Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cholesterol Depletion (2nd nomination)


 * 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   redirect to Hypocholesterolemia. Consensus is that this is a synthesis-ridden content fork. Any useful content can be editorially merged from the history. This does not preclude writing an article about the in vitro procedure rather than the medical condition.  Sandstein  05:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Cholesterol Depletion
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

A piece of WP:SYNTH about the presumed consequences of lowering cholesterol with drugs. In addition, it is a WP:COATRACK for anti-statin writers. JFW &#124; T@lk  20:45, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  — --Darkwind (talk) 05:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Nominator has it right - this is synthesis/original research. Furthermore, it is non-notable fringe science; the major sources supporting the thesis seem to be a lurid unpublished article (no serious journal should ever publish non-neutral language like that infamous household dietary and medical obsession: ‘Cholesterol’) and a self-published book by a dentist. --MelanieN (talk) 13:45, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The Wainwright article was published in Arch Med Sci, which is published in Poland and has an impact factor (but no PubMed listing). There are four issues a year. JFW &#124; T@lk  18:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of the content is simply hypocholesterolemia, making this a content fork. Although the term has been used in WP:MEDRS it refers to an in vitro process rather than a medical condition, so merging is an inappropriate option. The above noted article is a journal not listed in PubMed. This is original research not supported by reliable sources.Novangelis (talk) 14:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to hypocholesterolemia. Bearian (talk) 18:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, not a candidate for deletion It occurs to me even without doing any research that the phrase "cholesterol depletion is non-notable" is an oxymoron.  One look at the basic Google search for "cholesterol depletion" shows two Wikipedia articles and then a long list of academic sources:


 * Effects of cholesterol depletion by cyclodextrin on the ...
 * Oct 15, 1998 ... Effects of cholesterol depletion by cyclodextrin on the sphingolipid microdomains of the plasma membrane. Ilangumaran S, Hoessli DC. ...
 * www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9761744 - Similar
 * Cholesterol Depletion Disrupts Caveolae and Differentially Impairs ...
 * May 23, 2002 ... By electron microscopy, cholesterol depletion was found to disrupt caveolae. The 5-HT response could be restored by exogenous cholesterol, ...
 * atvb.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/short/22/8/1267 - Similar
 * Chronic Cholesterol Depletion Using Statin Impairs the Function ...
 * Jun 3, 2010 ... We have explored the effect of chronic cholesterol depletion induced by mevastatin on the function of human serotonin1A receptors expressed ...
 * pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/bi100276b - Similar
 * Biophysical Journal - Cholesterol Depletion Suppresses the ...
 * Jan 1, 2005 ... Cholesterol Depletion Induces Solid-like Regions in the Plasma Membrane Biophysical Journal, Volume 90, Issue 3, 1 February 2006, ...
 * www.cell.com/biophysj/abstract/S0006-3495(05)73109-X - Cached - Similar
 * Cholesterol Depletion in the ER impairs VSVG ER to Golgi Transp
 * Here we demonstrate that acute cholesterol depletion in ER ... depletion is achieved by a brief inhibition of cholesterol synthesis with statins in cells...
 * www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/reprint/E05-02-0100v1.pdf - Similar


 * So clearly the topic is WP:GNG notable. Since the topic is notable, and reliable material exists that is not synthesis, the WP:SYNTH argument is a content dispute which should not be raised at AfD.  (See WP:N#NNC which explains the difference between content policy and notability, and also see WP:DEL which gives the criteria by which an entire article can be deleted for WP:SYNTH, WP:NOR, or WP:NPOV.)  WP:Coatrack is an essay based on NPOV.  Again, since reliable material exists, this is a content argument that has no relevance for an AfD discussion, any such issues should be handled on the talk page of the article.  Further evidence of this is that there are no tags on the article suggesting any problem with WP:SYNTH or WP:NPOV, and none of the 34 references is tagged with any issues.


 * Regarding the content fork issue, WP:Content fork states, "Since what qualifies as a 'POV fork' is itself based on a POV judgement, do not refer to forks as "POV" except in extreme cases of persistent disruptive editing. Instead, apply Wikipedia's policy that requires a neutral point of view: regardless of the reasons for making the fork, it still must be titled and written in a neutral point of view. It could be that the fork was a good idea, but was approached without balance, or that its creators mistakenly claimed ownership over it." So given that there is no claim that we are dealing with an "extreme case of persistent disruptive editing", the content fork argument has no standing.


 * Regarding the use of this AfD to enact a non-merge redirect from "Cholesterol depletion", the case must first be made that "Cholesterol depletion" is the same thing as "hypocholesterolemia" (the article says otherwise), and the case must also be made that the material at "Cholesterol depletion" doesn't belong either merged at "hypocholesterolemia", or moved to an article with a new title.


 * Regarding the fringe theory theory, we have a Wikipedia editor defining a "serious" journal based on reading one sentence. Regarding the WP:NOR theory, it is acceptable for an author contributing to Wikipedia to first get material published in a reliable source elsewhere, this material does not then violate WP:NOR.  Based on a comment here, the article is missing the in vitro viewpoint.  Unscintillating (talk) 04:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I see that User:Glynwiki has not been notified as to the existence of this AfD.  Unscintillating (talk) 04:13, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Rename or merge All the articles Unscintillating listed above refer to "cholesterol depletion" as an in vitro biochemical technique used in lab research. This article is not about that but about hypocholesterolemia in humans. It needs to be merged to there, or to statins, or renamed Cholesterol lowering in humans or similar.--Pontificalibus (talk) 14:30, 27 July 2011 (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.