Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 17:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

We do not need an article on each clinical trial ever conducted. This trial has made a limited impact on the prevention of breast cancer, and the results should be discussed in the context of other modalities, not in a separate article. Delete. JFW &#124; T@lk  06:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with JFW. Pubmed lists many millions. An article on each is not needed.-- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree that Wikipedia should not have an article on every trial. I have searched for references and added a few. I believe that at least one of them (Wickerham, abc News) could be regarded as a third-party reliable source that establishes notability. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  16:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep This "STAR" study got massive coverage in national reliable sources - New York Times, USA Today, etc. I added several of these references to the article. --MelanieN (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep in light of improvements since the Afd was opened, appears to be a very notable study. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per sourcing added to the article, topic passes WP:GNG. See references section in the article; the ABC News, USA Today and Business Week articles cover this topic directly. Northamerica1000 (talk) 12:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep we do need an article on any study that get's this level of reliable source coverage that makes it independently notable of any other modality or article.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The article says "One of the largest breast cancer prevention studies ever,[2] it included 22,000 women in 400 medical centers in the United States and Canada.[3][4][5]" That sounds pretty notable to me.   D r e a m Focus  21:06, 13 January 2012 (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.