Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wenxin Keli

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. Swarm ^{we ♥ our hive} 05:47, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wenxin Keli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An alt-med treatment with 100% primary sourcing (a no-no per WP:MEDRS). No reality-based commentary at all, just a tiny number of supportive primary studies. Guy (Help!) 21:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 00:13, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• contemplative delete because although it seems there are sources, I'm not sure if there's much good notability and it would've been nice to mention elsewhere but there's no obvious move target (draft/userfy would probably be a good compromise). My searches were this, this, this and this but there's nothing that convinces me of improvement. @David Eppstein: is welcome to comment. SwisterTwister talk 04:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no particular expertise to contribute to this debate. We have plenty of other editors who know much more than I about medicine and medical fringe topics. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:42, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no coverage in non-medical sources, the refs are medical research papers. Although this might be worth a mention in a medical textbook at some time, this fails to be an encyclopedic subject. Also, the research has been so far inconclusive, which makes this a sort of promo advert. Kraxler (talk) 18:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.