Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of common cold drugs


 * 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. Some of the keep arguments are essentially, "This is useful", which is in direct contradiction to WP:NOTMANUAL. It's not that the encyclopedia shouldn't be useful, just that being useful is, by itself, insufficient reason to keep an article. It must also be verifiable and notable, and the keep arguments don't speak to that. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

List of common cold drugs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreffed. We already have cough medicine.

J Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 06:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep A cough is not the same as a cold. References demonstrating that the list satisfies WP:LISTN are easy to find - see NHS choices, for example.  Andrew D. (talk) 09:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Firstly, a quick look at the name, "common cold drugs" - what does that mean? Drugs that give or drugs that cure the common cold. A quick look some of the unreferenced entries does not confirm they are related to the common cold for either reason! Perhaps categorization s a much better idea, but wouldn't "common cold remedies" or similar be preferable to the present title? --Richhoncho (talk) 09:51, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree about the title - your suggestion was in my mind too. Changing the title does not require deletion, and so I've moved to list of remedies for the common cold.  This wording also makes it clearer that we're talking about the common cold rather than common remedies. Andrew D. (talk) 10:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you find there is no remedy for love or the common cold. It would be unencyclopedic to suggest otherwise. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. We don't need redundant, poorly updated medical articles that don't offer utility to the reader beyond what other articles offer.  I might be slightly on the fence if this was a well-maintained and sourced artice, but it's not - some of the things mention aren't at all common, and some aren't even commercialised yet - and I doubt this article will ever be good, useful, or even have an adequately defined scope. That (except for the scope bit...) wouldn't make me want to delete most non-medical articles, but I think we have a bit of an obligation to treat articles about human health differently than articles about pokemon. Kevin Gorman (talk) 10:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 17:58, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 17:58, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete / redirect to Cough medicine which actually contains high quality references. An article on treatment of the common cold would be reasonable. This content is not good however as a list. It might give the impression that they are either recommended or shorten the duration of infection. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:15, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment....Ummm are you aware you nominated this?, You can't really !vote twice unfortunately, Cheers,  – Davey 2010 Talk 03:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * My nomination is not a vote. I am sure only one will be counted. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 03:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Technically anything you write above is a !vote, Some editors do forget so just assumed you had but ah well, Cheers, – Davey 2010 Talk 03:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, agree with assessment by, above. This page is a recipe for problems, at least inherently, at this point in time. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 21:19, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - If nothing else, WP:TNT. Unclear title, unclear and/or inaccurate subject definition, unreferenced, a mix of active ingredients and brand names with varied applicability... &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 03:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep but rework and rename (again). Remedy (a disambiguation page) links Cure; but there is no cure for the common cold. The products listed may alleviate symptoms and often provide comfort to the afflicted. The NHS page linked above starts off "You should be able to treat cold symptoms..." (emphasis mine). So keep but make clear in the lead that these are treatments to alleviate symptoms, not cures. Also rename (again) to reflect this change of emphasis. -Arb. (talk) 14:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep a very informative list because folks are often 'prescribed' or recommended an over-the-counter medication and then are told by their health care provider (doctor, nurse, med tech, pharmacist, quack-of-du-jour) that the pills that they are taking are for a 'cold'. Since I double and triple check medications of myself and family members, and they tell me that they are taking 'cold' medicine and I see that they are taking something that is other than cold medicine, I tell them to ask their doctor about the med.  Maybe none of you 'guys' get talked down to in medical consultation interactions with less than full disclosure, but since I am an older woman, I sometimes get a pat on my head and told not to worry about what the doctor is giving me for my 'nerves' or that 'cold'.  A list on Wikipedia may just alert some people to double check what they are thinking is cold medicine....it does need work...   Bfpage &#124;leave a message 22:39, 13 March 2015 (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.