Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homeoprophylaxis


 * 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. Espresso Addict 19:32, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Homeoprophylaxis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Effectively a POV fork of a section of Homeopathy. Adam Cuerden talk 04:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * redirect back to Homeopathy until proper sources are presented. dab (𒁳) 08:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * delete. Yet another POV fork.  This is a rehashed variant of the nosode/sarcode concept, which is already covered at homeopathy.  Kill it with fire, I say.  Skinwalker 16:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think that it even deserves a redirect as it seems to have a very small profile in keyword searches. ScienceApologist 17:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable POV fork created to push an agenda (as is usual with such forks). Moreschi Talk 22:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: POV forks of already-controversial articles are bad. This article is a POV fork of a controversial article. The use of homeopathy as an alternative to vaccination can and perhaps should be discussed in homeopathy or anti-vaccinationism. MastCell Talk 23:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletions.   —Espresso Addict 11:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Bad because it is a POV fork, and bad because it is one of those cases where people forget that being neutral about crap doesn't prevent you from calling it crap.Kww 16:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above, Most of the info is unsourced and already exists in one form or another in the Homeopathy article.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 17:02, 10 October 2007 (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.