Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breast reduction drugs


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 03:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Breast reduction drugs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article says there is no evidence they work, yet says they work. Article is constructed by a synthesis of different papers to this topic. Does not pass WP:GNG. Sources like this: are about treating specific medical conditions, they do not support whether or not danazol works on the general public as a breast size reducer. The article is synthesising papers like this into the subject IRWolfie- (talk) 11:32, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Ridiculous synthesis of primary sources about disparate conditions. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 20 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete It's mostly a mish-mash of various drugs used for breast-related diseases and disorders, with no clear nexus between the listed drugs, or between the drugs and the topic at hand.HillbillyGoat (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Crap stub which does not meet Wikipedia's quality standards for medical coverage. WP:IAR delete, improve the encyclopedia through vaporization... Carrite (talk) 00:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nothing in the article contradicted itself. There are two different subsets to the topic, one is about professional medical use to treat unwanted conditions, the other is about dietary supplements. At least the first deserves mention, because its notable, the articles are about the conditions with treatment, and its factual about treating conditions. The medical professional use is not about general public use. The supplements section is about general public uses which there is nothing published, because it is fairly new. Lucy346 (talk) 23:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note Lucy346 is the creator and primary author of the article.  14:29, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Tamoxifen for the management of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review
 * NYTimes article Lucy346 (talk) 05:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The first source is a systematic review for Tamoxifen where it concerns "gynecomastia and breast pain", not for the general topic of breast reduction drugs. The NYT article is about surgery for gynecomastia, not this topic. IRWolfie- (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No, "prophylaxis or treatment" of gynecomastia, and an alternative to surgery. Tamoxifen "could lead to a complete resolution of gynecomastia." Lucy346 (talk) 04:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's only in passing, the rest is about surgery. Besides, as I said, Tamoxifen and gynecomastia are not at AFD. IRWolfie- (talk) 11:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's from the 1st source listed. You're referring to the New York Times article. Lucy346 (talk) 16:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * How does that help? Neither are about the general topic of breast reduction drugs. IRWolfie- (talk) 11:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It is, it's in the title. Lucy346 (talk) 04:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Good amount of secondary source coverage. Also, agree with analysis by, above. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * What coverage are you referring to? IRWolfie- (talk) 23:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge with Breast reduction. The article, on its own, is arguably too non-notable to stand. However, it has valid content that is lacking from the general breast reduction article, and should be transferred over. Dea  db  eef  03:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, obvious original synthesis not mentioned in any medical textbook or review article.Kiatdd (talk)
 * Delete, context-specific coverage should be at the individual articles Macromastia, Gynecomastia, etc. No redirect possible.  As HillbillyGoat stated, there is no source providing a "nexus between the listed drugs" so collecting them into one article is a WP:SYNTH problem.   14:29, 8 May 2013 (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.