Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Independent clinical trial


 * 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. no point in keeping this OR around Secret account 01:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Independent clinical trial

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It seems to me that this article should be deleted, because we already have article titled "clinical trial" which covers this subject. This article's title is "Independent clinical trial", but most of it is generally about clinical trials. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per CSD A10. Also, at least some of this is a copypaste from sites listed as references.  -- Finngall   talk  19:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi, I read your notes anche I want you to know that Independent clinical trials has been created as part of a European project, which is lead by Mario Negri Institute (Italy). They analized the existing for a wide range of words and concepts and found some inaccuracies. At that point they have chosen not to correct the existing pages, but to create new pages, replicated in six European languages. And the are some copycaste because the authors of this page are the same for the web sites too. DeboraSerra (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Just to provide you more detailed information about the background supporting the development of the new page “independent clinical trials”.It has been planned and written in the context of the FP7 project ECRAN focused on European independent clinical research (see the ECRAN website http://www.ecranproject.eu/en). The consortium of the ECRAN project which includes both institutional/academic partners and consumers’ and patients’ organizations (see the list of partners at http://www.ecranproject.eu/en/content/partners), has produced original materials (e.g. a film, two serious game, a tutorial and FAQs, see again the ECRAN website) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License to communicate to the general public the key messages about clinical research. A strong effort was made to communicate the key messages in plain language and in the European languages (all materials are available in 6 languages, English French, Italian, German, Polish and Spanish, covering the 75% of European citizens and a selection in the 23 European languages). Among the materials, the production of wikipedia contents was a priority stated by the original protocol itself and described by a specific task of the project. The aim was provide materials simple and accurate in the same time. The ECRAN partners analyzed the existing Wikipedia pages in 6 languages (see the table) on several topics related to clinical trials and clinical research and concluded that dishomogeneity and Forse questo termine potrebbe essere sostituite da uncompleteness could represent an obstacle to properly transmit the key messages. Thus, they chose to develop a brand new page, using (they are aware) the material originally developed, whose authorship belongs to ECRAN. At the moment we are revising page, but, actually, we don’t think that it will be possible rewrite some contents. In fact the present texts are the results of a 2-year work of experts who weighted each term in order to make the information precise (in terms of methodology, statistics and/or bio-medicine) and easy to be understood. On the basis of the English version, the same contents in the other 5 languages will be uploaded on WIKI. Thus, any change in English has to be replicated, balancing again the accuracy and the user-friendship of the texts. We think that Wikipedia and the ECRAN project share the common mission to disseminate reliable multilingual information. Thus, we would like to have the opportunity to publish at least in part our material fully respecting Wikipedia rules.


 * Please, do you have any suggestion about the better solution (use of brackets, modality of quotation or whatever). Thanks so much Paola Mosconi, IRCCS Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, IRFMN, Italy, coordinator of the ECRAN project on behalf of the ECRAN partners  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeboraSerra (talk • contribs) 08:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * DeboraSerra, some suggestions:
 * Before adding more information to the English Wikipedia, I would discuss your goals at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine, and ask for suggestions on how to proceed. That is a discussion page for medical-related articles on the English Wikipedia in general.
 * Information from ECRAN should not be used on Wikipedia as if it were free; ECRAN owns the copyright to the information and restricts its use through a Creative Commons license to limit its dissemination. Even ECRAN's text too closely, with minor word changes, could constitute a copyright violation by Wikipedia, and such information should be removed from Wikipedia.
 * Information in a Wikipedia article will be subject to changes by any Wikipedia editors, and different language Wikipedias are run independently, so maintaining consistency beyond its initial publication isn't possible.
 * The different language Wikipedias are run under different rules, procedures, and style guidelines. Don't assume something said in the English Wikipedia applies to the French Wikipedia.
 * I also left some article-specific style suggestions at Talk:Independent clinical trial. Agyle (talk) 08:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge into Double blind test per WP:FORK. This appears to be essentially the same thing from a different viewpoint. Bearian (talk) 16:46, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd strongly oppose this. Bearian, Double blind test is a redirect to Blind experiment. Blind experiments can cover any scientific field, while clinical trials are medically-related experiments, which may or may not be blind experiments. If by "per WP:FORK" you mean create a new stand-alone article called "Double blind test" with information from this article and "Blind experiment", I think you're mixing together two very dissimilar topics. As a very basic example of a non-blind clinical trial, consider that of an artificial heart, where both doctors and patients are aware when artificial hearts are being tested. Agyle (talk) 08:51, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 01:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete We already have a proper encyclopedia article at Clinical trial. There is no content in this article which is not already covered better at Clinical trial, so there is no need for a merge or redirect. This is not a Wikipedia article at all; more like a pamphlet "to communicate to the general public the key messages about clinical research". That's an admirable goal, and I'm sure there are many places on the internet where this kind of general-public, question-and-answer-format publication would be appropriate. But Wikipedia is not one of them; this is an encyclopedia. Also, as noted above, this article certainly appears to have been copied from somewhere else - and the authors appear to think they WP:OWN the page and can control its content, which is not how things work here. --MelanieN (talk) 00:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * User:MelanieN, thanks for your comments. While User:Argyle is also correct that there are differences between the two concepts, this is little more than a how-to guide that would have to be re-written from scratch to be a real article. Bearian (talk) 13:53, 7 July 2014 (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.