Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brain Occupation in Traditional Chinese Medicine


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 04:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Brain Occupation in Traditional Chinese Medicine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is pure pseudo science and written in an outdated style. It should be a subsection of the Traditional Chinese medicine article. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Then wrong venue: this is a merger proposal. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 01:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the nominator is suggesting a part-merge (of that which is not already replicated at Traditional Chinese medicine) and a deletion of this unlikely search term. That content which is not already there should be included there (it won't be much at all from the looks of it) so that this article can be deleted. I don't think this is a "traditional" (excuse the pun) merger proposal. Stalwart 111  03:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - the sources provided aren't about Chinese medicine at all. This looks to be an WP:OR essay based on some tenuously referenced (WP:SYNTH, basically) ideas and concepts. Stalwart 111  03:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 00:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 00:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - The article, as currently written is difficult to read and comprehedn to the point that ther eis no mergeable material even if there was a desire to merge. The bulk of the article is just a preamble about Traditioanl Chinese Medicine, and the aprt that is about "brain occupation" is unintelligible.  As for the notability of the topic, I can find no sources covering this.  The references supplied have nothing to do with this and appeaer to have been grabbed based on having the words brain and occupation in them. -- Whpq (talk) 21:35, 20 December 2012 (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.