Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forgotten Plague


 * 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Black Kite (talk) 10:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Forgotten Plague

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is poorly / unreferenced. Some of the refs present do not support the content in question for example "Co-director Ryan Prior, as a journalist, sets out to investigate the reality of patients struggling with myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) which has become to be known as chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) after enduring a journey of his own with the disease."

The CDC does not mention this film or individual. This site ProHealth is not reliable for anything. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:26, 6 March 2020 (UTC)


 * This https://www.meaction.net/about/ ref does not even mention the film.
 * Basically we have one blog post https://www.huffpost.com/entry/forgotten-plague-a-must-s_b_8230262
 * Looking here https://www.google.com/search?tbm=nws&q=%22Forgotten+Plague%22+-wikipedia and not seeing good refs for this video Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:33, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Doc James The reference of https://www.meaction.net/about/ was used to reference what the Organization’s goal was, as it tied to the topic of the film since one of the directors of the film is on the board of directors of it and has stated its promotion in press kits. However, since the article is not about the Organization, I decided to remove it. Additionally, the Huffington post is considered to be a review on plenty of other sources mentioning the film. Lastly, the film is relatively targeted to a certain population, so finding more references is rather scarce. I will continue the search though. Sorry for the inconvenience. --Asanc445 (talk) 22:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Asanc445 No worries. I will leave it to experts of writing film articles on Wikipedia to decide if one review is sufficient for an article. Apologies for coming down hard on you like this... Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Doc James It’s completely fine! I appreciate all the input you have given lately. I really want to make a develop a well-written article; so thank you. While reading the ProHealth article by Erica Verillo, I interpreted it as a review, since she does her own analyses in some points; however, the experts will know best. Additionally, I found several other possible sources for reviews such as This Telegraph article and This other article from a small production studio. however, I am unsure if they would be considered sufficient. Thanks again for your help.--Asanc445 (talk) 23:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - An article that uses unrelated references that have nothing to do with the article, and primary sources. Analog Horror, ( Speak ) 18:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 23:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 05:57, 22 March 2020 (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.