Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tongue Patch Diet


 * 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. Editorial concerns like neutrality can be discussed on the talk page. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 02:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Tongue Patch Diet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Procedural nomination of a declined PROD, I felt it should be discussed prior to deletion. An IP PRODDed the article with a rationale of "This is a promotional article perpetuating dangerous health claims. It consists entirely of content written by an editor blocked for undisclosed paid editing." -- GB fan 11:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - I may be fooled by the marketeers but I see an article that is supported by sources that meet our notability guidelines. If content is too promotional in nature then it needs editing, not deletion. Also, I personally don't care who wrote the article under what incentive; I only review the article itself. DeVerm (talk) 18:23, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This needs cleaning to ensure that it's neutral - apparently the article creator was blocked as an undisclosed paid editor and I'm slightly concerned by the repeated insistence that no actual cases of issues have been reported. It seems to be sourced by this article and this one, but neither explicitly state these claims. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Not sure - I think the notability threshold is met (even if it is met via aggressive advertisement and lazy journalists). However, newspapers source do not meet WP:MEDRS, so the real question is verifiability of the medical claims. I honestly do not know if it is possible to write the article without making medical claims (in either direction). If yes, keep and cleanup, if not, delete. Tigraan Click here to contact me 09:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it's neutral, not promotional. The absurdity of the method is obvious. There's enough coverage for notability, and we do cover notable nonsense.  DGG ( talk ) 15:47, 30 June 2016 (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.