452:. Given the fact that the AMA thought it notable enough to actually have a position on it, the fact that there are several reliable sources and finally because the project isn't running short on hard drive space. If amplification worked for Fender and Marshall, there's no reason it shouldn't for G-Spots. Only in America folks! --
377:
to indicate but one of a number of cosmetic vaginal procedures with "lack of data supporting the efficacy". That anybody sought cosmetic surgery for the G spot I suppose mildly amusing, but that belongs in article on G-spot as a one liner noting this
American College of Obstetricians and
48:. No one is proposing that the information in the article ought to be removed from Knowledge entirely. Therefore, there is no point in having the discussion here. A merge discussion can take place on the article talk page if people feel it is necessary.
378:
Gynecologists (reliable source) view. I disagree with Werner
Heisenberg's view that the referencees show significant coverage - some titilating TV commentary does not make notability (most of those refs probably should be removed as failing to meet
166:
246:
This article covers G-spot amplification, G-spot augmentation and G-shot. Now whilst this may or may not be the best place for it, it is certainly a notable medical procedure and should not be merged to G spot.
382:) - but if some firm statistic brought to bear on numbers performed (eg 10,000 procedures in US in last couple years) then yes notable for being a significant minority viewpoint, but otherwise per
366:- just tip this junk/drivel over to a brief mention in G-spot (something that recently strongly suggested is a myth, making this a placebo proceedure of a myth). Reliable secondary source (per
160:
121:
287:
427:
126:
94:
89:
98:
81:
409:, it should be an article (with due weight given to the journal published source and the rest of the cruft and iffy sources removed).
351:
181:
148:
17:
330:
297:
273:
142:
461:
442:
421:
390:
358:
335:
302:
277:
256:
238:
214:
63:
476:
457:
138:
85:
36:
475:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
56:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
327:
294:
188:
406:
319:
438:
417:
269:
356:
202:
453:
77:
69:
234:
174:
49:
154:
252:
431:
410:
399:
371:
312:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
344:
209:
197:
To determine if the topic is notable enough for a more prominent write up (new section) in
387:
379:
367:
383:
323:
230:
226:
265:
248:
115:
206:
227:
Does not meet stand alone general noteabillity clause for a stand alone article
426:
I removed the cruft, non-reliable sources, and text not supported by sources.
402:
374:
315:
222:
198:
469:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
398:. Amusing, yes, and it needs to be rewritten, but because of
386:"the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all".
201:, should be merged, or deleted outright because it verges on
111:
107:
103:
173:
264:, references show significant coverage, satisfying
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
479:). No further edits should be made to this page.
203:Knowledge:Advertising#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox
288:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
187:
8:
343:Notable procedure, more balanced info now.
282:
286:: This debate has been included in the
7:
322:, but it looks like it needs some
24:
430:lists 14 sources: it's notable.
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
462:03:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
443:05:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
422:04:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
391:18:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
359:12:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
336:11:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
303:11:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
278:01:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
257:15:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
239:07:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
215:04:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
64:03:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
496:
472:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
46:Procedural early keep
78:G-spot amplification
70:G-spot amplification
333:
305:
300:
291:
270:Werner Heisenberg
487:
474:
435:
414:
354:
349:
331:
298:
292:
192:
191:
177:
129:
119:
101:
59:
34:
495:
494:
490:
489:
488:
486:
485:
484:
483:
477:deletion review
470:
454:Fred the Oyster
433:
412:
352:
345:
134:
125:
92:
76:
73:
57:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
493:
491:
482:
481:
465:
464:
447:
446:
445:
428:Google scholar
393:
361:
338:
306:
280:
259:
241:
195:
194:
131:
127:AfD statistics
72:
67:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
492:
480:
478:
473:
467:
466:
463:
459:
455:
451:
448:
444:
440:
436:
429:
425:
424:
423:
419:
415:
408:
404:
401:
397:
394:
392:
389:
385:
381:
376:
373:
369:
365:
362:
360:
357:
355:
350:
348:
342:
339:
337:
334:
329:
325:
321:
317:
314:
310:
307:
304:
301:
296:
289:
285:
281:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
258:
254:
250:
245:
242:
240:
236:
232:
228:
225:
224:
219:
218:
217:
216:
213:
212:
208:
204:
200:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
132:
128:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
60:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
471:
468:
449:
395:
370:) would use
364:Strong merge
363:
346:
340:
308:
283:
261:
243:
220:
210:
196:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
54:
50:
45:
43:
31:
28:
388:David Ruben
326:rewriting.
161:free images
309:Weak keep
231:Sk8er5000
221:Merge to
407:ABC news
403:17766626
380:WP:MEDRS
375:17766626
368:WP:MEDRS
320:ABC news
316:17766626
249:Polargeo
122:View log
434:Georgia
413:Georgia
384:WP:NPOV
353:paedia
324:WP:NPOV
167:WP refs
155:scholar
95:protect
90:history
266:WP:GNG
223:G-spot
199:G-Spot
139:Google
99:delete
432:Sandy
411:Sandy
347:Matto
311:per
229:. --
182:JSTOR
143:books
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
458:talk
450:Keep
439:Talk
418:Talk
405:and
400:PMID
396:Keep
372:PMID
341:Keep
332:ping
328:Pcap
318:and
313:PMID
299:ping
295:Pcap
284:Note
274:talk
262:Keep
253:talk
244:Keep
235:talk
175:FENS
149:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
58:Talk
293:--
211:Boy
207:Roy
189:TWL
124:•
120:– (
460:)
441:)
420:)
290:.
276:)
268:.
255:)
237:)
205:.
169:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
51:NW
456:(
437:(
416:(
272:(
251:(
233:(
193:)
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
133:(
130:)
118:)
80:(
61:)
55:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.