Looksmaxxing Wiki:Point of view

This encyclopedia is curious about looksmaxxing as a practice: what people do to look better, what they claim, where the words came from, and what is medical.

It is not looksmax.org. It is not a rating mill. It is not a suicide-adjacent forum. Blackpill claims appear as claims. They do not set the lead.

In scope

• Facial aesthetics, hair, skin, teeth, body composition, style, photos.
• Surgery and dentistry as described procedures, with "see a licensed clinician."
• Forum lexicon (PSL, mog, mewing, Norwood) as historical vocabulary.
• Apps and coaches in this market, described, not endorsed.

Out of scope

• Pickup technique as a how-to — that is seduction.wiki.
• DIY bone-breaking, "bonesmash until it works," unlicensed implant mills as instructions.
• Political manosphere as a political project.

Voice

Lead with what the thing is: anatomy, history, what the procedure does. Then origin of the slang if it matters. Forum religion, labeled as a claim.

Polemic in the body only for things that are both dangerous and useless as a method — bonesmashing is the type case. Unlicensed gel, DIY needles, “liquid rhino” as a blindness risk are the same class: state the harm in the article, not a vibe.

Everything else — fillers vs threads vs lifts, mewing vs a haircut, HA vs an implant — stays descriptive in the lead and the tables. Comparative preference goes in a short section near the end:

== This wiki's view ==

Example: on nasolabial fold, the body lists crease-fill, cheek-fill, cog threads, and surgical midface work as things people use. This wiki's view is that when the fold is from descent, hitching or lifting the cheek matches the problem; filling only the crease is camouflage. That is an editorial call. It is not a referral and not a sermon through the whole page.

See also Looksmaxxing Wiki:Citing sources. 18+ implied: this wiki does not coach minors to hate their faces.