Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EDM 908 Science And Technology Committee Report On Homeopathy


 * 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. There is no obvious merge target. Anyone who wishes to work on an article on the report may contact me to get the content userfied or incubated. T. Canens (talk) 09:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

EDM 908 Science And Technology Committee Report On Homeopathy

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Early Day Motions are of absolutely no importance whatsoever. Seriously. None. Check the Parliament website: "there is very little prospect of EDMs being debated". This might just warrant a footnote in an article on the Science & Technology Committee report on Homeopathy... if we had one. As far as I can see we don't. As far as I can see, this is the only EDM for which we have an article. The article itself is arguing the primary case for and against the committee's findings, under a title which is in any case wrong as the report is the more significant of the two topics. Guy (Help!) 16:09, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge, er, somewhere. An article on the report itself should probably exist, for example. The article does indeed appear not to be useful at all. There's useful refs there to get info from, if the author or someone is interested in putting the info into other articles - David Gerard (talk) 16:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This seems like micro-reporting. An article on the original report might be okay, but an article on the response to the report (and a long article too) seems like a little too much. The topic seems to be interesting and should have some WP coverage, but please make that for the general public (including us Americans, etc.) and not only for insiders, to whom only this article here would make any sense. Kitfoxxe (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Move or Merge. I can think of two sensible ways forward. One would be to mention both this and the original report this EDM objects to into the main Homeopathy article. The other would be to rename this to something like Science and Technology Committee Report on Homeopathy, refocus the article on to the report, and just include the EDM as a reaction. Either way, this current article is too much like a soapbox. I broadly agree with the point of view pushed in the article, but that's not what Wikipedia articles are for. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Moving it to a name that says it's about the report itself would be good. Then, of course, it would need to be rewritten to be about the report. Any volunteers? - David Gerard (talk) 12:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I that's the outcome, I'll do it if no-one else steps forward. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 12:59, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Move and substantially rewrite per above or delete per WP:NPOV, WP:SOAP and WP:NOTNEWS. Wikipedia is not the place for in-depth reporting on recent fringe political issues, and the article reads like advocacy for one point of view.  Sandstein   08:42, 5 December 2010 (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.