Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photomedicine


 * 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The result was closed as a speedy keep – withdrawn by nominator. – S. Rich (talk) 17:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Photomedicine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No references. (Is this Fringe science or perhaps a scam?) – S. Rich (talk) 05:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have no opinion on whether or not it's fringe or a scam or a legitimate field, but I'm bringing up a lot of hits in various academic journals and publishers. It seems to be notable enough and being a scam or fringe doesn't automatically mean that it can't be notable. I'll try to hit up one of the medicine WP to see if they can flesh the article out. Right now I'm just sort of piling sources up on the article for others to use. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Not fringe, use of light therapy in psoriasis is a classic treatment. Maybe a merge or a rewrite, but the article is only in poor condition, not on a fringe subject. -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 10:05, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge with light therapy. JFW &#124; T@lk  12:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Definitely support merge, per JFW. 109.157.86.177 (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment by OP. With special thanks to Tokyogirl, I will do a speedy close on this AfD. Before considering a merge, I think developing the article as she has is the best course of action. – S. Rich (talk) 17:19, 14 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.