Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripeptide-37


 * 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. Rlendog (talk) 19:03, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Tripeptide-37

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The entirety of this article constitutes original research. Every claim made about "Tripeptide-37" itself is unreferenced. Examples:
 * "Recently developed suspensions of Tripeptide-37, in concert with titrations of palmitic acid and phytochemical admixtures, have also shown promise in clinical studies" - unreferenced
 * "Tripeptide-37 mimics the natural mechanism of TGF-β to stimulate collagen synthesis" - unreferenced
 * "Tripeptide-37 suspension therapy significantly inhibits matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-9) activity" - unreferenced
 * "Clinical tests using Tripeptide-37 suspension therapy has shown an ability to significantly inhibit MMP activity, which counteracts both pelvic organ prolapse and atrophic vaginitis" - unreferenced

All the statements that are referenced refer to well establish science, but do not relate directly to "Tripeptide-37". "Tripeptide-37" is not mentioned at all in any of the cited references. In fact, a search of the chemical literature for this compound (CAS#1247010-50-9) turns up only a single reference in a Japanese patent ("Method for extracting rule showing functional peptide, functional peptide design method and preparation method, polypeptide or polypeptide-containing composition evaluation method, and functional peptides." Honda, Hiroyuki et. al. ) which is unrelated to the topic of this article.

A web search for "Tripeptide-37" turns up very little, and most of what is found refers to what appear to be chemical derivatives of "Tripeptide-37" (palmitoyl tripeptide-37, elaidoyl tripeptide-37, etc.) There doesn't appear to be anything from a reliable source upon which to build an acceptable article.

Although "Tripeptide-37" no doubt exists as some cosmetics ingredient, all the content about it currently in Tripeptide-37 is completely unverifiable and the article is original research, violating Wikipedia policy. This article is basically an advertisement for a product packaged with a veneer of science to make it appear more substantial than what it really is. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per nom (except that I'd accept sources relating to palmitoyl tripeptide-37, elaidoyl tripeptide-37, etc., as those are only esters that would be cleaved in vivo anyway). The only facts that seem to be verifiable are (1) the substance is an INCI ingredient and (2) it is part of some cosmetics.
 * The unrelated refs, as well as the complete portion of the article below the lead, also constitute a WP:synthesis. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Presumably this was created to support www.buy-tripeptide-37-anti-ageing-quantum-cream.com or something. Removing unreferenced claims and irrelevant statements leaves us with nothing. --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep since it is used people will be interested, however strip back all the original research and non relevent text to leave a stub. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparently, we can't even verify its composition. What information would the stub contain besides "Tripeptide-37 is a substance used in the skin care industry"? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 21:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is even the source that says "Tripeptide-37 is used in the skin care industry", or "H-Arginine-Lysine-Phenylalanine-OH is used in the skin care industry" or even that this tripeptide is used for anything at all, or that any tripeptide has been named Tripeptide-37? --Pontificalibus (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * delete as spam support and otherwise empty. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:47, 29 February 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.