under the hypnosis article. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, maybe there's a phrase or sentence that can be merged. No reason for a standalone article for this topic; not a sufficiently notable separate concept.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 08:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge Our article on hypnotherapy breaks out specific applications into separate articles, e.g. hypnotherapy in childbirth. The first half of Hypnosis for Weight Loss cites notable sources. There isn't enough information given to verify the first two citations, but that is a cleanup problem, not grounds for deletion. The term Hypnosis for Weight Loss produces lots of Google hits, including mainstream sources, mayo clinic, abcnews, msnbc. There's enough material (some critical) to fill out this article.--agr (talk) 09:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Hell In A Bucket, there may be a sentence or two which could benefit being merged with Hypnosis, but I think this article is a delete. Not sure if GHits is a good indicator on this as I imagine most of them will be commercial- I suppose my point is should there be an article entitled 'Pills for Penis Enlargement' because there are a lot of GHits?  I might be wrong, but I think the current article is not sufficient not to be deleted or possibly merged with Hypnosis. DRosin (talk) 21:57, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete/possible merge - There are a lot of ghits, but they are almost all commercial. Does this mean it is a widely-practiced/documented subject, enough for notability, or does it...well, not. I don't know. I'm not sure. I get the general impression it's worth a mention at the Hypnosis or Hypnotherapy article, but not much more than that. Certainly not a standalone article. Maybe a general impression isn't a good reason. I think this article was created as an advertisement (created by and quoting "Vince Chung, a Certified Hypnotherapist with Chicago Hypnosis and Hypnotherapy of Buffalo Grove, Illinois"), and most of it is WP:OR. I think deleting this article and maybe adding in a quick mention at Hypnotherapy would be the best idea,  Lord Spongefrog,   (I am Czar of all Russias!)  18:42, 7 January 2010 (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.