Talk:Pralatrexate

why the accuracy tag? This definition seems to have been taken straight from the National Cancer Institute's web site? check out a clinical study, NCI's dictionary entry and the link on the article for info. Salsb 2 July 2005 18:24 (UTC)

Cost
The high cost of pralatrexate has been discussed in many peer reviewed journals, for example Kesselheim, JAMA 2016;316(8):858. --Nbauman (talk) 06:36, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

What about the claims that it is good for treating covid 19?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9228317/Experimental-cancer-drug-hailed-coronavirus-cure-Israeli-hospital.html has a claim that this drug cures covid. Is it not worth mentioning in the article? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 17:07, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The Daily Mail is not a reliable source. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Any source used as a reference for a medical claim must meet the strict standards of Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Cullen328  Let's discuss it  18:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I wasn't using trying use the Daily Mail as a citation, but rather merely as an example of the widespread claims that have been made this month in many publications. What I had in mind was someone competent to do so (probably not me) adding something in the article to the effect that there are these claims, together with some sort of evaluation of their credibility, whether they are just yellow journalism, a hoax, or whatever. In short, it was just a question. Arctic Gazelle (talk) 19:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You were proposing adding content to an article and the source you brought forth was worthless. If you can find a source that meets WP:MEDRS, then your proposal can be considered. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  19:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If the Wikipedia article stated that the Daily Mail has made a particular claim about pralatrexate, wouldn't the Daily Mail be a good enough source to back that up? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 04:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)