Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyroluria


 * 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   keep, probably merge later. Moreschi (talk) 14:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Pyroluria

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Not a real disease, no sources independent of orthomolecular medicine acknowledge its existence. Therefore, by WP:FRINGE, this particular invented condition does not deserve its own article. ScienceApologist (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per WP:SNOW as article is extensively sourced with reliable sources. __meco (talk) 11:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Not every reference in there is solid, but it appears to be real enough: . Without any further reasoning from SA, I see no reason to doubt these sources. - Mgm|(talk) 11:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Truth is not the threshold for Wikipedia, verifiability is (WP:V). There are many sources and no explanation by the nominator, why they are to be considered unreliable.  So Why  11:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep For all the reasons above.  Pyroluria is considered by some to be caused by mercury toxicity, which is sometimes associated with dental amalgam.  Scienceapologist recently sought to have the entry on the amalgam controversy deleted, to no avail.  Do I see a pattern?--Alterrabe (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If kept, big clean-up. Article in its current state is virtually useless. I can't tell from it what is accepted science and what is pure speculation.


 * 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.