Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dingkun Dan


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Dingkun Dan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Pure promotion, not a single reference on that page mentions "Dingkun Dan". Before he was blocked, the creator and his sockpuppet/meatpuppet have been adding this "Dingkun Dan" garbage to over 20 historical/medical articles with references that don't mention at all what they were adding. Timmyshin (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 03:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 03:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails GNG as is, the worrying edits mentioned above also make me wonder if this can be salvaged. South Nashua (talk) 19:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete lack of significant coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete While there are mentions of this item or substance in a few texts and books, I haven't found anything that denotes it's notability as a technique, medicine, or other form of TCM. There's no significant references or descriptions of the substance, specifically it's composition or history. I find fails WP:GNG. Operator873 CONNECT 05:50, 26 November 2017 (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.