Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The effectiveness of neurofeedback as a treatment for Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder : An annotated bibliography


 * 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. I'm open to userfying it if someone wishes to pull out any reasonable information... but you're going to have to type the WHOLE title on my talk page to get me to do it. :-) ''' - Philippe  23:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The effectiveness of neurofeedback as a treatment for Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder : An annotated bibliography

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

Essay containing personal opinion and book reviews: fails Original research; Synthesis of published material Ros0709 (talk) 20:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. That's probably one of the longest serious titles I've seen! Veinor (talk to me) 20:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think it's even longer than Jeremiah Peabody's Polyunsaturated Quick-Dissolving Fast-Acting Pleasant-Tasting Green and Purple Pills. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 20:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just ran it through a perl script, and this article is 104 characters, while the one you mentioned is 124. Veinor (talk to me) 20:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Pwned. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 20:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom as a original research / synth violation. B figura  (talk) 21:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. At least three of the references are unambiguously reliable sources: Newsweek, The Times (London), The Independent, and some of the books and journal articles are as well. The article may need trimming and NPOV work, but I think the article contains some encyclopedic information worth saving. --Eastmain (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * merge as a never-to-be-put-in-the-search-bar addition to neurofeedback. A summary of this probably already exists there anyway.  We shouldn't have another article promulgating a fringe theory, when there's one already. Merkin's  mum 23:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

comment- I'm suspecting this is written by the same bloke who wrote Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Divorce_and_Children:_An_Annotated_Bibliography, due to the similar unusual choice for titles, although the usernames are not the same. Merkin's mum 23:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; the subject of the article is a bibliography. The references that Eastmain notes aren't on the subject of the article, so aren't relevant. Very few bibliographies are interesting enough in and of themselves to be worthy of an article, and I see absolutely no evidence this is one of them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I also suspect these notes are for his own personal use, rather than anyone elses, as his versions of the article include "The clinical trials addressed in this work would provide excellent information for the body of my essay." and similar notes. Merkin's mum 23:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete or Move to user space. This is simply a personal essay/notes. While it could be used for research in other articles, it's certainly not appropriate for mainspace. Vassyana (talk) 00:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete not an article. JuJube (talk) 01:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Not encyclopedic, WP:SYN. What is with all of the annotated bibliography articles? JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 02:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: to date, eight similar articles have been created within a short timeframe. There is ongoing discussion about them here. Ros0709 (talk) 09:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment (putting this in the first listing on this page) A professor at the U of Florida gave an assignment to his students to post here; see the AN/I thread. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 14:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge salvagable information to ADHD. Ezratrumpet (talk) 05:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, POV and original research. KleenupKrew (talk) 09:41, 20 April 2008 (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.